No Indictment in Eric Garner Case

[Boss]

You and the NoLo.com people are misusing the term and making a claim that is factually inaccurate. Police are not required to demonstrate probable cause before making an arrest.

"To establish probable cause, police officers must be able to point to objective circumstances leading them to believe that a suspect committed a crime. A police officer can’t establish probable cause by saying only something like, 'I just had a hunch that the defendant was a burglar.'”
Point out the "objective circumstances" that led the NYPD to kill Eric Garner, or is it more likely your heroes "just had a hunch" he was selling loosies?
Probable Cause When Police Can Make an Arrest Nolo.com

We don't know the "objective circumstances" of what led them to attempt arresting Garner. This is available to the grand jury and it hasn't been made public. Did he have loosies in one pocket and money in another? We don't know... You don't see people running around making such a claim because we don't know. I think it's very important to being objective to realize what we don't know.

We can go all Nancy Grace and investigate every possible scenario as if we do know... it just needs to remain clear this is conjecture and not based on any evidence or fact.

 

[dannyboys]

And now for the facts:
Any cop has the legal authority to 'detain' anyone for their safety and the detainees safety. This is Federal law and State law.
The cops in Garner's case were attempting to detain Garner while they made preliminary enquiries.
Garner was on parole and the cops were attempting to determine if Garner was breaking the conditions of his parole which would have meant he was going back to jail.
Why was Garner standing on that Staten Island street corner.......and had been for a couple of hours according to witnesses who gave testimony at the GJ hearing?
What reason would Garner have to travel to Staten Island? Certainly not to hang with the 'hommies'. HA HA!
He was there selling illegal smokes because where he usually sold them too many cops knew him so he went where he thought the cops wouldn't recognise him. He had been arrested five time selling at the train station already.
THe GJ heard and saw all the evidence and justice was served.
All you LIB 'pyjama-boys' can now go back to mommy's basement and wait until you think you have another excuse to whine about nothing.
The career criminal had already cost the State hundreds of thousands of dollars putting up with his useless ass.

 

[Boss]

"To establish probable cause, police officers must be able to point to objective circumstances leading them to believe that a suspect committed a crime. A police officer can’t establish probable cause by saying only something like, 'I just had a hunch that the defendant was a burglar.'”

Despite the fact they are incorrectly using the term "probable cause" here, they are making a valid point which you need to consider. The officers must have had some objective reason to place Mr. Garner in custody. Someone can be taken into custody without arrest and held for questioning. I don't know if they were attempting to arrest the man or take him into custody for questioning, so I can't start jumping to false conclusions. It's part of maintaining my emotions and remaining objective. When he resisted being taken into custody, that's a felony. If officers didn't have objective reason before, they do then.

 

[georgephillip]

You and the NoLo.com people are misusing the term and making a claim that is factually inaccurate. Police are not required to demonstrate probable cause before making an arrest.

"To establish probable cause, police officers must be able to point to objective circumstances leading them to believe that a suspect committed a crime. A police officer can’t establish probable cause by saying only something like, 'I just had a hunch that the defendant was a burglar.'”
Point out the "objective circumstances" that led the NYPD to kill Eric Garner, or is it more likely your heroes "just had a hunch" he was selling loosies?
Probable Cause When Police Can Make an Arrest Nolo.com

We can go all Nancy Grace and investigate every possible scenario as if we do know... it just needs to remain clear this is conjecture and not based on any evidence or fact.

We should know what specific call the NYPD was responding to when Garner died, right?

 

[Boss]

You and the NoLo.com people are misusing the term and making a claim that is factually inaccurate. Police are not required to demonstrate probable cause before making an arrest.

"To establish probable cause, police officers must be able to point to objective circumstances leading them to believe that a suspect committed a crime. A police officer can’t establish probable cause by saying only something like, 'I just had a hunch that the defendant was a burglar.'”
Point out the "objective circumstances" that led the NYPD to kill Eric Garner, or is it more likely your heroes "just had a hunch" he was selling loosies?
Probable Cause When Police Can Make an Arrest Nolo.com

We can go all Nancy Grace and investigate every possible scenario as if we do know... it just needs to remain clear this is conjecture and not based on any evidence or fact.

We should know what specific call the NYPD was responding to when Garner died, right?

We should know everything the grand jury knew. That would certainly be included. However, it is academic what specific call they were responding to. Why would you think that makes any difference? Someone had objective reason to take Mr. Garner into custody. We don't know the details, the information has not been released.

 

[dannyboys]

You and the NoLo.com people are misusing the term and making a claim that is factually inaccurate. Police are not required to demonstrate probable cause before making an arrest.

"To establish probable cause, police officers must be able to point to objective circumstances leading them to believe that a suspect committed a crime. A police officer can’t establish probable cause by saying only something like, 'I just had a hunch that the defendant was a burglar.'”
Point out the "objective circumstances" that led the NYPD to kill Eric Garner, or is it more likely your heroes "just had a hunch" he was selling loosies?
Probable Cause When Police Can Make an Arrest Nolo.com

We can go all Nancy Grace and investigate every possible scenario as if we do know... it just needs to remain clear this is conjecture and not based on any evidence or fact.

We should know what specific call the NYPD was responding to when Garner died, right?

Three store owners called the NYPD complaining there was someone selling smokes outside their businesses and had just been in a fight with another Black man on the corner.
That would be because Big Garner was muscling in on the other Black man's territory.
The NYPD responded. They asked Garner what his name was. They checked and got his entire arrest record. That was when they told him they were 'arresting' him. Big Garner, at that point knew he was going back to jail which he apparently did not wish to do.
Case closed.

 

[georgephillip]

Someone had objective reason to take Mr. Garner into custody

Why would you jump to that irrational, subjective conclusion?

 

[georgephillip]

Three store owners called the NYPD complaining there was someone selling smokes outside their businesses and had just been in a fight with another Black man on the corner.
That would be because Big Garner was muscling in on the other Black man's territory.

You keep throwing shit at the wall and hoping it will stick,
Why is that?
Do you have a credible link for you latest version of events?

 

[Boss]

Someone had objective reason to take Mr. Garner into custody

Why would you jump to that irrational, subjective conclusion?

It's not irrational to assume the hoard of police officers in the video were abiding by their requirement to have objective reason. They wouldn't be doing it otherwise because someone among them would have said... hey guys, we don't have the authority for this... so it is very rational to assume they did. It's irrational to assume mobs of police officers run around abusing their authority to violate basic civil rights.

 

[georgephillip]

It's irrational to assume mobs of police officers run around abusing their authority to violate basic civil rights.

That may well be true in your neighborhood.
Not so much for the one Eric Garner lived and died in.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

It's irrational to assume mobs of police officers run around abusing their authority to violate basic civil rights.

That may well be true in your neighborhood.
Not so much for the one Eric Garner lived and died in.

You are making a claim that the police are lying about why they attempted to arrest him to begin with.

Substantiate that claim.

 

[georgephillip]

You are making a claim that the police are lying about why they attempted to arrest him to begin with.

I'm claiming the police may have jumped to the wrong conclusion when they encountered Garner on the day he died. The only way to establish that claim would require a trial by a jury of Daniel Pantaleo's peers where both sides are allowed to present evidence and cross examine the opposition. That opportunity was denied by the GJ.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

You are making a claim that the police are lying about why they attempted to arrest him to begin with.

I'm claiming the police may have jumped to the wrong conclusion when they encountered Garner on the day he died. The only way to establish that claim would require a trial by a jury of Daniel Pantaleo's peers where both sides are allowed to present evidence and cross examine the opposition. That opportunity was denied by the GJ.

No, the opportunity to decide if he was guilty of what they were arresting him for was forfeited by Garners resisting.

And I believe the cop who used the choke hold should be charged with a crime, but that doesn't matter.

You do NOT have a right to resist a lawful arrest. You have a right to resist an unlawful arrest.

Unlawful arrest doesn't mean you claim you're innocent of whatever crime they are accusing you of.

Once you resist, whatever happens is YOUR fault

 

[dannyboys]

It's irrational to assume mobs of police officers run around abusing their authority to violate basic civil rights.

That may well be true in your neighborhood.
Not so much for the one Eric Garner lived and died in.

I didn't realize Garner lived in Tompkinsville. Thanks for telling us.
We always know who to axe for the facts.

 

[georgephillip]

You do NOT have a right to resist a lawful arrest.

Since the GJ denied the right to a jury trail, how will we find out if the NYPD had probable cause to arrest Garner on the day he died?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

You do NOT have a right to resist a lawful arrest.

Since the GJ denied the right to a jury trail, how will we find out if the NYPD had probable cause to arrest Garner on the day he died?

The GJ which investigated his death had NOTHING to do with probable cause over the arrest. NOTHING.

Whether it was a legal arrest or not has no bearing on whether the choke hold killed him.

If you resist arrest, the burden shifts to YOU to prove it was an illegal arrest. The police then become the defendants and don't have to prove they are innocent.

I'm sorry that you don't understand that, but it is true.

 

[georgephillip]

I'm sorry that you don't understand that, but it is true.

Worry more about your own lack of understanding.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

I'm sorry that you don't understand that, but it is true.

Worry more about your own lack of understanding.

I just explained to you how the system works. All you've posted is emotion.

You CLEARLY don't understand the law here.

 

[georgephillip]

The GJ which investigated his death had NOTHING to do with probable cause over the arrest. NOTHING.

The decision rendered by the GJ makes it harder to determine if the NYPD observed objective circumstances that led them to arrest Garner the day he died which has EVERYTHING to do with probable cause.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

The GJ which investigated his death had NOTHING to do with probable cause over the arrest. NOTHING.

The decision rendered by the GJ makes it harder to determine if the NYPD observed objective circumstances that led them to arrest Garner the day he died which has EVERYTHING to do with probable cause.

No it doesn't'.

Read what Im saying.


Whether the arrest itself was warranted or not makes NO difference unless you are arguing that the choke hold can be used as long as Garner deserved to be arrested.

Is that your argument