Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Full Version: NY Choking Leads To Man Dying
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Quote:I get that and that's what I said in a post above. The hold should still be taught as a self defense tactic ONLY.
 

You're focusing on something completely irrelevant.

 

Whether they teach how to do a choke hold or not isn't relevant to whether the officers murdered a subdued man.

 

Even if the NYC condoned the use of such tactics it still wouldn't change that he specifically used it unnecessarily and purposefully even when the subdued victim made it as clear as he could under the circumstance that he was being suffocated to death.
Quote:You're focusing on something completely irrelevant.


Whether they teach how to do a choke hold or not isn't relevant to whether the officers murdered a subdued man.


Even if the NYC condoned the use of such tactics it still wouldn't change that he specifically used it unnecessarily and purposefully even when the subdued victim made it as clear as he could under the circumstance that he was being suffocated to death.


They condone the use but they won't make the hold illegal as its a self defense tact that all police SHOULD know.


Murder? I don't know. Hard to convict on a murder charge with a non compliant. Hard, but not impossible. Did he deserve to die? No.. Did he resist arrest and become a non compliant? Yes..
Quote:They condone the use but they won't make the hold illegal as its a self defense tact that all police SHOULD know.


Murder? I don't know. Hard to convict on a murder charge with a non compliant. Hard, but not impossible. Did he deserve to die? No.. Did he resist arrest and become a non compliant? Yes..
 

I saw no effort by 3 of the officers where they were on top of him to handcuff him. 
Quote:I agree completely. But the man was pleading and gasping for air until he lost consciousness. Obviously he could breathe while talking….. until he couldn't anymore. 

 

He wasn't a violent criminal and nothing about the situation called for a chokehold. 

 

(In case it wasn't mentioned - he was selling cigarettes illegally on the street. Which is very common in NYC.  A pack is $12 or more due to state and city taxes. People buy them in Jersey are elsewhere and sell them for $8 on the street. Everytime I walk to the grocery market I pass two people muttering "Newports, Marlboro's ..eight dollars."  These people don't pose a threat and are as common as pigeons in the less wealthy areas of all boroughs.) 
 

Yep its very common for people to sell loose cigs in NYC.
Quote:Too hard for me to believe.. If you can talk, you can breathe.. 

 

What I think happened is that the weight of 4 officers on his back, combined with his health issues caused his death. But I agree that the choke hold should have never been used and they need to outlaw it.. 
 

Im confused.

 

Was he supposed to die in silence. Once he stated he couldnt breathe, the officers didnt reposition themselves enough to allow the guy to get a grasp of air. 
Quote:They condone the use but they won't make the hold illegal as its a self defense tact that all police SHOULD know.


Murder? I don't know. Hard to convict on a murder charge with a non compliant. Hard, but not impossible. Did he deserve to die? No.. Did he resist arrest and become a non compliant? Yes..
 

Murder - no. But that's why there are criminal charges less than murder. It's not all or nothing. I'd sure like to hear from the DA and Grand Jury why no charge of manslaughter wasn't brought forward. It's just a charge. The cops would still be given their day in court - if they didn't want to agree to a plea deal.

 

I just wonder how many millions the City will have to agree to pay.
Quote:Im confused.

 

Was he supposed to die in silence. Once he stated he couldnt breathe, the officers didnt reposition themselves enough to allow the guy to get a grasp of air. 
 

And what if it wasn't true and was merely a ruse to continue resisting? Once he became non-compliant he lost any good faith from the officers.
Quote:Murder - no. But that's why there are criminal charges less than murder. It's not all or nothing. I'd sure like to hear from the DA and Grand Jury why no charge of manslaughter wasn't brought forward. It's just a charge. The cops would still be given their day in court - if they didn't want to agree to a plea deal.

 

I just wonder how many millions the City will have to agree to pay.
 

You can also have an event like this with an adverse outcome that isn't in any way criminal.
Quote:And what if it wasn't true and was merely a ruse to continue resisting? Once he became non-compliant he lost any good faith from the officers.
 

Even if he was verbally lying, they could have realized by his body languages he was struggling to breathe. 

 

So once he became non-compliant, he lost his human rights as well?
Quote:Even if he was verbally lying, they could have realized by his body languages he was struggling to breathe. 

 

So once he became non-compliant, he lost his human rights as well?
 

"Could" doesn't work, it's a hindsight judgement made without the accompanying stressors of the moment. And no, he doesn't lose his human rights, but he placed himself in the position of having to be restrained by the police by his actions. Actions have consequences, and the tendency of the media, the community and folks like you is to focus on the actions of the cops without due consideration to the events that created the circumstances. Did he get what he deserved? No, but the outcome was created in part by his willful choice to 1. disobey the law and 2. resist arrest.
Quote:"Could" doesn't work, it's a hindsight judgement made without the accompanying stressors of the moment. And no, he doesn't lose his human rights, but he placed himself in the position of having to be restrained by the police by his actions. Actions have consequences, and the tendency of the media, the community and folks like you is to focus on the actions of the cops without due consideration to the events that created the circumstances. Did he get what he deserved? No, but the outcome was created in part by his willful choice to 1. disobey the law and 2. resist arrest.
 

That's extremely hard to argue against.. 
So. Block all streets , bridges in protest. Some gets hurt. Ambulance can't get through....and the dominoes tumble.
Quote:Even if he was verbally lying, they could have realized by his body languages he was struggling to breathe. 

 

So once he became non-compliant, he lost his human rights as well?


Verbally lying? Is there another way?

Well, sign language I suppose.



Now. You mention body language. Would that have sufficed in Ferguson if the cop said he felt threatened by Browns body language?


Also. Non compliant and losing human rights. So if you're stopped by a cop, start to resist or run, I think you gave away some rights, not lose them.
Quote:The officers didnt even try to restrain his hands to put the cuffs on him. 
 

At what point are you referring? The first thing they did is reach for his hands (multiple times). He refused and the pulled him down with the modified chokehold. He continues to resist as 4 officers are trying to gain control over him.

 

Quote:That's not how it works. The Grand Jury is controlled by the DA, they see only as much or as little as he decides they should see.

 

And if Wilson doesn't take the stand at least the jury can draw whatever conclusions it wishes.

 

I'm just saying there seems to be unanswered questions. Did Wilson look assaulted based on those photos? Was there conflicting testimony? Will we ever know what the heck happened?

 

All we have are Wilson's (self-serving and lawyered-up) statement. It's a shame. He certainly may have still walked after a trial; certainly seemed to have a good chance.

 

For the New York case - the City will have to pay millions to settle the civil case.
 

I know how it works. 

 

I've spoken to more than I can remember. 

 

My point here is that the DA (the prosecutor) showed them the facts that they had available to them. They showed the same evidence that they would use in trial. The ONLY difference would have been the Officers defense attorney would have been able to potentially eliminate some of the evidence and discredit others. It doesn't allow for a ... more thorough case ... not in regards to cases of this magnitude where the evidence is presented. In fact, Grand Jury has an opportunity to ask questions immediately and there's an open dialogue with the presenting Officer / attorney. It's incredibly easy to find PC during Grand Jury. If they couldn't find PC, then they do not have enough to to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, I don't see any reason why a they should have continued forward.

 

They had more than his statement. Where did you get that from?

 

NYPD will pay out for no other reason than a deviation of policy resulting in a death.

 

Quote:The paramedic checked his pulse and that was it from what I read.  They left him lying on the ground.  At one point the cop who put the choke hold on waved at a camera as the man lay on the side walk.  Seems like more should have been done if he is laying there not responding.  
 

Yeah, that wasn't the smartest move, and it doesn't really help his point-of-view. I agree. They should have attempted something, but they aren't legally obligated to render first aid.

 

Quote:I can't speak to your questions with certainty, but the coroner did :

 

 

So the chokehold AND the compression of his chest were deemed lethal. 

So his resistance contributed in part momentarily - but can't we argue that when he is repeatedly pleading for air - he is no longer resisting, but simply struggling to breathe? 
 

Undoubtedly. There's no question that the chokehold and weight of people on his back factored into his death. The chokehold lasted around 6-8 seconds I think? It appeared as though the Officer even released the chokehold before he said that he couldn't breath. I'm guessing because that's all I can do here, but I suspect that heart diseased and asthma played a bigger role in his death than the momentary loss of breath that may have been caused by the Officer. 

 

I've personally seen people using this same line as they resisted arrested. Criminals, especially those with similar backgrounds to Garner, will often use it regain control of the situation and put it in their favor. The Officers can't simply stop what they're doing because someone throws out that line. It shouldn't be disregarded, either. If anything the Officers did contributed to his death, I think it was the weight on his back, and I believe that had he simply put both hands behinds his back, then nothing would've happened. 

 

I think there were injuries caused by the Officers actions which resulted from Garner's resistance. Did the coroner report say the chokehold stopped his breathing?

 

Quote:Im confused.

 

Was he supposed to die in silence. Once he stated he couldnt breathe, the officers didnt reposition themselves enough to allow the guy to get a grasp of air. 
 

What should they have done? He's already proven that he didn't intend on going back to jail. Allow him to get up? Stop all efforts to control him? What is YOUR solution to this?
Quote: 

What should they have done? He's already proven that he didn't intend on going back to jail. Allow him to get up? Stop all efforts to control him? What is YOUR solution to this?
 

Solution, don't arrest someone selling non-stamped smokes? Citations if you have to do something? Seriously the guy was selling cigarettes....
Rand Paul nails it

 

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/03/politics/r...index.html

 

<p class="" style="font-family:arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);">"I think it's also important to know that some politician put a tax of $5.85 on a pack of cigarettes," Paul said. "So they've driven cigarettes underground so as not to make them so expensive."

<p class="" style="font-family:arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);">The likely Republican presidential hopeful continued, "But then some politician also had to direct the police to say, 'Hey, we want you arresting people for selling a loose cigarette.' And for someone to die over you know breaking that law -- there really is no excuse for it."

Quote:Solution, don't arrest someone selling non-stamped smokes? Citations if you have to do something? Seriously the guy was selling cigarettes....
 

It wasn't the selling smokes that was the problem, it was the failure to comply with the cop's instructions. You don't get a vote in whether or not you're going to be arrested, and non-compliance always turns out bad. If you find yourself in that situation just shut up and do as instructed.
Quote:It wasn't the selling smokes that was the problem, it was the failure to comply with the cop's instructions. You don't get a vote in whether or not you're going to be arrested, and non-compliance always turns out bad. If you find yourself in that situation just shut up and do as instructed.
 

Same thing the Jews where told by Nazis (NOT CALLING POLICE NAZIS) just saying at some point the laws become so ridiculous non-compliance is the only option.

 

I get it the man was resisting and on some level he shares some of the fault. To me the larger fault lies in the reason why the officer and him where even in that situation. The problem once again is government. 
Welp, looks like the whole race thing is kaput. I wonder why the MSM didn't report this very interesting detail? I wonder, wonder, wonder what interest is served by de-escalating potential racial friction in this case?

 

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/12/...-sergeant/

Agreed this case isn't about race

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5