Ferguson Riots

[bmags]

Based on that, any cop that handcuffed him and forced him to lie on the ground should also be charged with his death.

 

Okay.

[Jenksismyhero]

So if you shoot someone in a typically non-lethal spot, but they're anemic and they bleed out, that's not on you?

 

See, it's not that simple. A shot and someone ending up dead is usually easy to show the proximate cause.

 

Let's say a cop shoots someone, in the shoulder or chest, something not necessarily life threatening but possibly life threatening, and then that person jumps into a car and immediately gets into a car crash that definitely kills him. Would you charge the cop (or whomever) for murder?

 

I don't think this case is as simple as "choke hold = death." I'm guessing, but i'd imagine that's what the hang up was here for the grand jury.

[Reddy]

Totally depends on the circumstances, but maybe.

 

Again though, the choke hold wasn't the only act that caused the death. I'm not sure what the testimony was/would be about how much of a factor it was.

 

 

 

Based on that, any cop that handcuffed him and forced him to lie on the ground should also be charged with his death.

 

 

you realize how absolutely ridiculous your reasoning is, right?

 

so the choice that ONE officer made to perform an illegal choke hold on a non-violent man shouldn't matter because two other guys there didn't stop him?

 

I love how Repubs are all "PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY" until it's convenient.

[Reddy]

See, it's not that simple. A shot and someone ending up dead is usually easy to show the proximate cause.

 

Let's say a cop shoots someone, in the shoulder or chest, something not necessarily life threatening but possibly life threatening, and then that person jumps into a car and immediately gets into a car crash that definitely kills him. Would you charge the cop (or whomever) for murder?

 

I don't think this case is as simple as "choke hold = death." I'm guessing, but i'd imagine that's what the hang up was here for the grand jury.

 

so you're saying the fact that this guy was fat absolves the police officer of the responsibility of considering the health of his perp before he attempts an illegal choke hold that could kill someone in this man's condition? got it.

 

even the right wing pundits don't agree with you on this one. lol just absurd.

Edited December 4, 2014 by Reddy

[cabiness42]

You honestly think he should go to jail for the rest of his life for putting a guy into a chokehold for 5 seconds?

 

And really, I think to be logical about it, you'd also have to want to put any officer there on the scene in jail as well, since their decisions to handcuff him and keep him on the ground is the biggest contributing factor to his death.

 

I don't think he should go to jail for the rest of his life, but I think he should face some kind of felony charge. If the statutes don't allow him to be charged with something that carries a sentence less than life, then that's a serious problem.

 

He should lose his job, do some time, and the department should be fully civilly liable.

[Jenksismyhero]

you realize how absolutely ridiculous your reasoning is, right?

 

so the choice that ONE officer made to perform an illegal choke hold on a non-violent man shouldn't matter because two other guys there didn't stop him?

 

I love how Repubs are all "PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY" until it's convenient.

 

It's not "illegal," it's in violation of NYPD procedures. Violation of a procedure isn't a criminal act. That's assault and battery, not murder. If you get into a fight with someone and they die 2 hours later, that may or may not be manslaughter. But you still have to prove that the fight and whatever damage you did caused the death. What i'm arguing here is that it's not crystal clear that the choke hold lead to the death. That was one of several factors cited by the med. examiner, and who knows what they and other experts testified to during the GJ hearings.

 

And while the guy was non-violent, he was still resisting. Just to be clear. Doesn't make the officer's actions any better, but it does excuse the other officers who handcuffed him.

 

I love how liberals are all "justice for all!" until it's convenient.

[Reddy]

End of the day, the indisputable facts are that a police officer used an illegal choke hold on a non-violent perp, and accidentally killed him.

 

That, my friends, is negligent homicide or manslaughter at the very least. And undeniably deserves a f***ing INDICTMENT - which isn't a f***ing CHARGE. You can argue all you want about whether the cop deserves to do time for murder, but THAT'S not the discussion. The discussion is whether or not he deserves to GO THROUGH THE LEGAL SYSTEM like ANY other human being who did what he did. That's not justice, no matter what side of the isle you're on.

[Reddy]

It's not "illegal," it's in violation of NYPD procedures. Violation of a procedure isn't a criminal act. That's assault and battery, not murder. If you get into a fight with someone and they die 2 hours later, that may or may not be manslaughter. But you still have to prove that the fight and whatever damage you did caused the death. What i'm arguing here is that it's not crystal clear that the choke hold lead to the death. That was one of several factors cited by the med. examiner, and who knows what they and other experts testified to during the GJ hearings.

 

And while the guy was non-violent, he was still resisting. Just to be clear. Doesn't make the officer's actions any better, but it does excuse the other officers who handcuffed him.

 

I love how liberals are all "justice for all!" until it's convenient.

until it's convenient? explain.

[Jenksismyhero]

so you're saying the fact that this guy was fat absolves the police officer of the responsibility of considering the health of his perp before he attempts an illegal choke hold that could kill someone in this man's condition? got it.

 

even the right wing pundits don't agree with you on this one. lol just absurd.

 

Um, good? I'd hate to be defined by talking heads like you.

[Reddy]

Um, good? I'd hate to be defined by talking heads like you.

I'd hate to be defined by a lack of compassion, reason, and logic like you, so we're even. I'd hate to believe that not all people deserve to be treated equally. I honestly pity you.

Edited December 4, 2014 by Reddy

[Jenksismyhero]

End of the day, the indisputable facts are that a police officer used an illegal choke hold on a non-violent perp, and accidentally killed him.

 

That, my friends, is negligent homicide or manslaughter at the very least. And undeniably deserves a f***ing INDICTMENT - which isn't a f***ing CHARGE. You can argue all you want about whether the cop deserves to do time for murder, but THAT'S not the discussion. The discussion is whether or not he deserves to GO THROUGH THE LEGAL SYSTEM like ANY other human being who did what he did. That's not justice, no matter what side of the isle you're on.

 

I mean I suppose that's a fair point, but when you have a video of the entire incident, I again go back to the question of causation. And if experts testified and couldn't say that the choke hold caused the death, well, then, what's the point of a trial other than to appease people like you who want some blood, regardless?

 

 

[Jenksismyhero]

I'd hate to be defined by a lack of compassion, reason, and logic like you, so we're even. I'd hate to believe that not all people deserve to be treated equally. I honestly pity you.

 

I think i'm being entirely logical. I'm telling you there appears to be a causation problem. You've yet to address that.

 

And I think everyone should be treated equally. Including cops who make terrible, tragic mistakes, but mistakes that don't deserve decades or life in prison.

Edited December 4, 2014 by Jenksismybitch

[Reddy]

I mean I suppose that's a fair point, but when you have a video of the entire incident, I again go back to the question of causation. And if experts testified and couldn't say that the choke hold caused the death, well, then, what's the point of a trial other than to appease people like you who want some blood, regardless?

 

Prosecutors control the presentation of evidence, and they thus control the jury. Prosecutors in this situation don't WANT indictments because they don't want to make enemies of the police,since they RELY on police cooperation to do their job. If a prosecutor doesn't want an indictment, and the DA doesn't want an indictment, what do you think will happen? The system is broken.

[StrangeSox]

You honestly think he should go to jail for the rest of his life for putting a guy into a chokehold for 5 seconds?

 

And really, I think to be logical about it, you'd also have to want to put any officer there on the scene in jail as well, since their decisions to handcuff him and keep him on the ground is the biggest contributing factor to his death.

I honestly think that he should go to jail for some period of time because he put someone in a chokehold, a technique that the NYPD recognized was killing people three decades ago, and killed them.

[Reddy]

I think i'm being entirely logical. I'm telling you there appears to be a causation problem. You've yet to address that.

 

And I think everyone should be treated equally. Including cops how make terrible, tragic mistakes, but are still just mistakes that don't deserve decades or life in prison.

REGULAR PEOPLE WHO MAKE TRAGIC MISTAKES GO TO PRISON

[StrangeSox]

And I think everyone should be treated equally. Including cops who make terrible, tragic mistakes, but mistakes that don't deserve decades or life in prison.

 

yeah see that's exactly the problem. Police who engage in brutality use excessive force that's recognized as increasing fatality risk make terrible, tragic mistakes that kill people rarely get charged and even more rarely get convicted. Regular people, not so much. Texas executes people on far, far weaker evidence than this case.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

I honestly think that he should go to jail for some period of time because he put someone in a chokehold, a technique that the NYPD recognized was killing people three decades ago, and killed them.

 

I don't have a problem with an assault/battery charge. Murder or manslaughter? I don't think I can go that far. Not with the info on the internet anyway. If the experts say that the chokehold is the major cause of the death, then I'd be ok with it.

[StrangeSox]

I don't have a problem with an assault/battery charge. Murder or manslaughter? I don't think I can go that far. Not with the info on the internet anyway. If the experts say that the chokehold is the major cause of the death, then I'd be ok with it.

The NYPD recognized as far back as 1985 that chokeholds are potentially lethal and changed their policy so that officers stop using them.

 

This officer used a chokehold on a nonviolent man suspected of evading a f***ing cigarette tax and his actions directly led to his death. His assault and battery killed Eric Garner.

[Jenksismyhero]

yeah see that's exactly the problem. Police who engage in brutality use excessive force that's recognized as increasing fatality risk make terrible, tragic mistakes that kill people rarely get charged and even more rarely get convicted. Regular people, not so much. Texas executes people on far, far weaker evidence than this case.

 

I mean I don't disagree, but I still think in my fight example, which this is basically a fight with different stages resulting in a death, a prosecutor isn't going to bring a murder charge against someone without being able to prove causation. From the med examiner's report alone, i think that's difficult to do here because it was one of several factors and the guy was clearly alive and breathing after the choke hold ended.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

The NYPD recognized as far back as 1985 that chokeholds are potentially lethal and changed their policy so that officers stop using them.

 

This officer used a chokehold on a nonviolent man suspected of evading a f***ing cigarette tax and his actions directly led to his death. His assault and battery killed Eric Garner.

 

Maybe.

[EvilMonkey]

Well one takeaway from all this is 'don't resist arrest'.

[StrangeSox]

Well one takeaway from all this is 'don't resist arrest'.

Obey or be brutalized.

[StrangeSox]

Maybe.

Using this elevated standard of proof in combination with the Ferguson ~both sides~ quasi-trial grand jury process, I estimate our criminal indictment rates will plummet by 90%.

[CrimsonWeltall]

Well one takeaway from all this is 'don't resist arrest'.

 

He initially pulls his hands away from the officer trying to grab them. After that point, and the entire time the choke hold is on him, he is offering zero resistance.

 

STOP RESISTING WITH YOUR DYING

[StrangeSox]

He initially pulls his hands away from the officer trying to grab them. After that point, and the entire time the choke hold is on him, he is offering zero resistance.

 

STOP RESISTING WITH YOUR DYING

Garner committed an assault on the police officer by attacking the officer's forearm with his neck. He also attempted to vandalized public property i.e. the sidewalk by smashing his face into it.