People get ready!!!

[Yarddog]

I saw a guy that did not deserve to get choked out man... Seriously? You cannot tell me that guy deserved that kind of treatment. There were like 8 cops standing there...not 1 cop getting bum rushed.

Mouth off to the police and see what it gets you.

When a police officer shoots a dog conservatives rant about the police state and big government, but when a man is choked to death for "mouthing off", he deserved it.

I didn't say he deserves it, just that he shouldn't have resisted.

Mouthing off isn't resisting. At best it's disorderly conduct, which usually results in an infraction or misdemeanor. Not being choked to death.

I noticed what seemed to be a flutter (editing? I dunno) in the video, just before the cop applied the choke-hold, and the audio's a bit fuzzy there.

Does anyone know if the 'suspect' was ordered to put his hands behind his back or otherwise submit to arrest, and whether he refused?

I'm trying to figure-out why the cop would have applied the choke-hold in the first place.

Unless the call for reinforcements had been coded to indicate a dangerous suspect, and the newly-arrived 'reinforcing' cop decided to jump the 'dangerous' suspect from behind, in order to gain control of him.

From what I understand he refused to let them put on cuffs, but with the number of cops and the fact he wasnt showing aggression I would say
they used unreasonable force

 

[Vigilante]

The Officer initiated the choke hold, while there were more than enough bodies to take the guy down.
The guy was not fighting, yes he was resisting but non-combative.

This was NEVER a head lock...why are certain posters such flagrant liars???

Apparently the jury though it wasn't or he would be indicted but stupid people like you don't get that fact.

 

[Kondor3]

You're thinking to hard trying to come up with something that isnt there. You dont believe your lying eyes?

Lying eyes? Uhhhhh... yeah... whatever you say.

Meanwhile, the question stands: Was the suspect either (1) instructed to surrender and refused or (2) coded by dispatch as a danger, to be neutralized quickly?

 

[reconmark]

The Officer initiated the choke hold, while there were more than enough bodies to take the guy down.
The guy was not fighting, yes he was resisting but non-combative.

This was NEVER a head lock...why are certain posters such flagrant liars???

Apparently the jury though it wasn't or he would be indicted but stupid people like you don't get that fact.

Actually with each proceeding post, you are erasing all doubt as to who is stupid...

 

[aaronleland]

I saw a guy that did not deserve to get choked out man... Seriously? You cannot tell me that guy deserved that kind of treatment. There were like 8 cops standing there...not 1 cop getting bum rushed.

Mouth off to the police and see what it gets you.

When a police officer shoots a dog conservatives rant about the police state and big government, but when a man is choked to death for "mouthing off", he deserved it.

I didn't say he deserves it, just that he shouldn't have resisted.

Mouthing off isn't resisting. At best it's disorderly conduct, which usually results in an infraction or misdemeanor. Not being choked to death.

I noticed what seemed to be a flutter (editing? I dunno) in the video, just before the cop applied the choke-hold, and the audio's a bit fuzzy there.

Does anyone know if the 'suspect' was ordered to put his hands behind his back or otherwise submit to arrest, and whether he refused?

I'm trying to figure-out why the cop would have applied the choke-hold in the first place.

Unless the call for reinforcements had been coded to indicate a dangerous suspect, and the newly-arrived 'reinforcing' cop decided to jump the 'dangerous' suspect from behind, in order to gain control of him.

For the 50th time, nobody disputes what happened. The video tape, the police, and the medical examiner are telling the same story. The officer in question and two EMTs have even been punished for it. They had sufficient force to subdue the man, but the officer used a procedure banned by the NYPD instead.

 

[Kondor3]

...From what I understand he refused to let them put on cuffs, but with the number of cops and the fact he wasnt showing aggression I would say they used unreasonable force

Hmmmmm... I dunno about the 'unreasonable force' thing... we've all seen a whole passle of cops gang-pile on a single suspect... white... black... whatever... and the bigger the suspect, the bigger the gang-pile, yes?

And, if he did, indeed, refuse to submit to hand-cuffs, then he gave the cops the license they needed, to take down that behemoth, although I'm not convinced about the choke-hold thing yet.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[reconmark]

The "implied" is what you read into it, being too stupid to actually comprehend what I posted.

So in essence you attempted to lie and now you want to state that I "implied" som.ething.

I said before, if dishonesty is your moral standard, don't respond.

No idiot. The speaker 'implies" and the listener "infers". He inferred. What is so fucking difficult about that?

Nothing now comment on the topic or get lost!!!...what's so fucking difficult about that, asshole.

Tell us again about your excellent English, pleeeze!

My English is excellent, anything further you need?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

I'll come back to this disgusting redneck sewer of filth to remind all of you racist, stupid white Darren Wilson/George Zimmerman girly men that whatever happens, you deserve it.

 

[aaronleland]

...From what I understand he refused to let them put on cuffs, but with the number of cops and the fact he wasnt showing aggression I would say they used unreasonable force

Hmmmmm... I dunno about the 'unreasonable force' thing... we've all seen a whole passle of cops gang-pile on a single suspect... white... black... whatever... and the bigger the suspect, the bigger the gang-pile, yes?

And, if he did, indeed, refuse to submit to hand-cuffs, then he gave the cops the license they needed, to take down that behemoth, although I'm not convinced about the choke-hold thing yet.

It had been banned by the NYPD over a decade ago, because it caused the death of a few people. He had the choice of a "gang pile" of officers, or using a banned, potentially deadly move, and he chose to choke the man.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Can't tell that by the video. If he was choked he couldn't say that he couldn't breathe. His vocal chords would be constricted as well. A lung issue would be different.

The medical examiner said that the chokehold killed him, and the police said that the chokehold that killed him violated policy.

Has GJ testimony been released already?

What does that matter? The medical examiner said Garner died from compression to the neck, compression to the body, and prone positioning. They did say that asthma, obesity, and heart disease were contributing factors, but the officer violated policy by using the choke hold in the first place.

What does that matter? I guess if you're a mob anarchist it doesn't. For civilization it matters totally. Evidence and testimony -- including medical examinations -- carry more weight than a preliminary examination alone.

IDIOT! NOBODY (including the officer) is denying that he was put into a choke hold, and that it resulted in his death. NOBODY but you.

Where'd you get that? None of the GJ testimony has been released nor is it allowed to be released according to NY law.
Or are you doing another Ferguson, where you disregard the system and civility and pursue an agenda?

 

[Vigilante]

The Officer initiated the choke hold, while there were more than enough bodies to take the guy down.
The guy was not fighting, yes he was resisting but non-combative.

This was NEVER a head lock...why are certain posters such flagrant liars???

Apparently the jury though it wasn't or he would be indicted but stupid people like you don't get that fact.

Actually with each proceeding post, you are erasing all doubt as to who is stupid...

I feel sorry for you!

 

[Meathead]

The "implied" is what you read into it, being too stupid to actually comprehend what I posted.

So in essence you attempted to lie and now you want to state that I "implied" som.ething.

I said before, if dishonesty is your moral standard, don't respond.

No idiot. The speaker 'implies" and the listener "infers". He inferred. What is so fucking difficult about that?

Nothing now comment on the topic or get lost!!!...what's so fucking difficult about that, asshole.

Tell us again about your excellent English, pleeeze!

My English is excellent, anything further you need?

I don't need anything, I do find your claims about your English rather humorous given your obviously limited vocabulary though.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Can't tell that by the video. If he was choked he couldn't say that he couldn't breathe. His vocal chords would be constricted as well. A lung issue would be different.

The medical examiner said that the chokehold killed him, and the police said that the chokehold that killed him violated policy.

Has GJ testimony been released already?

What does that matter? The medical examiner said Garner died from compression to the neck, compression to the body, and prone positioning. They did say that asthma, obesity, and heart disease were contributing factors, but the officer violated policy by using the choke hold in the first place.

What does that matter? I guess if you're a mob anarchist it doesn't. For civilization it matters totally. Evidence and testimony -- including medical examinations -- carry more weight than a preliminary examination alone.

The medical examiner found: "compression of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police"

You, too, have access to GJ testimony that NY law says is forbidden to be released?

 

[reconmark]

Kelly Bans Choke Holds By Officers
By IAN FISHER
Published: November 24, 1993

• Email
• Print
• 

The New York City Police Department has issued an order banning the use of choke holds, the restraining maneuvers that cut off the flow of blood and oxygen to the brain and have been blamed in the deaths of suspects here and around the nation.

The directive comes as police departments around the country have prohibited or reviewed the use of various choke holds by officers.

At a police promotion ceremony at One Police Plaza, Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly characterized the ban not as a new policy but as clarification of a 1985 order.


New York City has not trained police cadets in the use of choke holds for at least 10 years, Chief Timoney and other experts said, and their use here has been less controversial and apparently apparently less widespread than in Los Angeles.

Kelly Bans Choke Holds By Officers - New York Times

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Oh shut up. This guy was hardly a thug. Selling individual cigarettes is hardly some major crime worthy of a forbidden choke hold.

But we don't know what he might have done to warrant the response. It was clipped from the partisan video.

It may have been, I am not sure. Do you have any proof that video was edited to make this incident something other then it wasn't?

Did you actually watch it? It jumps from his verbal resisting to a point where cops are on his back. What happens in between is missing.

I did watch the video. Can you offer any proof that this video was altered in fashion that suggests he acted violently? Or is this just an assumption you willing to run to justify a forbidden choke hold?

I can't assume anything about the missing footage because it is missing. Apparently you can. You must be a soothsayer.

 

[aaronleland]

I do feel for the officer. I don't think he meant to kill anybody, and he seems genuinely troubled by what he did. I think he just wanted to be "hero cop". Jump into the fray, and take the suspect down single-handedly. Unfortunately, us lowly civilians don't have the luxury of saying "I didn't mean to do it", and getting away with manslaughter.

 

[reconmark]

The "implied" is what you read into it, being too stupid to actually comprehend what I posted.

So in essence you attempted to lie and now you want to state that I "implied" som.ething.

I said before, if dishonesty is your moral standard, don't respond.

No idiot. The speaker 'implies" and the listener "infers". He inferred. What is so fucking difficult about that?

Nothing now comment on the topic or get lost!!!...what's so fucking difficult about that, asshole.

Tell us again about your excellent English, pleeeze!

My English is excellent, anything further you need?

I don't need anything, I do find your claims about your English rather humorous given your obviously limited vocabulary though.

If you believe my vocabulary to be limited do you really think I would waste my time making you the fool, when your own words have done so???

 

[Vigilante]

Kelly Bans Choke Holds By Officers
By IAN FISHER
Published: November 24, 1993

• Email
• Print
• 

The New York City Police Department has issued an order banning the use of choke holds, the restraining maneuvers that cut off the flow of blood and oxygen to the brain and have been blamed in the deaths of suspects here and around the nation.

The directive comes as police departments around the country have prohibited or reviewed the use of various choke holds by officers.

At a police promotion ceremony at One Police Plaza, Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly characterized the ban not as a new policy but as clarification of a 1985 order.


New York City has not trained police cadets in the use of choke holds for at least 10 years, Chief Timoney and other experts said, and their use here has been less controversial and apparently apparently less widespread than in Los Angeles.

Kelly Bans Choke Holds By Officers - New York Times

What type of choke hold is forbidden? Just heard the windpipe was NOT damaged....isn't that the purpose of this supposed chock?

 

[reconmark]

The Officer initiated the choke hold, while there were more than enough bodies to take the guy down.
The guy was not fighting, yes he was resisting but non-combative.

This was NEVER a head lock...why are certain posters such flagrant liars???

Apparently the jury though it wasn't or he would be indicted but stupid people like you don't get that fact.

Actually with each proceeding post, you are erasing all doubt as to who is stupid...

I feel sorry for you!

Like I said so many times, if dishonesty is your moral position, keep it to yourself.
I don't feel sorry for liars.