It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Official: Police chokehold caused NYC man's death

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 02:37 PM
link   


NEW YORK (AP) — The medical examiner has ruled that a police officer's chokehold on a New York City man last month caused his death.

Medical examiner spokeswoman Julie Bolcer said Friday that Eric Garner's July 17 death was ruled a homicide.

Bolcer says his death was caused by "the compression of his chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police." She says asthma and heart disease were contributing factors.

Garner, who is black, was being arrested for selling untaxed, loose cigarettes. Video shows him being placed in a chokehold by a white officer. The video has caused widespread outcry, and Attorney General Eric Holder has said the Justice Department is "closely monitoring" the investigation into his death.

Official: Police chokehold caused NYC man's death

Since this has now been officially ruled as a homicide committed by a NYPD officer, I wonder if the judge won't lock him up "because he wouldn't fare well in prison"?




posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: LrdRedhawk

Ok, I understand you are quoting from the article but after reading said article I can't see where it says a choke hold killed the guy.

I mean all it really said is the factors that contributed to his death were

"the compression of his chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police,"

Also,

Asthma, heart disease and obesity were contributing factors, she said.


No where does it say strangulation, the crushing of his wind pipe or the compression of his carotid artery.

Also, the race baiting is clear throughout the article.


A chokehold used by a white police officer on a black New York City man during his arrest

and

Sharpton believes chokeholds are used disproportionately on minorities.


I mean as a "reputable" news outlet, shouldn't the AP verify the claims before passing them as news?



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: areyouserious2010
a reply to: LrdRedhawk

Ok, I understand you are quoting from the article but after reading said article I can't see where it says a choke hold killed the guy.

I mean all it really said is the factors that contributed to his death were

"the compression of his chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police,"

Also,

Asthma, heart disease and obesity were contributing factors, she said.


No where does it say strangulation, the crushing of his wind pipe or the compression of his carotid artery.

Also, the race baiting is clear throughout the article.


A chokehold used by a white police officer on a black New York City man during his arrest

and

Sharpton believes chokeholds are used disproportionately on minorities.


I mean as a "reputable" news outlet, shouldn't the AP verify the claims before passing them as news?


So are you saying the chokehold did not kill him? If the chokehold was not used he would still be alive.

Chokeholds are banned in New York and now this has been ruled a homicide. I hope they charge that scumbag cop with murder.

He killed him over single cigarettes not cartons or even packs, just singles. But sure lets defend him and just give up all of our rights right now.



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: areyouserious2010




Ok, I understand you are quoting from the article but after reading said article I can't see where it says a choke hold killed the guy.


Here you go.


died as result of compression to his neck, compression to his chest and “prone positioning during physical restraint by police,” according to autopsy results.


link



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 05:54 PM
link   
I just like in the original thread on this story as it broke out, the shills kept mentioning "he had Asthma", "he had Asthma" like it's some sort of damage control.

Wonder if anything happens to this cop.



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 05:54 PM
link   
a reply to: LrdRedhawk

The choke hold taught in many karate classes should be ruled as attempted murder. Cutting the blood supply to the brain until someone is unconscious is serious business. Bad timing can be fatal. Also, the chocked individual may have forgotten how to breath after the choke is removed.

I am glad they charged the cop with murder.



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: eManym

You don't get taught a choke hold in marital arts. Blocking the blood flow is not a choke hold.
Choke hold blocks the air way and cause them to cough or gag. In martial arts that is the sign you are doing g it wrong and need to get a better position.
Won't say sleepers are harmless but they are safer then a choke hold. Well as long as you let go.

Eta: the sleeper will incapacitate a person safely tho and faster then a choke hold will strangle someone
edit on stFri, 01 Aug 2014 18:15:54 -0500America/Chicago820145480 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: alienjuggalo


So are you saying the chokehold did not kill him?

Nope, I am saying the AP article did not list strangulation as the cause of death. It only listed

"the compression of his chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police,"
and

Asthma, heart disease and obesity were contributing factors,


Now, the Raw Story article does say

died as result of compression to his neck, compression to his chest and “prone positioning during physical restraint by police,” according to autopsy results.
I am merely pointing to the fact that there is a difference in interpretation. I would be interested to see what the actual wording of the press release is.


He killed him over single cigarettes not cartons or even packs, just singles.

I would argue the officers INTENDED to arrest him because he was breaking the law by selling untaxed cigarettes. The police made clear their intent to arrest him peacefully but he began to resist that arrest.


But sure lets defend him and just give up all of our rights right now.

Well, I would say people do not have the right to resist a lawful arrest. And when people do resist a lawful arrest, the police have the right to overcome that resistance with reasonable force.



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: areyouserious2010

the upshot of it is that if he hadn't been placed in a choke hold, he wouldn't have died.

pretty simple, really...



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: areyouserious2010

i've gotta point out the irony of your username right now..

are you serious? i mean, really, are you?

there are drug dealers, murderers, rapists, and stick-up artists out there on the streets, and they waste time with some dude slinging loosies?

back in the day, they would have told him to get lost...today, he's dead....



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

Most choke holds in Martial arts focus on cutting blood supply to the brain, not depriving them of oxygen.

It is relatively painless and not terribly dangerous if you take into account the rate in which it happens to the amount of people who die from it.
That's not to say it's safe; but it's not like shooting someone either.

The danger is people not letting go of the choke once the person has lost consciousness.

Source: I do BJJ and getting choked is a weekly routine.



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Daedalus
a reply to: areyouserious2010

the upshot of it is that if he hadn't been placed in a choke hold, he wouldn't have died.

pretty simple, really...


The upshot to that is that if he wasn't doing something illegal, he wouldn't of been put in a choke hold.

Pretty simple really...
edit on 1-8-2014 by Collateral because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Collateral

Causing a stroke is another danger.



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Daedalus


the upshot of it is that if he hadn't been placed in a choke hold, he wouldn't have died.

pretty simple, really...


See, that is the problem. It's not "pretty simple." People are quick studies of the legal system, on this site, when it comes to prosecuting a cop. And just as quick to condemn said police officer and convict on the highest possible charge one can think of.

There are many factors that come into play when charging someone with a crime. Based on the facts, I don't know if murder would be an appropriate charge.

I have not said the officer should not be charged. It seems you are just as quick to condemn me as well. It is that quick condemnation that removes any reason from discussion here.



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 06:45 PM
link   
a reply to: eManym

Or a heart attack from stress of an arrest.

From the sound of it, the death didn't have anything to do with the actual choke hold.
I'll happily go with the autopsy report over ats assumptions.



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Daedalus


there are drug dealers, murderers, rapists, and stick-up artists out there on the streets, and they waste time with some dude slinging loosies?

back in the day, they would have told him to get lost...today, he's dead....


Some would say that you are arguing that the police should not enforce certain laws. In fact, you are arguing the officers should exercise discretion in enforcing the law. I completely agree.

Telling the guy to "get lost" is enforcing the law. An officer is using his or her discretion to use the least invasive way of stopping the guy from breaking the law.

BUT, for an officer to use discretion, it requires some form of COMPLIANCE on the part of the person breaking the law. If the officer tells the guy to "get lost" an he does, it's done. The guy is on his way, the officer can continue about his business and everyone is happy.

If the guy says "no, you get lost," then the officer must now take further action which, if the guy does not comply at all, can lead to his arrest.

In the situation we are presented with, should the officers have attempted to issue the guy a citation? Yea, you could make that argument. But, if the guy is a habitual offender, the officer may decide that the only way to ensure the "message is received," is to arrest the guy.

Based on the guy's argumentative demeanor throughout the encounter, a reasonable person could see the guy probably was not going to "get lost" if asked by the officers or submit to being issued a citation. So, arrest was the next step.



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 07:05 PM
link   
Never mind.
edit on 8/1/2014 by Restricted because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: areyouserious2010

i'm not condemning you.

all i'm saying is that if he hadn't been put in the hold, he wouldn't have been dead. his "crime" wasn't so severe that the cop needed to go to all that trouble....tell him to stop what he's doing, and move on....not immediately move in for an arrest....policing isn't about arresting as many people as possible...

the problem with cops today is that they treat their job like a game...let's see who can get the high score for arrests...

he escalated when he didn't need to, he put the man in a hold he obviously wasn't properly trained to use, and now that man is dead....and for what? some loosies....

it's idiotic..



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Collateral

jaywalking is illegal, dropping a cigarette butt on the ground is illegal, failing to signal for a turn is illegal...do people who do these things deserve to die as well?

there's a fine line between good policing, and being an anal retentive bully....



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Collateral

and the autopsy report says the hold killed him...

so what was that about taking the autopsy report over ATS assumptions, again?



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join