The NYPD Are Making Themselves Look Really Small With Their Anti-DeBlasio Antics

[Stephanie]

I hope the people in New York wake up someday and look what they are putting in office to run their lives..

It's cute though seeing the left/lib/dems dumping all over them to protect their Comrade in arms, DemouthBlasio

wake to that party people

 

[georgephillip]

I still don't see any evidence that suggest a need for a trial. The evidence is pretty clear. He resisted, requiring the officers to take him down with force, resulting in him having a secondary medical problem, resulting in his death.

Garner's death was ruled a homicide based on a video showing how a banned chokehold lead directly to his killing, and you don't see any need for a public trial? Grand juries don't decide whether a suspect is guilty or innocent but only whether there's sufficient evidence to warrant a trial; in Garner's case there was.

 

[Stephanie]

I still don't see any evidence that suggest a need for a trial. The evidence is pretty clear. He resisted, requiring the officers to take him down with force, resulting in him having a secondary medical problem, resulting in his death.

Garner's death was ruled a homicide based on a video showing how a banned chokehold lead directly to his killing, and you don't see any need for a public trial? Grand juries don't decide whether a suspect is guilty or innocent but only whether there's sufficient evidence to warrant a trial; in Garner's case there was.

who ruled it a homicide based on a video? who ruled they put him in a banned Choke hold?

that is a lie

 

[georgephillip]

And it's possible there would be far fewer public trials, since doing so could cause mass quitting by police, which would result in a political football for opposition politicians to use against incumbents.

What evidence can you provide to show a majority of police officers support rogue/corrupt colleagues?

 

[georgephillip]

who ruled it a homicide based on a video? who ruled they put him in a banned Choke hold?

that is a lie

"New York City police officer Daniel Pantaleo killed Eric Garner on July 17 when he grabbed him by the neck and, with other officers, threw him to the ground and pinned him there. But did he commit homicide? And if so, was it a crime..."

"On Aug. 1, a New York City medical examiner determined that the cause of death in the Garner case was 'homicide,' specifically the neck compressions from the Pantaleo’s chokehold and 'the compression of [Garner’s] chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police,'according to spokeswoman, Julie Bolcer."

New York banned chokeholds in 1993.
Why do you think all cops are above the law?
Compassionate conservatism?
Why a Medical Examiner Called Eric Garner s Death a Homicide

 

[Andylusion]

who ruled it a homicide based on a video? who ruled they put him in a banned Choke hold?

that is a lie

"New York City police officer Daniel Pantaleo killed Eric Garner on July 17 when he grabbed him by the neck and, with other officers, threw him to the ground and pinned him there. But did he commit homicide? And if so, was it a crime..."

"On Aug. 1, a New York City medical examiner determined that the cause of death in the Garner case was 'homicide,' specifically the neck compressions from the Pantaleo’s chokehold and 'the compression of [Garner’s] chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police,'according to spokeswoman, Julie Bolcer."

New York banned chokeholds in 1993.
Why do you think all cops are above the law?
Compassionate conservatism?
Why a Medical Examiner Called Eric Garner s Death a Homicide

First, there is a difference between a "headlock" and a "chokehold". A choke-hold, deliberately prevents the person from breathing. If you can say........ "I can't breath".... then it is in fact NOT a choke hold.

When I was in high school, a guy pulled a knife on me. I put him in a choke hold.... he couldn't say anything....... because I was CHOKING HIM. You can't say jack squat if you are in a choke hold.

That's why if you see UFC matches and such, they have a TAP OUT. Why do they have a TAP OUT... if you can just say "I give up"??

BECAUSE... you can't say anything if they have you in a choke hold. In fact, by it's very nature, a choke-hold, has your arm, under their chin. You can't usually even open your mouth to say anything.

Second, listen very clearly..... Choke holds were NOT banned in New York. There is no law that bans the use of choke holds.

You people just make up crap. The police department eliminated choke holds as a matter of procedure and training and policy. There is nothing "ILLEGAL" about using a choke hold in New York.

There is a huge huge difference between "We don't use choke holds" and "Choke holds are illegal".

Lastly, the medical examiner clearly stated:

“compression of neck, compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police,” and that asthma and heart disease also played a role.

Compression of the neck, does not mean "choke hold". People are reading into that. Again, if he really was in a choke hold, he would not be clearly saying "I can't breath". Only ignorant people who have never used, or been subject to a choke hold (I've had both), do not know this.

Was their compression? Sure. They were holding the guy down. That's what happens when you pin someone.

Now if you want to ask whether it was the actions taken during the arrest that killed him... absolutely! I agree with that 100%.

My problem is this. Clearly he resisted arrest. If he had simply said "Yes officer" and done exactly as he was told, none of this would have happened.

As far as I'm concerned, everything that happened was his fault. Yes, I'm blaming Garner for his own death. He should have done as he was told.

 

[georgephillip]

You people just make up crap. The police department eliminated choke holds as a matter of procedure and training and policy. There is nothing "ILLEGAL" about using a choke hold in New Yor

"Was Pantaleo criminally negligent in killing Garner? He was,according to New York State law, if he failed 'to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk' that Garner would die from his actions, and that failure was 'a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.'

"Nobody should dispute that Pantaleo committed homicide—that fact was determined Aug. 1. Was Pantaleo’s behavior a gross deviation from the standard of care that a police officer should take when confronting an unarmed father of six whom he suspects may have been selling cigarettes illegally?

"Napolitano and many others who have watched the video of Garner’s killing think Pantaleo’s behavior was criminally negligent.

"The Staten Island grand jury apparently did not."

And the reason why the Staten Island grand jury did not believe Pantaleo's behavior was criminally negligent was because the local DA made sure the jury saw only the evidence that would work in the rogue cop's defense. Which is exactly why local prosecutors should not be allowed to control what evidence grand juries see whenever police misconduct is suspected.

Why a Medical Examiner Called Eric Garner s Death a Homicide

 

[Care4all]

No cigarettes were found on Mr Garner, and none were found in his car either...that's what I read today....? Is that possible?

So were the police just harassing him?

 

[Unkotare]

Grand juries don't decide whether a suspect is guilty or innocent but only whether there's sufficient evidence to warrant a trial; in Garner's case there was.

So, instead of grand juries we should just ask you each time?

 

[georgephillip]

No cigarettes were found on Mr Garner, and none were found in his car either...that's what I read today....? Is that possible?

So were the police just harassing him?

One account has it Garner had just "broken up a fight", and the fight call was what the NYPD responded to. The cops recognized Garner and may have jumped to a couple of wrong conclusions about why he was there. Garner was not killed at his usual location for selling untaxed cigarettes. Had the grand jury done its job properly all these questions would have been answered in a public courtroom.

 

[Andylusion]

You people just make up crap. The police department eliminated choke holds as a matter of procedure and training and policy. There is nothing "ILLEGAL" about using a choke hold in New Yor

"Was Pantaleo criminally negligent in killing Garner? He was,according to New York State law, if he failed 'to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk' that Garner would die from his actions, and that failure was 'a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.'

"Nobody should dispute that Pantaleo committed homicide—that fact was determined Aug. 1. Was Pantaleo’s behavior a gross deviation from the standard of care that a police officer should take when confronting an unarmed father of six whom he suspects may have been selling cigarettes illegally?

"Napolitano and many others who have watched the video of Garner’s killing think Pantaleo’s behavior was criminally negligent.

"The Staten Island grand jury apparently did not."

And the reason why the Staten Island grand jury did not believe Pantaleo's behavior was criminally negligent was because the local DA made sure the jury saw only the evidence that would work in the rogue cop's defense. Which is exactly why local prosecutors should not be allowed to control what evidence grand juries see whenever police misconduct is suspected.

Why a Medical Examiner Called Eric Garner s Death a Homicide

First, there is no evidence that Pantaleo was criminally negligent. The paper is entirely wrong on that. It's not up to a police officer to make sure that nothing they do could possibly kill someone... or they would do nothing. Fighting with someone to put them in cuffs alone.... could always result in their death, depending on how they struggle.

If that was the standard Police are required to reach... is to make sure that absolutely nothing they ever do could accidentally cause someone's death... then the moment any person refuses to be put in cuffs, the police would just let them go.

Further, Pantaleo actions were not a deviation from standard practice. His headlock and restraint was a normal and routinely used, and trained tactic.

What Napolitano thinks doesn't mean diddly jack squat. It's very popular to be against the police, to gain favor from the public. I would trust that opinion less than even the opinion of the guy who shot the video.

The one clear fact that is undisputed, is that the Grand Jury, after looking at all the evidence, including evidence you yourself, and everyone else has not seen, made it clear there was no case against Pantaleo.

You claim, that the prosecutor criminally withheld evidence.

I'd love to see your proof of that.

 

[Andylusion]

No cigarettes were found on Mr Garner, and none were found in his car either...that's what I read today....? Is that possible?

So were the police just harassing him?

If he sold the last one to an undercover cop, then I would expect that.

Regardless, it doesn't matter. When a police officer arrests you, you need to do what you are told. If you are not guilty of the crime, that will come out. But in the moment... it's not an option to do what the cop says. Just shut up, and do what you are told. If you get tossed in jail, get an attorney and sue them.

 

[Andylusion]

No cigarettes were found on Mr Garner, and none were found in his car either...that's what I read today....? Is that possible?

So were the police just harassing him?

One account has it Garner had just "broken up a fight", and the fight call was what the NYPD responded to. The cops recognized Garner and may have jumped to a couple of wrong conclusions about why he was there. Garner was not killed at his usual location for selling untaxed cigarettes. Had the grand jury done its job properly all these questions would have been answered in a public courtroom.

You still don't get it. That doesn't matter. None of what you just brought up, matters.

When the cop says put your hands behind your back... that's not a "highly recommended option". That's an order. Just do it. If you have done nothing wrong, when the police question you, and the others around the area, they'll let you go.

I've had this happen to me. I did nothing wrong. The officer asked a few questions, asked a few other people, determined I was just a passer by, and let me go.

But I don't argue with him. I didn't provoke him. I didn't bicker about it. I wasn't a jerk, or telling him off. I did exactly as he said to do. There was no need to smash me to the ground and hog tie me, because I did what I was told immediately.

If this had gone to trial, all that background crap had nothing to do with Garners death, and would not have matter in any way to the outcome of the trial.

 

[FA_Q2]

You people just make up crap. The police department eliminated choke holds as a matter of procedure and training and policy. There is nothing "ILLEGAL" about using a choke hold in New Yor

"Was Pantaleo criminally negligent in killing Garner? He was,according to New York State law, if he failed 'to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk' that Garner would die from his actions, and that failure was 'a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.'

"Nobody should dispute that Pantaleo committed homicide—that fact was determined Aug. 1. Was Pantaleo’s behavior a gross deviation from the standard of care that a police officer should take when confronting an unarmed father of six whom he suspects may have been selling cigarettes illegally?

"Napolitano and many others who have watched the video of Garner’s killing think Pantaleo’s behavior was criminally negligent.

"The Staten Island grand jury apparently did not."

And the reason why the Staten Island grand jury did not believe Pantaleo's behavior was criminally negligent was because the local DA made sure the jury saw only the evidence that would work in the rogue cop's defense. Which is exactly why local prosecutors should not be allowed to control what evidence grand juries see whenever police misconduct is suspected.

Why a Medical Examiner Called Eric Garner s Death a Homicide

what makes you think that the officer would have perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk when they arrested him?

999 out of 1000 people put in a choke hold would be just fine. Garner had other problems that are not written on his forehead. He was also resisting arrest and being uncooperative. Things that no one seems to want to address.

 

[georgephillip]

First, there is no evidence that Pantaleo was criminally negligent. The paper is entirely wrong on that. It's not up to a police officer to make sure that nothing they do could possibly kill someone... or they would do nothing. Fighting with someone to put them in cuffs alone.... could always result in their death, depending on how they struggle.

"Members of the New York City Police Department will NOT use chokeholds. A chokehold shall include, but is not limited to, any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air..."

"If a person appears to be having difficulty breathing or is otherwise demonstrating life-threatening symptoms, medical assistance will be requested immediately. The patrol supervisor will direct that alternate means to maintain custody be utilized, if appropriate."

Not only did your heroes use a banned chokehold to kill Eric Garner they ensured his demise by not providing lifesaving medical treatment once he was in custody.

Spare me any more of your anecdotal bull shit life stories, and try to limit your comments to verifiable claims.

Excerpt The NYPD Patrol Guide Every Mother s Son POV PBS

 

[georgephillip]

what makes you think that the officer would have perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk when they arrested him?

999 out of 1000 people put in a choke hold would be just fine.

Choke holds are NOT allowed by NYPD protocols.
Not only was a banned technique used to subdue Eric Garner, but this was followed by criminal negligence when officers made no attempt to administer first aid.
"For more than five minutes in the Eric Garner video, several officers stand around waiting for an ambulance to arrive as Garner lies on the ground, inert but still alive. CPR training might have saved Garner's life that day."
Preventing another Eric Garner tragedy 6 simple reforms we can implement right now - The Week

 

[Vigilante]

 

[georgephillip]

When the cop says put your hands behind your back... that's not a "highly recommended option". That's an order. Just do it. If you have done nothing wrong, when the police question you, and the others around the area, they'll let you go

Except in this society cops are not allowed to arrest anyone they choose any time they want. Maybe your white privilege has led you to believe Justice is blind, but that's just another lie the rich tell(and fools believe)

 

[Andylusion]

First, there is no evidence that Pantaleo was criminally negligent. The paper is entirely wrong on that. It's not up to a police officer to make sure that nothing they do could possibly kill someone... or they would do nothing. Fighting with someone to put them in cuffs alone.... could always result in their death, depending on how they struggle.

"Members of the New York City Police Department will NOT use chokeholds. A chokehold shall include, but is not limited to, any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air..."

"If a person appears to be having difficulty breathing or is otherwise demonstrating life-threatening symptoms, medical assistance will be requested immediately. The patrol supervisor will direct that alternate means to maintain custody be utilized, if appropriate."

Not only did your heroes use a banned chokehold to kill Eric Garner they ensured his demise by not providing lifesaving medical treatment once he was in custody.

Spare me any more of your anecdotal bull shit life stories, and try to limit your comments to verifiable claims.

Excerpt The NYPD Patrol Guide Every Mother s Son POV PBS

I don't give a crap what you do, or do not want to hear. I'm going to respond as I see fit. If you don't like it, you can ignore me. I'm more than happy for you to talk less on the forum, but you have no authority over how I talk. Sucks to be you. Too bad.

Moving on, we already covered this. It wasn't a choke hold. Further, your statement, doesn't change the fact that what he did was not "ILLEGAL". You claim to only want to hear verifiable fact, yet can't grasp this very simple fact.

The moment the police realized he was having a medical problem, they responded accordingly.

You seem to be implying that the officers should have known in advance that he was going to have a medical problem. Well, you are full of crap. There's no way they could have known what they were doing was going to cause him to die. Ridiculous idea.

It's always easy for some snotty internet poster, who has never been in any situation ever.... to claim others should have done it better. You sound like one of those pathetic arm chair football couches, who sends a letter to the couch of his favorite team, going "why didn't you ran this or that play???".

Grow up Mr. Snotty. I get it. You have never been in a fight, and never used a choke hold, or had a choke hold used on you, and so you are plain ignorant of absolutely everything. I get it.

My expectations of you lower, every time you post.

 

[Andylusion]

When the cop says put your hands behind your back... that's not a "highly recommended option". That's an order. Just do it. If you have done nothing wrong, when the police question you, and the others around the area, they'll let you go

Except in this society cops are not allowed to arrest anyone they choose any time they want. Maybe your white privilege has led you to believe Justice is blind, but that's just another lie the rich tell(and fools believe)

Of course justice isn't blind. And of course there are bad cops. I've met some.

Doesn't change the fact, that I have never seen a cop just randomly attack someone, who was not.... Resisting... provoking... taunting... fighting.... arguing... or attacking a police officer.

Never seen it.

And you can come up with all the bull crap excuses you want... and pull out the standard leftardian responses like "White privileged" and all the other crap. That's fine. That's what I expect from an intellectually bankrupt, and morally devoid leftist. Can't prove anything, just pull out the standard excuses.

Go ahead... let's hear you whine and cry some more. Watching you people squeal makes me laugh. Please continue.