NYPD Officer Who Fatally Choked Eric Garner Wasn't Indicted, Man Who Filmed the Incident Was

a reply to: Bundy

Well said.

If Eric garner deserved capital punishment for ilegal activities then let the courts decide. That does not give anyone the authority to kill him.

a reply to: Komodo

WEll this goes beyond race and socioeconomic classes, this also touches on brain washing Police and creating separatism and survival level mentality for the police against all civilians, that is scary. .

a reply to: Komodo

LIBMR Ducks!

The police can all be fitted with cams but when it suites them they will say they were not working, not turned on and the judge won't even ask why not.

This is what's been happening with cameras in patrol cars and is just one of the many reasons that I say that the whole system is broken, past repair

I don't trust the police not to Photoshop recordings and I no longer trust them with DNA evidence when it is not backed up with something else or witnesses that have not been blackmailed into playing along with the cops.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Komodo
He was not choked to death. Autopsy revealed cardiac arrest.

Yes often happens when someone or thing stops you from breathing, the ticker speeds up and goes in to cardiac arrest.

#1 If any of you bothered to read the police and autopsy reports you'd know that a "choke hold" (designed to cut off the flow of air) wasn't used but a "submission hold" (designed to momentarily slow the flow of blood to make you pass out was used). Big difference.

#2 The victim "Eric Garner" was not in the best of shape. he was overweight, had trouble walking half a block without stopping to catch his breath, had heart disease, diabetes, and several other health ailments. As one person put it he was a flight of stairs away from a heart attack. So given the victim's poor health the "submission hold" was the straw that broke the camels back.

#3 The Reason the Grand Jury did not indict, was because the cop did not break the law or violate the rule, had no intention of killing Eric Garner that day, Eric Garner was resisting arrest. While it is unfortunate that he died, the cop was just following standard policy and did not violate the law. So no charges were filed.

What I have a problem with is the law itself, a fine would be more appropriate that the need to arrest someone. And as for the "Broken Windows" Policing policing strategy, and it being unsuccessful, you must not remember NYC or Time Square before it was cleaned up. The problem here is not broken windows but, Nanny Bloomberg going overboard.

all this proves is that there are a lot of criminals in that neighborhood and that people in that neighborhood illegally carry guns.The guy probably had a gun on him while he was shooting the video.

"I was framed" LOL
It`s sad that there are so many gullible people who so easily take the word of a criminal over the word of a police officer.

a reply to: Tardacus

"I was framed" LOL
It`s sad that there are so many gullible people who so easily take the word of a criminal over the word of a police officer.

So are you saying that the video he took was faked or that the police don't frame people especially when trying to cover for one of their own.

A bit of weed should be over looked when it comes to a serious case like murder and using something like that to persuade someone to agree with the police is perverting the course of justice.

originally posted by: JBRiddle
#1 If any of you bothered to read the police and autopsy reports you'd know that a "choke hold" (designed to cut off the flow of air) wasn't used but a "submission hold" (designed to momentarily slow the flow of blood to make you pass out was used). Big difference.

#2 The victim "Eric Garner" was not in the best of shape. he was overweight, had trouble walking half a block without stopping to catch his breath, had heart disease, diabetes, and several other health ailments. As one person put it he was a flight of stairs away from a heart attack. So given the victim's poor health the "submission hold" was the straw that broke the camels back.

#3 The Reason the Grand Jury did not indict, was because the cop did not break the law or violate the rule, had no intention of killing Eric Garner that day, Eric Garner was resisting arrest. While it is unfortunate that he died, the cop was just following standard policy and did not violate the law. So no charges were filed.

Thanks for the facts.

I support individual personal responsibility.

I have been stopped and questioned by police just for being in a place that had some suspicious activity.

I answered their questions. They thanked me and said, "Have a nice day". They were doing their job.

I'm a white middle aged female.

Life and death follow a spiritual order and not the order of the flesh. Brown was not supposed to die in the manner he did however garner was and he knew full wll it was his spirit that made the decision. The one filming showed up for one reason and that was for the war between the spirit and flesh. I do not really expect anyone to be able to understand the full intent of my words but i can tell you that it all ends unless it gets back on track. There is no sceduled peace insight. Do not blame me or some god blame your own spirit for leading you all astray. I agree the program sucks for the flesh but it will not change until all is fullfilled. Meanwhile the battle rages on and on. For all those that say that death would be better than living under this tyrannical system should know they are poined and headed in that direction.

a reply to: Bundy

Bundy,

I agree with you entirely on all the points you made in the post to which I am responding. Please do not misunderstand my intention in posting my thoughts on the image that BobAtHome posted. I was merely trying to point out, that the image suggested that there might be certain things about the life of the victim, which have not been expressed in full detail in the press, probably to simplify the situation for viewers and readers of mainstream news media.

What happened to the gentleman concerned was still wrong. Putting someone in a sleeper hold or variant thereof, is always dangerous. As far as I understand it, the difference between a choke, and a submission hold is that a choke seeks to close the windpipe, preventing oxygen from entering the lungs and by extension the whole body, including the brain. This can permanently damage the windpipe, the larynx, and is designed to suffocate the victim until they pass out and die.

A submission hold of the type used here however, seeks instead to partially and temporarily prevent blood, and therefore oxygen, from reaching the brain by pressure being applied to the veins and arteries in the neck. The key difference being, if one successfully measures the pressure applied and the timing, the victim will awaken later with a muzzy head, but no permanent damage to anything at all.

I have had to use such a hold before now, and they are very effective. But one must only use one when the situation is DIRE because by the nature of the mechanism by which they work, they are dangerous. A little too much pressure cutting off too much of the blood supply, or applying pressure for a little too long, can cause the cells in the brain to basically die. That is why I only ever used a hold of that nature when I had a knife waved in my face. I would say that the threat presented by a man who was clearly overweight and not physically fit, and therefore not much of a threat to anyone, even while resisting arrest, was not adequate to the deployment of such a technique, and that given his condition, it was never going to end well.

The main things to take away from this, as far as I am concerned:

1) a person, even a guilty person, has the right to be tried in a court by a jury of his peers, to due process. Extrajudicial enforcement is not the way to go if a society based on law is to prevail long term.

2) sleeper holds, or whatever people are calling them these days, are effective but ought to be used sparingly, and intelligently. That includes a necessity to learn to correctly assess the chances of an individual dying if it is used on them, based on whatever information officers have available about the intended target. Obese, slow moving, clearly unwell people, are not appropriate targets for such a maneouvre and such moves should not be taught to anyone who cannot tell the difference.

3) being prepared to be honest about Mr Garner's life, should not affect peoples opinion of the issues raised by this death. Great rock stars have died with veins full of poison, precisely because the manner of their lives was a path to their meeting with the infinite, but we do not revere them any less because they died in such a way, despite the decrepit nature of their passing. Equally, we should not be any less concerned that a man died while being resrtrained by a large group of officers, whether he was a gardener, or a gangbanger, whether he was a haulage technican or a hitman. These things do not make a blind bit of difference to how wrong his death was, because of how it happened, and why it happened.

Also, don't get me wrong, if he had been in posession of a weapon, or the speed and strength required to kill those officers, and they had responded with lethal force to a lethal threat, then this would not even be a discussion. But no such threat existed, he was not armed, he was not a powerful man, but an obese and unhealthy one.

a reply to: ispyed

Sour grapes from the police.

I agree. Bwah, we got caught on tape. That wasn't supposed to happen. You caused a stink by recording it. now you're gonna pay, too.

If you're real lucky you won't wind up in the Murder one tank on Rykers.

a reply to: Rosinitiate

3 cheers for body cameras, Hip Hip Hooray! Hip Hip Hooray! Hip H...ip *crickets* no? Anyone?

What good are lapel cameras gonna do? Eric's death was recorded on cell phone and it still didn't matter.

Besides cops are into a lot of corrupt stuff, think they will mind?

Serpico

yea..

getting the thread back on track .. this thread isn't about Garner.. it's about the guy that VIDEO tapped the cop and HIM going to jail for having a weapons charge against him .....

to coincidental ?

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Komodo

He was not choked to death. Autopsy revealed cardiac arrest.

While being choked.

Being choked causes asphyxiation, not cardiac arrest.

Secondly brush up on an LVNR and how its applied and watch the video.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Thank you for a well thought out and intelligent response. I didn't for a moment take what you said in what i think you would consider "the wrong way". As soon as i saw it, i thought the same thing as you. I also do not think any gang affiliation should be a death sentence. I grew up around some gang bangers, living in california in a lower class neighborhood. The majority of people who join gangs know little else. It's everywhere around them, family, friends, and enemies. I used to be a young idiot who thought they were cool because they had girls and money and didn't have to go to work, but i realize now that it's nothing but a #ty existence and to be avoided at all costs. I've known people who've been murdered for nothing before they ever really got a chance. The first friend of mine to die happened when he and i were 14, and he was shot to death over wearing a wrong color and his murder is still unsolved. I really wish people would stop glorifying sheer stupidity.

If there's record of him telling a reporter that Garner's killer threatened this guy with the whole Karma's a bitch like he claimed, he wouldn't be indicted, even carrying an illegal gun.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Rosinitiate

3 cheers for body cameras, Hip Hip Hooray! Hip Hip Hooray! Hip H...ip *crickets* no? Anyone?

What good are lapel cameras gonna do? Eric's death was recorded on cell phone and it still didn't matter.

Besides cops are into a lot of corrupt stuff, think they will mind?

Serpico

aggreed .. !!

and how many more movies have been made about this very subject..

a reply to: Komodo

Even if the cops had cameras it would not have changed the fact the guy died of cardiac arrest and not a LVNR.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Komodo

Even if the cops had cameras it would not have changed the fact the guy died of cardiac arrest and not a LVNR.

hmmm...it's their word against ours...but...here's what THIS thread is about ..

the video WASN'T on the cop .. it was a citizen ...who video taped the cop is now under arrest, for alleged firearm possession ...you do the math ..

a reply to: Komodo

The guy arrested was caught passing the firearm to a 17 year old.

New York Times

Narcotics officers on Saturday arrested a Staten Island man whose visceral cellphone images of the forceful and ultimately deadly arrest of Eric Garner helped galvanize protests and set off a citywide debate over police practices.

The police charged the man, Ramsey Orta, with two counts of criminal possession of a weapon — a .25-caliber Norton semiautomatic handgun — that the officers said he tried to pass to a teenager on the sidewalk of a drug-prone street blocks from the spot where officers had the fatal confrontation with Mr. Garner.

The officers also arrested the teenager, Alba Lekaj, 17, charging her with possession of the gun and possession of a small amount of marijuana, the police said.

Don't break the law.