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.

 

BREAKING: No Charges in Eric Garner Chokehold Case for Officer

page: 19
109
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 08:31 AM
link   
All the pigs in the video of this murder should be punished.

The choke hold MMA wannabe cop needs to do prison time. I'd say a good 5 years in the slammer would be appropriate and he should never be allowed on the force again.

His associates need to be fired for not doing their job of "protecting and serving" and actually preventing a US citizen from being murdered when he was clearly crying out for his dying breath in the video.

Another shameful day for this society we slave in... I mean live in.




posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentShillington

100% agreed, Mr. Shillington. Arrest the cameraman, not the murderer. What a world.



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
I think there are two reasons we're seeing more and more of this kind of thing...

1. The fact that we elected a black president has unleashed a resurgence of racism in this country.
2. Since 9/11, cops have become "heroes". And we can't prosecute our "heroes" for murder...

This is disgusting! I hope there is a huge backlash. Being quiet and peaceful when clearly, the justice system in this country is broken is just what we DON'T need.


"More and more" of these things aren't happening. The issue is the few cases that match this exact scenario get press coverage blown out of proportion for weeks/months. Statistics show that in 2012 123 black people were killed by police officers. Also in 2012 326 white people were killed by police. It certainly doesn't look like blacks are targeted more than whites. Probably the one thing we can agree on is too many people are being killed by the police.

www.inquisitr.com...



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Well this is one hell of a depressing thread. Is anyone at all holding the US police accountable for stuff like this? When Ian Tomlinson was killed by an idiot on the police in London there was at least an inquest, a finding of unlawful killing and the officer himself being kicked off the Force.



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
This…
Daniel Pantaleo smiles and waves to camera after killing Eric Garner


(Right-click to open in new window at fill size)

I just finished compiling that from this video - www.youtube.com...


Mission accomplished, just doin' my job... Just following orders?

No trial, no discovery, no way to know for sure...



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 09:14 AM
link   
We all seem to be outraged's at the cop's actions, and rightfully so. But why are we not expressing as much outrage toward the grand jury? They are the ones who had the power to potentially bring some justice to the situation and let these rogue cops know such bs has consequences, yet they let the cop walk. I have to put almost as much blame on the grand jury.

I know it must have been difficult for some of them, because most of us have been conditioned since childhood to respect authority and that the cops exist only to protect us and they are always right. When a rationale thinker questions a cop's actions, we are shunned by brainwashed family members who unfortunately just don't get it, bless there hearts, and think the police are just trying to do their jobs. They point to the fact that the guy was a criminal, that police put their lives on the line every day, etc., ignoring the evidence of what actually transpired and deferring to the authority of the cop. They never think of how they would feel if it was their kid/dad/sister etc. in the situation who was just killed unjustifiably by an overzealous cop. IMO there is a time to respect authority, but that respect cannot be unbridled and absolute, especially in situations like this.

I will refrain from calling the grand jury any bad names until I see the evidence that was presented to them that would allow them to make what appears to be on its face a hairbrained and uninformed decision. But I am only human, and right now the human in me is really pi$$ed.



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Hmmm...I wonder what President Obama has to say about this case:



OBAMA ON GARNER: 'MY TRADITION IS NOT TO REMARK ON CASES'




In his remarks Wednesday on the non-indictment of the New York police officer who allegedly choked Eric Garner to death during a routine arrest, President Barack Obama claimed that he does not involve himself in such controversies. "My tradition is not to remark on cases where there may still be an investigation," he said.

MORE:
www.breitbart.com...
edit on 4-12-2014 by IAMTAT because: highlighting



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT




posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT
Looks like the president appended "where there may still be an investigation" to that Breitbart title...

Anyway, look what others think about this case (see the comments):
No indictment in NYPD in-custody death

Back in the early 80's we learned of positional asphyxiation. Nothing like a dead duster hog tied face down in the back seat when you get to the station of MLK to make for a long shift.
Choke hold, I think not. I am old enough that not only was I taught and used a carotid hold, but also the good old (not really) bar arm choke hold. You ain't saying anything (especially "I can't breath") when you are being truly choked.
I am guessing positional asphyxia is what was causing his difficulty in breathing. Well damn it, stop resisting so I can handcuff you and roll your fat ass on your side!
So at the end of the day what to do? Fat people who don't want to cooperate get a free pass? The press is happy to say it was a choke hold death. I do not think that is what the coroners report states. It is a litany of bad things, all leading to positional asphyxiation that caused this guys death.
Damn I'm glad I'm retired. To my younger partner's, hold on tight, its' turning into a wild ride.


Someone claimed elsewhere that these are all law enforcement people, but they have categories of registration for civilian and manufacturer/distributor, so take that with a grain of salt. e: okay, maybe that person was right -

Post a Comment - You must be a verified law enforcement professional and a member of PoliceOne to comment. If you’re not a member and wish to comment, register here to join PoliceOne for free. All comments must comply with our Member Commenting Policy.

edit on 10Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:54:24 -0600America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago12 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT



OBAMA ON GARNER: 'MY TRADITION IS NOT TO REMARK ON CASES'



There he is again talking in opposites.




posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 11:08 AM
link   
This Grand Jury system needs looking at.
I think the US is one of the only developed countries in the world that still uses them.




Grand juries determine whether enough evidence exists for a case to go forward to a criminal trial, either before a jury or a judge. By law, they operate in secret and hear only evidence presented by prosecutors, who also instruct the grand jurors on the law. Defense lawyers are barred from speaking. For a decision, 12 jurors who have heard all of the evidence must agree.

www.nytimes.com...

I'm looking through trying to see an acceptable reasoning for the decision and I can't given the Medical Examiner said it was homicide, the move is illegal for NYC cops and there was a video and witnesses to the event.

I'm trying to find a faith in the legal system in this instance but can't.
A public killing should have gone to trial for a public transparent court proceeding, not a secretive hearing driven by god knows what agenda by the prosecution (cops mate?) as there is no transparency in the public domain during proceedings.

I'd be ditching the Grand Jury USA, time to catch up. NO public prosecution system should be held in secret.



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
In his remarks Wednesday on the non-indictment of the New York police officer who allegedly choked Eric Garner to death during a routine arrest, President Barack Obama claimed that he does not involve himself in such controversies. "My tradition is not to remark on cases where there may still be an investigation," he said.


He doesn't remark on CASES under investigation. That's very different than "remarking on controversies". I've never heard him remark on a CASE under investigation.



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

That's weird.

While the Trayvon Martin case was under investigation, he remarked on it.

While the Michael Brown case was under investigation, he remarked on it.

Yes, they are also controversies, but they both were active cases at the time as well.



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: zazzafrazz

If I'm not mistaken, in some or most states they have an option of a preliminary hearing, where evidence is presented in a courtroom, with a judge, arguments from both sides and all in the public record, unlike the grand jury which is secret closed doors, just the jury and prosecutor.

The preliminary hearing process should be the adopted standard process for indictments.

IMO



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Statistics show that in 2012 123 black people were killed by police officers. Also in 2012 326 white people were killed by police.


Speaking pure numbers, yes. But there are MANY more white people in the US than black.

123 out of 36 million black people
326 out of 264 million white people

Do the math. You have proven my point.



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
While the Trayvon Martin case was under investigation, he remarked on it.
While the Michael Brown case was under investigation, he remarked on it.


He didn't remark on the legal CASES.



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Maybe not the cases themselves, but he made remarks DURING the cases, using deceptive wording does not exonerate him from his previous actions. I'm normally a person to defend Obama, but what he said there is hypocritical.



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
While the Trayvon Martin case was under investigation, he remarked on it.
While the Michael Brown case was under investigation, he remarked on it.


He didn't remark on the legal CASES.



Weren't his remarks that of a parent losing a child?

Or along those lines?



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

He said what he said. It's clear. He made personal statements and talked about the general situation, NOT remarks on the specific legal cases. Breitbart has put words in his mouth and you guys are buying into it.
edit on 12/4/2014 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Yes. And at the Breitbart link, he talks about equality under the law and the police force, etc. NOTHING about the legal cases or investigations involved.



new topics

top topics



 
109
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join