Garner Incident-if you can say "I can't breathe," guess what you can breathe

[Skwim]

But the choke hold was the first action taken

Immaterial.

and it was sustained even when the suspect was on the ground.

Only for 6-7 seconds
Watch the video.

Note that Gerard is first grabbed around the neck at the 39 sec. mark

It takes the police 10 seconds (49 sec, mark) to wrestle Gerard to the ground and fairly well immobilize him.

At the 55 sec. mark it's clear that the choke hold is no longer being applied. That's a total of 16 seconds the choke hold was being applied, and only 5-6 seconds while Gerard was on the ground.

At about the 54 sec. mark just before the choke old is released Gerard starts complaining that he can't breathe, which he then repeats about 8 or 9 times until about the 1'10" mark.

So he was complaining that he couldn't breathe for about 16 seconds. And note that at least half of these complaints were made at a decent volume---Gerard was exchanging air: breathing.

Yes, there were other subsequent actions that seemingly contributed to his death, but the crucial point still remains that the choke-hold was done illegally.

Not illegal, but a prohibited tactic by the New York City Police Department.

 

[ChristineES]

I should keep my mouth shut. I have no intention of watching the video and I don't know all of what went on. I would just like to say I wonder who is going to take care of Mr. Garner's children. Single parents (that includes widows/widowers) with as many children as they had have it very hard. That is something we seem to forget about (he had six children, I think).
Do you think the widow and/or mother of his children will be able to win a wrongful death lawsuit? I am worried about this family.

 

[columbus]

But the choke hold was the first action taken and it was sustained even when the suspect was on the ground. Yes, there were other subsequent actions that seemingly contributed to his death, but the crucial point still remains that the choke-hold was done illegally.

No, the first action taken was whatever started the altercation. I don't know what that was, but it didn't involve the police.

Mr. Garner was a freakish combination of huge(350#), belligerently uncooperative, and physically fragile. The cop shouldn't have done what he did, but he did not cause Garner's death. Garner's physical ailments did.

It is a tragedy that Garner died. Everybody agrees with that. But he didn't die because he was black, or because the police singled him out for abuse. He died because he made some bad choices. The cop reverted to his training in a tense situation, and what used to be standard procedure was too much force in this particular case.

Arresting people is a dangerous job. People are free to do what they want, up to a point. But when they have passed that point I do not expect the police to do a hospital records search before they do their job.

Tom

 

[CMike]

"Main cause"? Not according to the medical examiner's spokeswoman.

From Nowhere Man's link in post 5:

"The cause of Garner's death was "compression of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police," said Julie Bolcer, a spokeswoman for the medical examiner's office.
Acute and chronic bronchial asthma, obesity and hypertensive cardiovascular disease were listed as contributing conditions . . . . "

So there were three primary factors (no main cause)

1) compression of neck
2) compression of chest
3) prone positioning​

and three contributing factors

1) acute and chronic bronchial asthma
2) obesity
3) hypertensive cardiovascular disease​

Finally someone whom values the truth.

 

[Thief]

Did I say anything like that?

We know what killed this guy. So it looks like he actually couldn't breathe.

Without getting into detail ... I have actually been choked before. It is possible to speak while it is happening, though it's difficult.

Not buying that.
I've been choked by people that know how.

Tapout is prearranged.....it is understood.....speech won't be there.

 

[Thief]

I am not implying that at all. The police went too far. They could have restrained him, if they had to, without choking him.

Without the take down.....they might shoot him.

 

[ChristineES]

Without the take down.....they might shoot him.

Shoot him? Why does that idea fill me with horror?

 

[Thief]

I am late on this one. I've read some of the posts but not all of them, so bear me if I repeat what someone else may have said.

Without bringing race into it, I can say that the police were wrong to hold onto this guy for a misdemeanor. The ONLY people who need to held down are those are dangerous, and everything points to the fact that this man was not dangerous.
Also, I keep getting causes of death from the various news agencies. One said he was choked to death, another says he had a heart attack right after the fact, and more. How are we supposed to truly know which killed him? I skimmed through the coroner's report and not being a doctor(physician)... well, you get the point.

Repeated arrests.
Likely to be turned over to felony.

The large guy was probably told....no more.
Next time.....a stay in jail.
(cigarette and tobacco is a government thing)

I say again...go back to the video....
The choke had been released.
The big guy was still speaking.

 

[Thief]

Shoot him? Why does that idea fill me with horror?

The police won't stop til the cuffs go on.

Resistance is met.
You may come along quietly.....or be wrestled to the ground.
If you somehow get up.....they will shoot you.

 

[ChristineES]

The police won't stop til the cuffs go on.

Resistance is met.
You may come along quietly.....or be wrestled to the ground.
If you somehow get up.....they will shoot you.

It's changed. Police used to only shoot if his/her life was in danger or if another person's life was in danger.

 

[Thief]

It's changed. Police used to only shoot if his/her life was in danger or if another person's life was in danger.

Where do you live?

No one walks from arrest......
If you attempt to flee.....

 

[ChristineES]

Where do you live?

No one walks from arrest......
If you attempt to flee.....

I don't get into police work. I've watched the show "Cops" and I've seen the Police chase men running away and tackling the men, I've never seen them shoot them.

 

[Thief]

I don't get into police work. I've watched the show "Cops" and I've seen the Police chase men running away and tackling the men, I've never seen them shoot them.

Let's start a thread and see how the gun play is dealt.

If you thought this thread was harsh...............................

 

[ChristineES]

Let's start a thread and see how the gun play is dealt.

If you thought this thread was harsh...............................

I know. I've followed the Michael Brown case. The police here in San Diego County are pretty trigger happy (They once shot a bunch holes in a homeless man wielding a sharpened stick), amongst other shootings, just as unnecessary.

 

[gnomon]

Immaterial.

Only for 6-7 seconds
Watch the video.

Note that Gerard is first grabbed around the neck at the 39 sec. mark

It takes the police 10 seconds (49 sec, mark) to wrestle Gerard to the ground and fairly well immobilize him.

At the 55 sec. mark it's clear that the choke hold is no longer being applied. That's a total of 16 seconds the choke hold was being applied, and only 5-6 seconds while Gerard was on the ground.

At about the 54 sec. mark just before the choke old is released Gerard starts complaining that he can't breathe, which he then repeats about 8 or 9 times until about the 1'10" mark.

So he was complaining that he couldn't breathe for about 16 seconds. And note that at least half of these complaints were made at a decent volume---Gerard was exchanging air: breathing.

Not illegal, but a prohibited tactic by the New York City Police Department.

If the tactic is prohibited by the department it is defined as an illegal hold.

Also not that there was compression put upon the subjects back.

As a long time smoker suffering from a pulmonary disorder, a rather mild one, I know what it is like to not be able to breathe even thought there is no outside physical force placed upon me.

The officer place an illegal, and that's what it is, hold upon the individual designed to restrict pulmonary function. After he was taken down there was a continuation of the pulmonary restriction based upon compression on the individual.

Yes, he suffered from preexisting conditions but that is irrelevant in regards to the law. The officer in question placed a restricted hold upon the individual when other measures were available. Namely, and I'm surprised others haven't noticed this, a compression arm lock upon the individual that can force someone to the ground. The history of the officer in question is also of note.

If we want to be upset about reactions to cases I still maintain the fact that there were no mass protests in the case of Cory Maye or Jonathan Ayers speaks loudly about the so called progressive movement in our society. In one case we have a young black man that was railroaded and sentenced to be executed whose case was luckily made by libertarians and in the other we have a white man gunned down by non-uniformed police officers over a bogus case.

Yet no protests.

Actually the mere fact that the majority of progressives on this very forum are probably considering voting for Hillary Clinton or Elizabeth Warren is enough to make intelligent individuals over cases of law enforcement malfeasance absolutely sick.

edit: Namely that Clinton was a hardcore advocate of police authority in the 1990's among her husband's imbecilic program that actually included harsh indictments for drug users and that Warren's claim to fame is nothing more than taking on banks while admitting to cheating her own finances for her own education. Not the type of continued fools we need in elected positions. But given the last election cycle I see we are not going to get anywhere on alleviating the true problem of our law enforcement system.

 

[Skwim]

If the tactic is prohibited by the department it is defined as an illegal hold.

Really? By whom? And if it is truly illegal please cite the relevant statute.

Also not that there was compression put upon the subjects back.

At exactly what moment do you see this? (cite the beginning and ending times in the video)

The officer place an illegal, and that's what it is, hold upon the individual designed to restrict pulmonary function. After he was taken down there was a continuation of the pulmonary restriction based upon compression on the individual.

Pretty much make it all up as you go on, don't you.

Yes, he suffered from preexisting conditions but that is irrelevant in regards to the law.

Forgive me for doubting your knowledge of the law, but after your other remark I have no choice.

 

[Storm]

0


Multiple conversations, and yes.

Again, personal attacks are against the rules, so if they are indeed occuring, they need to be brought to the mod team's attention so that they can address it.

Oh, it was.

 

[Jumi]

Well, guess what? If you can say repeatedly "I can't breathe", you can breathe.

He died mainly because of his health conditions; asthma, heart issues, etc.

I think the moral of the story is that if you have health problems, don't resist arrest.

Not everyone can express themselves perfectly when they are losing consciousness. The feeling of choking is probably the same as not being able to breathe. The police in this case obviously didn't have empathy or quality training in first aid. It was unfortunate that he died, I don't think they intended to kill him.

Based on what you expressed in your post, do you think people should be killed if they resist at all? What do you base your ethics on?

 

[Father Heathen]

I knew a turd would eventually surface if a rabbit plunged it enough, am I psychic or what! Bwahahahahahaha

Cute kid.

 

[Father Heathen]

Oh, it was.

Excellent. Now we can cease digressing with spam.