NYPD officer in Eric Garner case fired

[martybegan]

There is a serious question as to if he intended to apply a chokehold, or was just wrestling with a very large, resisting man, along with other officers.

The Admin Judge called it a chokehold, but many disagree.

Many disagree with a judge's ruling in many cases. Does that matter?

It matters in this case because you are arguing he should have been fired.

Based upon court findings. I hold the officer to the same standard I would have been held to.

The court findings are highly suspect. In the end they were trying to find SOMETHING to stick. They would rather him in prison, but would accept him being fired.

They were based upon fact. He did something expressly against policy. You can say "he didn't mean to" but he did all the same.

He was wrestling with a man over twice his size, along with other officers. His arm during this extending to his neck area doesn't mean he was applying a chokehold.

 

[pknopp]

Many disagree with a judge's ruling in many cases. Does that matter?

It matters in this case because you are arguing he should have been fired.

Based upon court findings. I hold the officer to the same standard I would have been held to.

The court findings are highly suspect. In the end they were trying to find SOMETHING to stick. They would rather him in prison, but would accept him being fired.

They were based upon fact. He did something expressly against policy. You can say "he didn't mean to" but he did all the same.

He was wrestling with a man over twice his size, along with other officers. His arm during this extending to his neck area doesn't mean he was applying a chokehold.

And yet he was.

 

[martybegan]

It matters in this case because you are arguing he should have been fired.

Based upon court findings. I hold the officer to the same standard I would have been held to.

The court findings are highly suspect. In the end they were trying to find SOMETHING to stick. They would rather him in prison, but would accept him being fired.

They were based upon fact. He did something expressly against policy. You can say "he didn't mean to" but he did all the same.

He was wrestling with a man over twice his size, along with other officers. His arm during this extending to his neck area doesn't mean he was applying a chokehold.

And yet he was.

Or it looked like a chokehold, but wasn't.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The cop's actions did not cause Garner's death. If the NYPD's policies had something to do with the take down it was the policy of hiring small men and women as police officers. In the days when the police had standards the police officers were bruisers who made Garner look fragile.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

If I break a policy at work I'm likely going to get fired. If I break a policy at work and someone dies, you can bet I am going to get fired. Pantaleo list a job and can ho and find another, Garner was murdered and he doesn't get a do over.

I have no idea why some hold a police officer to a different standard. Just do what you are instructed and no one gets fired.

There is a serious question as to if he intended to apply a chokehold, or was just wrestling with a very large, resisting man, along with other officers.

The Admin Judge called it a chokehold, but many disagree.

So you think it is ok for a police officer to choke a man to death. This guy should be doing 20 to Life, it just shows that there is still 2 Justice Systems in this country. I also believe all the officers who watched this murder should pay a price as well.

 

[pknopp]

The cop's actions did not cause Garner's death. If the NYPD's policies had something to do with the take down it was the policy of hiring small men and women as police officers. In the days when the police had standards the police officers were bruisers who made Garner look fragile.

The police officers actions did lead to his death any way around it. The family got millions not because he died, but because his civil rights were violated. He was doing nothing illegal. He was standing on a street. One does not have to freely give up their civil rights.

 

[martybegan]

If I break a policy at work I'm likely going to get fired. If I break a policy at work and someone dies, you can bet I am going to get fired. Pantaleo list a job and can ho and find another, Garner was murdered and he doesn't get a do over.

I have no idea why some hold a police officer to a different standard. Just do what you are instructed and no one gets fired.

There is a serious question as to if he intended to apply a chokehold, or was just wrestling with a very large, resisting man, along with other officers.

The Admin Judge called it a chokehold, but many disagree.

So you think it is ok for a police officer to choke a man to death. This guy should be doing 20 to Life, it just shows that there is still 2 Justice Systems in this country. I also believe all the officers who watched this murder should pay a price as well.

He wasn't choked to death. Cause of death was:

On August 1, Garner's death was found by the New York City Medical Examiner's Office to have resulted from "compression of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police".[1][65][66] Asthma, heart disease, and obesity were cited as contributing factors.[67] There was no damage to the trachea (windpipe) or neckbones,[68] which—according to Pantaleo—was one factor in NYPD Chief Surgeon Eli Kleinman's contrary conclusion in an internal report that Pantaleo did not put Garner into a chokehold.[69]

An independent autopsy conducted by Michael Baden, a former New York City medical examiner, agreed with the findings of the New York City Medical Examiner's Office and concluded that Garner's death was primarily caused by "compression of the neck". Baden reported finding hemorrhaging around Garner's neck, which was indicative of neck compression.[70]

And two examiners differed on if a chokehold was actually used.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

If I break a policy at work I'm likely going to get fired. If I break a policy at work and someone dies, you can bet I am going to get fired. Pantaleo list a job and can ho and find another, Garner was murdered and he doesn't get a do over.

I have no idea why some hold a police officer to a different standard. Just do what you are instructed and no one gets fired.

There is a serious question as to if he intended to apply a chokehold, or was just wrestling with a very large, resisting man, along with other officers.

The Admin Judge called it a chokehold, but many disagree.

So you think it is ok for a police officer to choke a man to death. This guy should be doing 20 to Life, it just shows that there is still 2 Justice Systems in this country. I also believe all the officers who watched this murder should pay a price as well.

Eric Garner was not choked to death. He died of a massive heart attack incident to morbid obesity and diabetes.

Stop lying.

 

[martybegan]

The cop's actions did not cause Garner's death. If the NYPD's policies had something to do with the take down it was the policy of hiring small men and women as police officers. In the days when the police had standards the police officers were bruisers who made Garner look fragile.

The police officers actions did lead to his death any way around it. The family got millions not because he died, but because his civil rights were violated. He was doing nothing illegal. He was standing on a street. One does not have to freely give up their civil rights.

He was resisting arrest. He was being taken in for selling loose cigarettes.

The City settled to placate those upset by the situation.

 

[pknopp]

The cop's actions did not cause Garner's death. If the NYPD's policies had something to do with the take down it was the policy of hiring small men and women as police officers. In the days when the police had standards the police officers were bruisers who made Garner look fragile.

The police officers actions did lead to his death any way around it. The family got millions not because he died, but because his civil rights were violated. He was doing nothing illegal. He was standing on a street. One does not have to freely give up their civil rights.

He was resisting arrest. He was being taken in for selling loose cigarettes.

No he wasn't. He was suspected that maybe that is what he was doing but he had no cigarettes on him. The cops decided to search someone based upon past actions. That is illegal and a violation of ones civil rights. Hence the millions in settlement.

The cops were called over a fight. Those fighting we gone and the cops itching for action had to find another way to release that. They decided to pick on someone minding his own business.

But go ahead, defend jumping on someone over the selling of loose cigarette's even if that was true. (which it wasn't)

 

[martybegan]

The cop's actions did not cause Garner's death. If the NYPD's policies had something to do with the take down it was the policy of hiring small men and women as police officers. In the days when the police had standards the police officers were bruisers who made Garner look fragile.

The police officers actions did lead to his death any way around it. The family got millions not because he died, but because his civil rights were violated. He was doing nothing illegal. He was standing on a street. One does not have to freely give up their civil rights.

He was resisting arrest. He was being taken in for selling loose cigarettes.

No he wasn't. He was suspected that maybe that is what he was doing but he had no cigarettes on him. The cops decided to search someone based upon past actions. That is illegal and a violation of ones civil rights. Hence the millions in settlement.

The cops were called over a fight. Those fighting we gone and the cops itching for action had to find another way to release that. They decided to pick on someone minding his own business.

Once he started resisting, he created the situation in which the cops had to use force to take him down.

He was standing around, and probably selling loosies as he was known to do. In NYC, as stupid as that sounds, that is illegal.

 

[pknopp]

The cop's actions did not cause Garner's death. If the NYPD's policies had something to do with the take down it was the policy of hiring small men and women as police officers. In the days when the police had standards the police officers were bruisers who made Garner look fragile.

The police officers actions did lead to his death any way around it. The family got millions not because he died, but because his civil rights were violated. He was doing nothing illegal. He was standing on a street. One does not have to freely give up their civil rights.

He was resisting arrest. He was being taken in for selling loose cigarettes.

No he wasn't. He was suspected that maybe that is what he was doing but he had no cigarettes on him. The cops decided to search someone based upon past actions. That is illegal and a violation of ones civil rights. Hence the millions in settlement.

The cops were called over a fight. Those fighting we gone and the cops itching for action had to find another way to release that. They decided to pick on someone minding his own business.

Once he started resisting, he created the situation in which the cops had to use force to take him down.

He was standing around, and probably selling loosies as he was known to do. In NYC, as stupid as that sounds, that is illegal.

You can not search someone over "Probably". He had no cigarette's on him. But again, go ahead and defend someone over even what you describe as a stupid law.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The cop's actions did not cause Garner's death. If the NYPD's policies had something to do with the take down it was the policy of hiring small men and women as police officers. In the days when the police had standards the police officers were bruisers who made Garner look fragile.

The police officers actions did lead to his death any way around it. The family got millions not because he died, but because his civil rights were violated. He was doing nothing illegal. He was standing on a street. One does not have to freely give up their civil rights.

He was resisting arrest. He was being taken in for selling loose cigarettes.

The City settled to placate those upset by the situation.

The city thinks it is avoiding a riot. The blacks still want to riot because the cop is still able to work somewhere else. They want a prohibition against working any where.

There are too many people who know that the officer did nothing wrong.

 

[miketx]

If I break a policy at work I'm likely going to get fired. If I break a policy at work and someone dies, you can bet I am going to get fired. Pantaleo list a job and can ho and find another, Garner was murdered and he doesn't get a do over.

I have no idea why some hold a police officer to a different standard. Just do what you are instructed and no one gets fired.

There is a serious question as to if he intended to apply a chokehold, or was just wrestling with a very large, resisting man, along with other officers.

The Admin Judge called it a chokehold, but many disagree.

So you think it is ok for a police officer to choke a man to death. This guy should be doing 20 to Life, it just shows that there is still 2 Justice Systems in this country. I also believe all the officers who watched this murder should pay a price as well.

Typical black criminal. does not even consider resisting arrest a crime. Now that this cop has been fired, watch for crime to skyrocket, giving you even more opportunities to steal a two dollar beer.

 

[pknopp]

The cop's actions did not cause Garner's death. If the NYPD's policies had something to do with the take down it was the policy of hiring small men and women as police officers. In the days when the police had standards the police officers were bruisers who made Garner look fragile.

The police officers actions did lead to his death any way around it. The family got millions not because he died, but because his civil rights were violated. He was doing nothing illegal. He was standing on a street. One does not have to freely give up their civil rights.

He was resisting arrest. He was being taken in for selling loose cigarettes.

The City settled to placate those upset by the situation.

The city thinks it is avoiding a riot. The blacks still want to riot because the cop is still able to work somewhere else. They want a prohibition against working any where.

A reasonable position. This is a guy that believed he was above the requirements set upon him.

There are too many people who know that the officer did nothing wrong.

I understand that many do not have a problem with the violation of a black man's civil rights. Unfortunately this place is infested with them.

 

[martybegan]

The cop's actions did not cause Garner's death. If the NYPD's policies had something to do with the take down it was the policy of hiring small men and women as police officers. In the days when the police had standards the police officers were bruisers who made Garner look fragile.

The police officers actions did lead to his death any way around it. The family got millions not because he died, but because his civil rights were violated. He was doing nothing illegal. He was standing on a street. One does not have to freely give up their civil rights.

He was resisting arrest. He was being taken in for selling loose cigarettes.

No he wasn't. He was suspected that maybe that is what he was doing but he had no cigarettes on him. The cops decided to search someone based upon past actions. That is illegal and a violation of ones civil rights. Hence the millions in settlement.

The cops were called over a fight. Those fighting we gone and the cops itching for action had to find another way to release that. They decided to pick on someone minding his own business.

Once he started resisting, he created the situation in which the cops had to use force to take him down.

He was standing around, and probably selling loosies as he was known to do. In NYC, as stupid as that sounds, that is illegal.

You can not search someone over "Probably". He had no cigarette's on him. But again, go ahead and defend someone over even what you describe as a stupid law.

He started resisting when questioned. Garner created the situation. He was being an ass.

 

[pknopp]

If I break a policy at work I'm likely going to get fired. If I break a policy at work and someone dies, you can bet I am going to get fired. Pantaleo list a job and can ho and find another, Garner was murdered and he doesn't get a do over.

I have no idea why some hold a police officer to a different standard. Just do what you are instructed and no one gets fired.

There is a serious question as to if he intended to apply a chokehold, or was just wrestling with a very large, resisting man, along with other officers.

The Admin Judge called it a chokehold, but many disagree.

So you think it is ok for a police officer to choke a man to death. This guy should be doing 20 to Life, it just shows that there is still 2 Justice Systems in this country. I also believe all the officers who watched this murder should pay a price as well.

Typical black criminal. does not even consider resisting arrest a crime. Now that this cop has been fired, watch for crime to skyrocket, giving you even more opportunities to steal a two dollar beer.

Resisting an unlawful arrest is not a crime. If Garner had survived, any charges would have been dropped and the settlement still paid out.

 

[martybegan]

The cop's actions did not cause Garner's death. If the NYPD's policies had something to do with the take down it was the policy of hiring small men and women as police officers. In the days when the police had standards the police officers were bruisers who made Garner look fragile.

The police officers actions did lead to his death any way around it. The family got millions not because he died, but because his civil rights were violated. He was doing nothing illegal. He was standing on a street. One does not have to freely give up their civil rights.

He was resisting arrest. He was being taken in for selling loose cigarettes.

The City settled to placate those upset by the situation.

The city thinks it is avoiding a riot. The blacks still want to riot because the cop is still able to work somewhere else. They want a prohibition against working any where.

There are too many people who know that the officer did nothing wrong.

I think there will be a bigger backlash in the NYPD.

I see a big sick-out coming on in the next week or so.

 

[pknopp]

The police officers actions did lead to his death any way around it. The family got millions not because he died, but because his civil rights were violated. He was doing nothing illegal. He was standing on a street. One does not have to freely give up their civil rights.

He was resisting arrest. He was being taken in for selling loose cigarettes.

No he wasn't. He was suspected that maybe that is what he was doing but he had no cigarettes on him. The cops decided to search someone based upon past actions. That is illegal and a violation of ones civil rights. Hence the millions in settlement.

The cops were called over a fight. Those fighting we gone and the cops itching for action had to find another way to release that. They decided to pick on someone minding his own business.

Once he started resisting, he created the situation in which the cops had to use force to take him down.

He was standing around, and probably selling loosies as he was known to do. In NYC, as stupid as that sounds, that is illegal.

You can not search someone over "Probably". He had no cigarette's on him. But again, go ahead and defend someone over even what you describe as a stupid law.

He started resisting when questioned. Garner created the situation. He was being an ass.

It is understandable to be an ass when a police officer is trying to violate your rights.

 

[Defiant1]

If I break a policy at work I'm likely going to get fired. If I break a policy at work and someone dies, you can bet I am going to get fired.

I have no idea why some hold a police officer to a different standard. Just do what you are instructed and no one gets fired.

There is a serious question as to if he intended to apply a chokehold, or was just wrestling with a very large, resisting man, along with other officers.

The Admin Judge called it a chokehold, but many disagree.

Many disagree with a judge's ruling in many cases. Does that matter?

It matters in this case because you are arguing he should have been fired.

Based upon court findings. I hold the officer to the same standard I would have been held to.

Is your life at risk by ghetto thugs every day?