NY - Officer Daniel Pantaleo used deadly chokehold on Eric Garner, Staten Island, July 2014

GJ certainly must have seen the video, wonder what they were thinking? JMO
The only thing I can think of is that the jury didn't think that hold or that cop caused the death. Or maybe there were too many at fault? Including paramedics?

From the video you showed me, it looks like the cop used a choke hold maneuver to get him down on the ground, but then let it go. By then there are several cops.

Then Eric starts saying "I can't breathe". He's cuffed. I can't tell if the cop is impeding his breathing at that point.

The friend said he hit his head. The police said he had a heart attack. I won't get too medical yet with the terminology or possibilities. It might be a case where the autopsy decided it.

The problem with a choke hold is the possibility of damaging the trachea if you press on it, or blood supply if you hold too long on the sides. Apparently, this one didn't. :dunno:

I hope they release everything.

The cop has a history. :cool:

Sent from Tapatalk
 
The only thing I can think of is that the jury didn't think that hold or that cop caused the death. Or maybe there were too many at fault? Including paramedics?

From the video you showed me, it looks like the cop used a choke hold maneuver to get him down on the ground, but then let it go. By then there are several cops.

Then Eric starts saying "I can't breathe". He's cuffed. I can't tell if the cop is impeding his breathing at that point.

The friend said he hit his head. The police said he had a heart attack. I won't get too medical yet with the terminology or possibilities. It might be a case where the autopsy decided it.

The problem with a choke hold is the possibility of damaging the trachea if you press on it, or blood supply if you hold too long on the sides. Apparently, this one didn't. :dunno:

I hope they release everything.

The cop has a history. :cool:

Sent from Tapatalk

BBM

<snip> The city's medical examiner ruled the death a homicide.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/03/us-usa-new-york-chokehold-idUSKCN0JH2BI20141203
 
A homicide is not always a crime.

True, was thinking criminally negligent homicide, but didn't find officer's response to be "criminal." Not even reckless endangerment in this case?
 
Because that wouldn't harm a child emotionally if they are scared and want to stop singing and go home. :rolleyes: I would pull my kids off the stage, because I know how upset they would have been.

I would have been more upset with my parents if they embarrassed me like that. LOL Kids will be fine. JMO
 

With all due respect that means little by itself.

There is Cause of Death and in addition there is a Manner of Death.

Cause of Death is pathological, Manner of Death is situational, so to speak.
COD=Fatal gunshot wound to CNS. Manner of Death =Homicide or suicide or accidental or undetermined.

The homicide tag means little by itself. A homicide could be murder or manslaughter, negligible, etc.

If cause of death is due to strangulation via broken hyoid bone it could(under Garner's case) indicate intent and or culpability.
 
Archangel: As a verified law enforcement officer, how would you have dealt with the arrest of Garner? JMO
 
<snip> The medical examiner ruled Garner's death a homicide caused in part by the chokehold. The father of three's health issues, including obesity, were listed as contributing factors in the autopsy report.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/loca...en-Island-Chokehold-Death-NYPD-284595921.html


<snip> "The patient did have an enlarged heart, a very large heart, but good coronary arteries. And did have evidence, under the microscope, of asthma," Baden said. "Compression of the neck that prevents breathing for example trumps everything else as a cause of death."

http://manhattan.ny1.com/content/ne...-s-final-autopsy-report/#sthash.R5GfR2Ri.dpuf
 
Archangel: As a verified law enforcement officer, how would you have dealt with the arrest of Garner? JMO

First, I do understand the philosophy of "broken window policing." Please Google if you don't understand.

If I was somehow going to get excited over cigarettes..........

I would have said settle down(he was beginning to show agitation and heading towards pre assaultive behavior) this is a casual conversation about a small violation we are having and I am not gonna stand here and have you disrespect me and what I represent nor am I going to disrespect you. So what we going to do...... we going to talk or roll around on the ground? 99% will see the logic and comply. The ones that don't you have to backup what you just said.

So, here I am back again and word is you're selling cigs again, so this is what I'm going to do to make sure you and I don't mistake each others moves and intentions. I am going to frisk you for mine and your safety then we are going to get to the bottom of this loosies thing ok?

Bottom line is if he is telling the truth about the fight breakup my conversations over. If he's selling or breaking the law he goes with me. I always try to tell them it can be a simple taxi ride to go and clear this up or an ambulance ride, but either way you have to go with me and clear this up.

(I know little about the case. Did they have a warrant? did they see him selling? I don't know)

Anyway I can't get real excited over cigarettes, and could have easily made him leave and say next time is jail time or what ever their law warrants. It just seems a little petty to me personally.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
188
Guests online
2,673
Total visitors
2,861

Forum statistics

Threads
580,438
Messages
17,755,768
Members
225,066
Latest member
csduvall
Back
Top