But, doesn't new york law state you can't use a choke hole?

 

No, it doesn't.

The NYPD has changed their policy to prohibit police officers from using that technique anymore, but that is NYPD policy and not law.

Furthermore, the technique the officer claims to have used is one in which you use your opposite hand to brace your take down arm specifically to avoid compression of the suspect's wind pipe. The maneuver is designed to provide leverage through your body weight to throw the suspect off balance and take them to the ground. The officer has stated that was his intent, only to take Garner to the ground, using a standard maneuver that he was taught during the Academy.

 

The last time I researched this incident, the Medical Examiner's office also stated that Garner's death was caused by cardiac arrest and an asthma attack, which was triggered by "compression of the chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police". He was not asphyxiated, meaning he was not choked to death.

The police could not have reasonably known how poor Garner's health was, and even if they had, they would have had to be intentionally trying to harm him in order for a crime to have been committed.  The law focuses a lot on what someone's intent was when something happens. There is a big difference between intentionally trying to harm someone, and an accident. The grand jury found that they didn't intend to harm him and were only attempting to affect a lawful arrest.

 

He didn't deserve to die, and any loss of life is a tragedy. But he also shouldn't have broken the law or resisted the police, and I believe that people need to be held responsible fro their own actions and the consequences they carry. Garner's poor health and poor choices were a causal factor in his death, and the police had nothing to do with either of those factors.

Edited December 5, 201411 yr by johnclark1102

The grand jury found that the cop did NOT strangle Garner to death. Garner died from cardiac arrest in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. The grand jury determined that he officer applied reasonable force using a technique he was taught in the academy to subdue a suspect that was resisting a lawful arrest.

 

You are welcome to believe that it was wrong, but your belief does not make it illegal. The 23 people on the grand jury who were presented with all of the evidence and facts determined that no crime was committed as defined by law.

Thank you for allowing me to believe freely. 

 

About that "no crime if the law says so" thing. You know, in 1937 in Russia it was legal to execute everyone who didn't uphold Stalin. In Nazi Germany it was no a crime by the law to execute Jews yet Nazi leaders were charged for that. 

 

Law is not above all. People make laws, people can be wrong. Just as a decent cop who overestimated himself and killed a man for nothing. 

Complacency.

Criminals fake medical conditions all the time, ranging from difficulty breathing, to chest pains, to faking seizures, etc. I've even heard a suspect say he had AIDS that was acting up and needed to go to the hospital right away.

 

It's like they think that if they are sick they will just go to the hospital and then be released to go home.

 

So a lot of officers and EMT's can get callous and seem uncaring when a criminal claims to have a medical issue during the arrest., because they hear the same thing every day from liars that are wasting their time and effort, tying up emergency response personnel, and putting innocent people that are experiencing legitimate medical conditions at risk by doing so.

Despite that, every claim of medical issue is treated seriously, which is why the medics were called for Eric Garner.

Don't get me wrong, Mr. Garner didn't deserve to die. But, I also believe his death is just the end result of his poor choices. He chose to break the law multiple times. He'd been arrested more than 30 times for various crimes including assault and grand larceny, and at the time of this incident he was out on bail after being arrested for illegally selling cigarettes, driving without a license, possession of marijuana, and false impersonation. He then chose to break the law again by continuing to sell cigarettes and resisting arrest when he got caught again. The police are allowed to use physical force to arrest you if you do not comply with their verbal commands, which is why the officer wasn't indicted. Garner also wasn't asphyxiated, he died from cardiac arrest in the ambulance.The officer didn't break the law, so he couldn't be charged with a crime since he didn't commit one.

If Mr. Garner had chosen not to break the law or chosen not to resist arrest that day, he would still be alive today.

 

The grand jury found that the cop did NOT strangle Garner to death. Garner died from cardiac arrest in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. The grand jury determined that he officer applied reasonable force using a technique he was taught in the academy to subdue a suspect that was resisting a lawful arrest.

 

You are welcome to believe that it was wrong, but your belief does not make it illegal. The 23 people on the grand jury who were presented with all of the evidence and facts determined that no crime was committed as defined by law.

 

Well, first of all, faking or not, medical teams, doctors, EMTs and whatsoever they can be called shouldn't BY ANY MEAN even look like uncaring and get callous. They are supposed to save lives, and using the argument of "They meet people faking stuff everyday" shouldn't be a valid argument. Fake or not, they should respond to every call with the same attention, and should NEVER be or look like uncaring or get callous. If they do, then they should change of job and do something else. I do believe they are partially responsible for the death of Garner for not taking care of him properly, as he should have been taken care of like any other victim if the EMTs did their job correctly.

 

Second, indeed the choices of this sir in particular were poor regarding the law, but seriously, wasn't there any other way to neutralize him and bring him to the station safely? Even a good ol' taser seems more legit in that case than a choke hold, the street is not a wrestling ring. Even if the cop wasn't responsible for the death of this guy, he should be sentenced for excessive use of force. He's a cop, he's supposed to be an example to the community, acting like a retarded street fighter is clearly not an example.

 

Also, a cardiac arrest can be induced by a lack of oxygen, relating to the suffocating grasp he underwent. An autopsy should be made to define clearly if that was the cause of the cardiac arrest, and death.

 

And finally, yes the grand jury took this decision, but there's an old saying that could apply to this case in particular: "To err is human". A miscarriage of justice might happen. Might be the case here. I believe so.

Thank you for allowing me to believe freely. 

 

About that "no crime if the law says so" thing. You know, in 1937 in Russia it was legal to execute everyone who didn't uphold Stalin. In Nazi Germany it was no a crime by the law to execute Jews yet Nazi leaders were charged for that. 

 

Law is not above all. People make laws, people can be wrong. Just as a decent cop who overestimated himself and killed a man for nothing. 

 

Every person has the right to have and express their own opinions, even if other people disagree with it.

 

I'm Jewish. Some of my family fled Nazi Germany. Some survived with numbers on their arms. Some died there. I'm well aware of what happened during that time period. Also, that's not relevant to this incident. In both of the time periods you referred to, someone else decided to kill people because of what they believed or what they said. No one decided to kill Eric Garner; his death was an accident that wouldn't have happened if he had simply accepted the fact that he got caught breaking the law again and went with the officers willingly.

 

And yes, I agree that people make laws and that people make mistakes. That's why I wish that everyone who gets so angry about the current state of our country would direct their anger and frustration at the POLITICIANS who make the laws and hold them accountable, instead of the police officers on the street who are sworn to uphold the laws. If people would direct their frustration at the politicians, the laws might change.

Edited December 5, 201411 yr by johnclark1102

There is one thing that is being overlooked here, when you have a man of his size pumped up on adrenalin it makes it extremely difficult to take him down, when the choke hold was applied in this case it was done in an effort to gain control of a large man resisting arrest. I myself have used the choke hold in order to gain control of a large perp.Do I think this guy was abused, no the officers used that force that is necessary to effect an arrest which in New York is totally legal and although the choke hold was banned by NYPD it was not a violation of the use of force.

Edited December 11, 201411 yr by gatekeeper

I think he used way to much excessive force. But had he not been selling illegal cigarettes this would've never happened.

 

I completely agree with your thoughts on this case. None of this would have happened, not only if had he not been selling illegal cigarettes, but also if he had not resisted arrest.