man dies after NYPD cop puts him in chokehold

[Atomic Playboy]

You said that there is no difference between it being illegal and against policy. I'm saying there is a difference.

If it was illegal, I could never do it. That means even if I was fooling around with someone, it would be against the law. However, that is not the case here. While NYPD does not want its officers doing that move, it is not illegal.

So it's not illegal to do anything that you can do while you're just fooling around with someone you know? "What do you mean I can't rub my penis on random people in public; I do it when I'm fooling around with my wife!"

I mean, look, if your argument is that it's not illegal to chokehold someone who does not want you to do it, you're just objectively wrong, and there's no other way to say it. It's battery, and possibly attempted murder depending on how the act takes place. Just because you get your cousin in a chokehold when you're "wrestling" doesn't mean that it's legal to go out and start choking random people.

 

[ivwshane]

You do understand that murder means that there was intent to kill someone, right? Oh, that's right. All cops want to do is kill black people, right? </s>

Did Garner die? Yes. Was there any intent on the officer to do so? No. Was anything they did negligent? According to the GJ, no.

As for Tamir, how many times does it need to be pointed out to you that brandishing the gun is a crime.

- Merg

Good lord! I know you are a trained cop who is trained to lie to protect your own in front of a jury (or apparently anywhere) but playing semantics isn't helping your case! It's a clear case of manslaughter, does that make it better for you?

 

[bshole]

We get it! You are a cop and you will do whatever it takes to protect your own, right or wrong. Principals be damned! Your brothers come first! Fuck the citizens, they are there to serve you and protect you!

Oh dear God, please tell me you are joking. He really is a cop? The one with the most batshit insane beliefs about law enforcement is the one allowed to carry a gun and a badge? Sweet jesus we are all fucked.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Obviously it wasn't a clear cut case of manslaughter or the grand jury would have made a "True Bill" decision on such.

 

[ivwshane]

Obviously it wasn't a clear cut case of manslaughter or the grand jury would have made a "True Bill" decision on such.

Or the prosecutor presented the case in a way that made sure no true bill was given. You know, because a prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich!

Business as usual, a different type of justice was given that the rest of us would never get.

 

[Abwx]

You do understand that murder means that there was intent to kill someone, right?

If you lose control of your car and run over someone there s no intent to kill but there will be murder if the guy is killed.

Besides, choking someone is not the same as holding his limbs, a vital function is held from working, he could have water boardered him and it would be the same action in its consequences...

 

[ivwshane]

If you lose control of your car and run over someone there s no intent to kill but there will be murder if the guy is killed.

Besides, choking someone is not the same as holding his limbs, a vital function is held from working...

Probably why the move was fucking banned in the first place. It's ok though, the move wasn't illegal so it's ok if it resulted in the guy dying. Oops!

/s

 

[The Merg]

My bad mr apologist, it wasn't his knee it was his hand on his head with a locked arm and the full weight of his body over the mans head.

Oops! That's totally different!

Fuck you!

He was holding his head sideways on the ground. Keeping his head down is a technique to control the person so they cannot get up. That doesn't restrict air flow and he is not hitting or pounding on him. He is simply holding his head on the ground.

And once again, I noticed that you keep ignoring my question... How would you have arrested him once he started to resist?

- Merg

 

[Abwx]

Probably why the move was fucking banned in the first place. It's ok though, the move wasn't illegal so it's ok if it resulted in the guy dying. Oops!

/s

You can break someone s neck by doing so if it s a wimpy guy, in this case the policeman acted purely psychologicaly based on his perception that the victim was massive and stronger than him, it s just that the poor guy was as weak as a teen and indeed his words where pronounced the same way as a child would have done, the video is heartbreaking.

All this remind me of US economist Kenneth Galbraith who once said that the difference between europeans and USans is that his fellow citizens do not have enough sense of what injustice is.

And once again, I noticed that you keep ignoring my question... How would you have arrested him once he started to resist?

- Merg

He didnt resist or we didnt see the same video, the guy is protesting when all of a sudden a policeman jump to catch his neck.

 

[The Merg]

If you lose control of your car and run over someone there s no intent to kill but there will be murder if the guy is killed.

Besides, choking someone is not the same as holding his limbs, a vital function is held from working, he could have water boardered him and it would be the same action in its consequences...

Actually, that is generally considered to be involuntary manslaughter or vehicular manslaughter since there was NO INTENT to kill someone.

- Merg

 

[wetech]

If you lose control of your car and run over someone there s no intent to kill but there will be murder if the guy is killed.

that would be manslaughter potentially, but definitely not murder.

 

[moonbogg]

Why does this deserve a thread again? The guy resisted arrest, had health issues, and died as a result. Case closed.

Also, that guy was the size of a fucking dinosaur, so it makes sense to get him under control.

 

[wetech]

He didnt resist or we didnt see the same video, the guy is protesting when all of a sudden a policeman jump to catch his neck.

There's a very obvious edit in the video between him pulling his hands back and the police taking him down. We don't know what happened and for how long in between.

 

[The Merg]

He didnt resist or we didnt see the same video, the guy is protesting when all of a sudden a policeman jump to catch his neck.

The first officer walks up behind him after telling him he is under arrest and tries to grab his hand/arm and he pulls it away. The second officer in the front tries to grab his hand/arm and he pulls it away again. Him actively pulling away from the officer when they are trying to arrest him is resisting arrest. The first officer then jumps on the guys back.

The one video that is mostly out there seems to skip a few seconds. You'll notice the fade out/in on the video right before the arrest attempt. There's another one from Time Magazine that appears to show the whole video. In it, the officer appears to say to Garner that he is under arrest as he walks up to him and tries to grab his arm.

- Merg

 

[BoomerD]

Why does this deserve a thread again? The guy resisted arrest, had health issues, and died as a result. Case closed.

Also, that guy was the size of a fucking dinosaur, so it makes sense to get him under control.

Exactly...here's a pro-tip for the wanna-be criminals out there. If you're contacted by a police officer, don't attack the cop, don't resist arrest, don't run...if you want to get home alive...you can always fight the charges in court...

IMO, better to spend a couple nights in the tank (whether you deserve it or not) than eternity in a box.

 

[The Merg]

There's a very obvious edit in the video between him pulling his hands back and the police taking him down. We don't know what happened and for how long in between.

Yeah. Time Magazine appears to have the unedited video. The missing time is only a few seconds or so, but appears to be when the officer tells him he is under arrest.

- Merg

 

[Bird222]

Why does this deserve a thread again? The guy resisted arrest, had health issues, and died as a result. Case closed.

Also, that guy was the size of a fucking dinosaur, so it makes sense to get him under control.

You forgot the part where the police were not following policy. How 'bout this example. Let's say it's against policy for cops to do high speed chases but they do one and hit and kill a person. Should they be charged with anything?

 

[bshole]

Exactly...here's a pro-tip for the wanna-be criminals out there. If you're contacted by a police officer, don't attack the cop, don't resist arrest, don't run...if you want to get home alive...you can always fight the charges in court...

IMO, better to spend a couple nights in the tank (whether you deserve it or not) than eternity in a box.

Any pro-tips for the cops or for grand juries working on indictments against cops?

 

[BoomerD]

Any pro-tips for the cops or for grand juries working on indictments against cops?

Sure..always remember...the police never lie...and they're ALWAYS right.












Oh yeah, I almost forgot...if the case involves some "filthy unwashed minority," they're guilty. Doesn't matter what the crime happens to be...nor what the evidence actually says...they're GUILTY!

 

[The Merg]

You forgot the part where the police were not following policy. How 'bout this example. Let's say it's against policy for cops to do high speed chases but they do one and hit and kill a person. Should they be charged with anything?

Your job says that you have to wear a uniform everyday. You don't wear your uniform so they fire you. It's not illegal that you didn't wear your uniform. You didn't follow their policy.

- Merg

 

[ivwshane]

He was holding his head sideways on the ground. Keeping his head down is a technique to control the person so they cannot get up. That doesn't restrict air flow and he is not hitting or pounding on him. He is simply holding his head on the ground.

And once again, I noticed that you keep ignoring my question... How would you have arrested him once he started to resist?

- Merg

Listen fuck face! You were concerned about the man resisting or running away or some other bullshit, cops tell people to excuse their bad behavior, the man wasn't going anywhere even if he wasn't being choked or had his head held with extreme force against the ground, there were multiple cops on him.


It's pretty fucking telling that not even a few seconds later one of the cops managing the crowd said, "this is now a crime scene", even he knew they fucked up.

To answer your question because apparently your training has made you incapable of answering the question yourself.

I would have continued talking to the guy, I would have tried to figure out why he was upset and then I would have explained my position and what my duty was and then I would have asked him what he would do in my situation? Gardner was not acting belligerent nor was he confrontational. Even during the initial physical confrontation Gardner resisted the urge to fight back, he kept his hands up (a universal gesture that means I have no intention of harming anyone). When he said he couldn't breathe I would have released him based on his previous actions.

Of course what I would have done doesn't mean shit and cops like you will always have excuses of why talking doesn't work so I assume your question was posed so you can frame yet another excuse.

 

[moonbogg]

Exactly...here's a pro-tip for the wanna-be criminals out there. If you're contacted by a police officer, don't attack the cop, don't resist arrest, don't run...if you want to get home alive...you can always fight the charges in court...

IMO, better to spend a couple nights in the tank (whether you deserve it or not) than eternity in a box.

I fully agree.

 

[fskimospy]

You said that there is no difference between it being illegal and against policy. I'm saying there is a difference.

If it was illegal, I could never do it. That means even if I was fooling around with someone, it would be against the law. However, that is not the case here. While NYPD does not want its officers doing that move, it is not illegal.

- Merg

It's definitely illegal:

§ 121.11 Criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation

A person is guilty of criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation when, with intent to impede the normal breathing or circulation of the blood of another person, he or she:

a. applies pressure on the throat or neck of such person; or
b. blocks the nose or mouth of such person.

Criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation is a class A misdemeanor.

http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article121.htm

Unless you're going to tell me that putting someone in a choke hold isn't an attempt to obstruct their breathing or blood circulation? The grand jury could easily have indicted him for this crime.

 

[Oyeve]

I wonder if the jury was afraid of cop repercussions.

 

[ivwshane]

Your job says that you have to wear a uniform everyday. You don't wear your uniform so they fire you. It's not illegal that you didn't wear your uniform. You didn't follow their policy.

- Merg

Did not wearing said uniform directly result in someone's death? Was requiring one to wear a uniform explicitly required to prevent death and unnecessary injury? No? Then what's your fucking point?