- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
To those who think the Garner case cop should've been indicted,
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:13 am
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:13 am
On what basis? We all agree it was not an intentional killing, so we must be talking criminal negligent homicide, right? Go on record with what charge and why. If negligence, say how he was negligent. That is, say whether a reasonable person in the officer's shoes would have foreseen that garner would die from such a brief choke. I am not seeing it, but you all are, so I want to know. I know the first answer will be "chokeholds are banned," and I have addressed that and will again if necessary.
This post was edited on 12/5/14 at 6:14 am
19
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:21 am to baybeefeetz
Didn't he utter/gasp "I can't breath" 11 times?
I'll be honest I haven't followed this at all, but it seems to me the cop could have given the poor guy a breath after the 10th time.
I'll go on the record as a nega-cop fwiw, I've yet to meet a good cop and I have them in my family including 2 Parish/County Sherrifs
I'll be honest I haven't followed this at all, but it seems to me the cop could have given the poor guy a breath after the 10th time.
I'll go on the record as a nega-cop fwiw, I've yet to meet a good cop and I have them in my family including 2 Parish/County Sherrifs
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:25 am to SuperSaint
Choke was released before he finished saying he couldn't breath. Doesn't matter anyway. Was a brief choke. Question is, given that, if you were tr cop would you have expected death.
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:30 am to baybeefeetz
I'll just say we have a system in place that oversees situations such as this when it comes to administering justice. Under this system, whether or not I agree with it, a grand jury that is representative of our peers has seen the evidence and elected not to indict. They have seen the evidence, I have not so I assume they know something I don't which in turn means I will abide by their decision.
If the system is changed because of what has happened then I will abide by that system also. Doesn't mean I have to like it but I will respect it.
If the system is changed because of what has happened then I will abide by that system also. Doesn't mean I have to like it but I will respect it.
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:34 am to baybeefeetz
A couple of things. Choke holds are against NYPD policy but not illegal. How else were they going to get that big a guy off his feet?
Second Garner died of cardiac arrest in the ambulance afterward and not from the choke hold. This dude's poor life choices and poor health is what ultimately killed him.
Second Garner died of cardiac arrest in the ambulance afterward and not from the choke hold. This dude's poor life choices and poor health is what ultimately killed him.
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:35 am to SuperSaint
How can you talk if you can't breath?
I'm sure the cops hear no end to bullshite health claims while arresting people. It's probably normal for them to ignore that stuff.
I'm sure the cops hear no end to bullshite health claims while arresting people. It's probably normal for them to ignore that stuff.
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:36 am to baybeefeetz
quote:Maybe not death, but possible injury and no doubt pain
. Question is, given that, if you were tr cop would you have expected death.
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:40 am to SuperSaint
So I'm pretty sure that's not enough to convict him of negligent homicide. But I don't disagree with you.
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:45 am to baybeefeetz
There appears to me to have been sufficient evidence to present to a petit jury.
Questions concerning the reasonableness of the choke, reasonableness of using that much force to effect the arrest, all appear to be sufficient enough to warrant a trial.
The standard for a grand jury indictment is quite low and, from this distance, just looks close enough to go (unlike Ferguson, BTW).
Questions concerning the reasonableness of the choke, reasonableness of using that much force to effect the arrest, all appear to be sufficient enough to warrant a trial.
The standard for a grand jury indictment is quite low and, from this distance, just looks close enough to go (unlike Ferguson, BTW).
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:47 am to Ace Midnight
Based on what is the question. Why do you think it's like a close call?
This post was edited on 12/5/14 at 6:49 am
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:47 am to TrueTiger
quote:
I'm sure the cops hear no end to bullshite health claims while arresting people. It's probably normal for them to ignore that stuff.
I'm not denying that, but they should be doing so at their own peril, not the peril of a person with problems. And in this case, the ME report suggests police actions were a cause of death.
SO, we go back to the beginning was lethal force justified based on the level and type of resistance presented. I'm not sure I can say, but there appears to be sufficient evidence for a charge - again, from this distance.
This post was edited on 12/5/14 at 6:48 am
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:49 am to baybeefeetz
quote:
Based on what is the question. If it's obvious that death was not reasonably foreseeable, there is no probable cause.
I'm not going to go around in circles with you again today. I'm not making a statement of guilt or innocence, merely that there appears to be sufficient evidence to go to trial.
Nothing more, nothing less, particularly for the choking officer.
Posted on 12/5/14 at 6:55 am to TexasTiger89
quote:
Second Garner died of cardiac arrest in the ambulance afterward and not from the choke hold.
I heard about this yesterday and supposedly the paramedics didn't provide base level of care like they should and are most likely to be part of the civil case rather than the cop.
Posted on 12/5/14 at 7:03 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
SO, we go back to the beginning was lethal force justified based on the level and type of resistance presented
this is the mistake being made by several people. There was no action taken by the police that would be classified as lethal force. I, myself, need to go back and watch the video again, because I was mainly focusing on the officer who applied the headlock, but were there any punches or kicks or baton strikes applied by other officers?
I ask this because if those things were not used, then the force applied here would be what is termed soft empty hand control. Punches, kicks and baton strikes would normally be termed hard empty hand control (depending on where applied to the body) or intermediate weapon strikes. So if only soft (or possible some hard) empty hand control was used, I don't see how it would be possible for a normal person to conclude that death was a possibility. EMS was requested after the arrest, and my understanding is they did not provide much care at all. I think the city will try and pin this on them.
This post was edited on 12/5/14 at 7:05 am
Posted on 12/5/14 at 7:05 am to baybeefeetz
The life or safety of the officers were never threatened by Garner's actions so the cops don't get the benefit of the doubt, IMO. A citizen that gets in a bar fight and chokes someone to death on accident gets charged so they should as well.
Posted on 12/5/14 at 7:06 am to Scoop
You are not looking at it the way the grand jury would have been instructed. This isn't a Self defense case.
accidents happen but you are only liable for the things that were reasonably foreseeable based on then action you take. In the bar fight, what was the choke like? Here, I don't hear anybody saying they firmly believe a death was one of the reasonably foreseeable consequences of that choke. And my position on that is clear.
accidents happen but you are only liable for the things that were reasonably foreseeable based on then action you take. In the bar fight, what was the choke like? Here, I don't hear anybody saying they firmly believe a death was one of the reasonably foreseeable consequences of that choke. And my position on that is clear.
This post was edited on 12/5/14 at 7:11 am
Posted on 12/5/14 at 7:07 am to Scoop
quote:
A citizen that gets in a bar fight and chokes someone to death on accident gets charged so they should as well.
I would agree if someone was chocked to death. That did not occur here, cause of death was not asphyxiation.
This post was edited on 12/5/14 at 7:07 am
Posted on 12/5/14 at 7:15 am to Chappy
quote:
EMS was requested after the arrest, and my understanding is they did not provide much care at all.
I saw an unconfirmed report they had all been fired, FWIW. (ETA: Apparently suspended, then ultimately reinstated.)
quote:
There was no action taken by the police that would be classified as lethal force
Let's assume the choke was unauthorized - wouldn't that classify? I don't mean to argue that any unauthorized technique would rise to that level, but if a technique is unapproved, because of past problems/risk of death or serious injury, wouldn't that de facto be a lethal force situation? I mean, again, I'm not sure the evidence is there to convict, but a petit jury could get into all of that.
Unlike the Ferguson case, where there was no credible evidence to build a conviction on, other than the negative outcome, in this case, we have a negative outcome for an arrestee who was neither armed, nor attempting to arm himself, but merely "softly" (to borrow your characterization) resisting being handcuffed. I think a criminal trial is warranted based on choke - just MHO.
This post was edited on 12/5/14 at 7:18 am
Posted on 12/5/14 at 7:18 am to Scoop
quote:
The life or safety of the officers were never threatened by Garner's actions so the cops don't get the benefit of the doubt, IMO. A citizen that gets in a bar fight and chokes someone to death on accident gets charged so they should as well.
totally different circumstances scoop.
The police were called to remove Garner who was camped in front of a business..he refused and refused arrest.
Two civilians getting into it is not the same
Posted on 12/5/14 at 7:18 am to baybeefeetz
quote:
On what basis?
The fact that the ME's report said the death was a homicide
If I "accidentally" kill someone with my car, I am charged with negligent or vehicular homicide. Why is the cop above it? Also, if I'm remembering correctly, this particular officer has been investigated/disciplined multiple times in the past for excessive force
Page 1 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News