SStarr33
Inactive
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2013
- Messages
- 7,881
- Reaction score
- 34
In the video they say he was breathing
NY - Officer Daniel Pantaleo used deadly chokehold on Eric Garner, Staten Island, July 2014
- Thread starter popsicle
- Start date
In the video they say he was breathing
SStarr33
Inactive
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2013
- Messages
- 7,881
- Reaction score
- 34
SEE IT: No indictment in Eric Garner fatal NYPD chokehold death sparks outrage on Staten Island streets, Twitter
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=NYDailyNewsTw
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=NYDailyNewsTw
I think she meant convicted, not indicted. I totally messed that up- sorry, will delete. Will check if I can find the report Thursday when they post them.
You're really serious? ALL "reporters" PRIDE themselves on their supposed accuracy in their reporting.
I've never heard about a single reporter, whether liberal or conservative, that has NEVER made a mistake, and furthermore, has never reported without their OWN bias being interjected into the story they're reporting on.
And that's precisely why I never rely on any one news source. I read both "left" and "right" news reports. Then I read blogs, which I know can't be linked to here on WS.
I rarely WATCH CNN, because I'd have trashed our TV by throwing something through it when I see some of the crap they spout.
I do read CNN and FOX news on the computer, though. For some reason, I'm less likely to throw something at my computer than the tv. And somewhere in the middle of the ultra left wing CNN and ultra conservative FOX, the REAL story is there.
<modsnip> And to read some opinion pieces. Some time to digest what you've read and come to your own conclusions without biting hook, line, and sinker on any particular MSM source. But that requires some time, thought, and independent decision making of your own.
I'll leave it at that.
jennapuppy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2010
- Messages
- 1,141
- Reaction score
- 154
When a shooting happens in the line of duty, an officer would most likely be convicted of voluntary or involuntary manslaughter. That has definitely happened more than once. I'm interested in reading the report she was citing.
popsicle
faith hope love
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2009
- Messages
- 22,113
- Reaction score
- 303
In my household I have renamed CNN. It is now called CTRNN (Current Tragedy Repeat News Network). They seem to live from one tragedy to another, IMO. Squeezing every minute out of each tragedy that occurs. Many times I don't know if I'm watching a current protest or riot or a repeat of yesterdays, and it is all with a "Breaking News" banner. CNN to me isn't what it used to be. I'll bet Ted Turner cries himself to sleep every night albeit that he cashed in his chips when he did.
JMO's
JMO's
hockeymom4
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2013
- Messages
- 3,468
- Reaction score
- 5
That is also not true. There have been far more than one. Here are a few,
Richard Chrisman
Johannes Mehserle
4 officers who beat Rodney king
John Abbate (off duty)
William cozzi
Justin volpe
Danziger Bridge Shootings (all five convicted, but overturned and new trial coming)
Probably shouldn't have included the bridge shooting officers. With or without them, this list has more than one. And in recent years, might I add.
eileenhawkeye
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2010
- Messages
- 8,755
- Reaction score
- 131
One example from almost 40 years...the other two from nearly 20 years ago...
I agree with you about finding a variety of sources- and wanting to throw stuff at the tv!- however I have found her to be pretty accurate in the past.
jennapuppy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2010
- Messages
- 1,141
- Reaction score
- 154
Some of the officers involved in the Danziger Bridge Shootings are still in custody awaiting a new trial. I found it interesting that their original convictions were overturned due to the actions of the federal prosecutors and DOJ officials who were involved. MOO
popsicle
faith hope love
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2009
- Messages
- 22,113
- Reaction score
- 303
Because the original quote said there has only ever been 1 NYPD Officer indicted in the death of a civilian. That was then changed to convicted.
I don't know if this has been mentioned before but in watching this video and the other video's of the actual arrest the most senior police officer on the scene is a black female cop (you can tell from the insignia on her shirt sleeve and the yellow gold badge). As far as I am aware this fact has not been mentioned by any of the MSM so far. It doesn't fit their narrative.
Despite being senior in command this Sergeant just stands idly by doing nothing. When Garner was shouting out "I can't breathe" she could have ordered her officers to get off the man. She was in a good position to see that a dangerous situation was rapidly developing. As a senior cop she should know all about the dangers of positional asphyxia. Also in the aftermath she just stands in the background instead of instructing her officers to render proper assistance . For example Garner should not have been placed on his side with his hands cuffed behind his back. When he was unresponsive the Sergeant should have ordered that handcuffs be removed and that he be placed on his back.
Where is the accountability of the black female Sergeant? <modsnip>
At the end of the video an officer is asked why they are not doing CPR and the officer replies "because he has a pulse".
Mark O'Mara pretty much said the opposite tonight on CNN, that people just should follow LEO's orders and not try to fight them. A lot of problems could be avoided that way (paraphrasing more or less).
LOL
Even CNN's commentators don't agree with each other. I am a registered poster on a LE forum and posed that question to the LEOs a few hours ago when I saw someone post that a civilian has the right to resist arrest.
Of course, I can't link to that forum and the responses I got. I'll just say I got laughed at. A LOT. And even asked if I was planning to test that theory and if they should take up a fund for my defense lawyer.
NY Post: Man in choke-hold death had no throat damage
http://nypost.com/2014/07/19/man-in-chokehold-death-had-no-throat-damage-autopsy/
According to the autopsy there was no damage to the decedents windpipe or neck-bones.
What this suggests to me is that the so-called "choke-hold" was not an actual "air choke" (referred to as a "true choke") which involves compression of the upper airway (trachea, larynx or laryngopharynx) leading to asphyxia. IMO this calls into question the findings of the autopsy which concluded that the "choke-hold" contributed to Garners death.
More than likely what killed Garner was the compression of his chest as he was face down with about four officers on top of him. This is known as "positional asphyxia"(or postural asphyxia) and it is leading cause of death for persons in police custody.
This is why I believe the GJ voted not to indict. Only one officer was charged - the officer who applied the "choke-hold" and it is very likely that his actions did not cause the death of Garner. Rather it was the other officers whose collective weight bore down on Garner as he lay face down who were most responsible. All of these officers were granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for their testimony.
http://nypost.com/2014/07/19/man-in-chokehold-death-had-no-throat-damage-autopsy/
According to the autopsy there was no damage to the decedents windpipe or neck-bones.
What this suggests to me is that the so-called "choke-hold" was not an actual "air choke" (referred to as a "true choke") which involves compression of the upper airway (trachea, larynx or laryngopharynx) leading to asphyxia. IMO this calls into question the findings of the autopsy which concluded that the "choke-hold" contributed to Garners death.
More than likely what killed Garner was the compression of his chest as he was face down with about four officers on top of him. This is known as "positional asphyxia"(or postural asphyxia) and it is leading cause of death for persons in police custody.
This is why I believe the GJ voted not to indict. Only one officer was charged - the officer who applied the "choke-hold" and it is very likely that his actions did not cause the death of Garner. Rather it was the other officers whose collective weight bore down on Garner as he lay face down who were most responsible. All of these officers were granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for their testimony.
If they are acting in good faith you don't, no matter what the circumstances. You can avoid charges of resisting arrest if the arrest was made without probable cause (in other words, the officer did not act in good faith).
believe09
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2007
- Messages
- 28,094
- Reaction score
- 506
I appreciate that you included the Danzinger Bridge hockeymom. I have spent quite a bit of time on that case and words fail.