A Choking in NY

[Knightshadow]

I'd like to open up the floor on the Eric Garner death in NYC and police procedures.

One comment from CNN is quoted as follows:

We have laws. Laws are because actions effect other people. Garner selling cigarettes is ILLEGAL. Most likely he was targeting people outside a business that sells them legally and pays high taxes for the sale. What is not mentioned is Garner was on probation. He was a habitual petty criminal and knew if arrested he would go to jail for probation violation. He broke the law anyway. That is what he did regularly. He also died from more the just the 'chokehold' which makes for a nice slogan. What is buried in the CNN article was "But the medical examiner also listed acute and chronic bronchial asthma, obesity and hypertensive cardiovascular disease as contributing factors in Garner's death". Clearly his resisting arrest contributed to his death because of his poor health. You can bet nearly every criminal resisting arrest says they can't breathe, you are hurting them, the baby is sleeping or whatever they can think of. No excuses stop cops when arresting you. All that can be discussed at your hearing. No one intended to kill Garner. It was an accident as a result of his own bad behavior.

Any opinions?

[Ephiral]

As a civilian, try cutting off someone's airflow in a potentially lethal way, then arguing that you shouldn't be charged with manslaughter at the very least, citing their bad behaviour.

Something tells me it won't fly.

Somehow I'm sure that there were other, far less risky methods of restraining a nonviolent suspect. He might have been doing wrong, but that does not excuse extremely dangerous and questionable tactics on the part of the police - and we need to stop pretending that it does.

[Avis habilis]

His "contributing factors" showed no sign of being about to kill him before a panicking cop applied a choke, already officially prohibited by the department, that can cause continuing, worsening tracheal damage even after it's released.

The victim's past has precisely no relevance to the question of whether the cop's action at that moment was reasonable or even legal.

[Blythe]

Chokeholds are a banned tactic for the NY police. They've been banned for something like 20 years, and it's still a problem among officers who do continue to use this tactic.

I think saying that Garner's ill health contributing to his death is...misleading. Yes, being overweight and having asthma will certainly make a chokehold more effective, but...it's still the chokehold that killed him, not his other health issues.

Also, I noticed this in particular:

He was a habitual petty criminal and knew if arrested he would go to jail for probation violation. He broke the law anyway. That is what he did regularly.

Why is his previous record relevant? Just because someone has broken the law before does not necessarily make their death justified. Unfortunately, this is way too close to too many "he was a thug" arguments I've read on other sites as an effort to justify an unjustifiable death for me to be comfortable with it.

I think an injustice has happened. Was Garner necessarily a good man? Maybe not. Yes, he violated his parole. But it is the responsibility of the NYPD to find ways to bring in offenders for appropriate sentencing/trial/etc., not to choke someone to death for resisting arrest. More officers could have been brought in to restrain him properly or chase him down or whatever it took to do it right. He did not deserve to die, and I am sad that Pantaleo was not indicted.

/end2cents

[Knightshadow]

Is it possible---and I ask this in all sincerity and ignorance---that Garner's previous crimes included violence and the police, being cautious, used force to subdue him, albeit excessive force as seen on video?  Some have argued that police officers enter into potentially violent situations and have protection of self and others foremost in mind, at the cost of the perpetrator in question. Again, NOT an excuse for the results, but a possible motive on their part.

[Avis habilis]

Even if the police knew anything about his record, it's still immaterial to the question of how he was behaving at the time the police choked him.

Civil rights Cordelia Rice has some insight into this.

[Ephiral]

Is it possible---and I ask this in all sincerity and ignorance---that Garner's previous crimes included violence and the police, being cautious, used force to subdue him, albeit excessive force as seen on video?  Some have argued that police officers enter into potentially violent situations and have protection of self and others foremost in mind, at the cost of the perpetrator in question. Again, NOT an excuse for the results, but a possible motive on their part.

In the sense that absolutely nothing has a 0% probability, yes, but I would be loath to bet on it. Any violent history at all would have been used in the usual "He was a thug who deserved it" narrative.

Further, using a banned and dangerous restraint is not "being cautious" or acting "with protection of self and others foremost in mind". There's a very good reason it's banned.

[Aiden]

That is complete bullshit, you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. The force that was used against that man is despicable.

http://time.com/3016326/eric-garner-video-police-chokehold-death/

Watch the video and see as a man's life is taken away from them even as he struggles to breath.

It doesn't matter about his criminal past
It doesn't matter that he "MIGHT" have been selling loose cigarettes outside a store.
To be treated that way then lay the victim on them is horrible.
Might as well blame women who are raped for wearing a short skirt.
I don't want to call it a race issue...but I feel it is, the footage shot after that is a white office beating a black man who is already down. How do do justify that?

[Ebb]

It was an accident...

Okay, I'm with you there. I don't think the cops entered into this encounter with the intent to kill Mr. Garner.

...as a result of his own bad behavior.

This, though, is just inaccurate. While every event has a multitude of causal factors, when you say that "X is a result of Y" then you're implicitly saying that Y is the most important factor, eclipsing the others. The behaviors you're characterizing as 'bad' here are a combination of very minor criminal activity and poor health. Neither of which come close to "having a banned chokehold forcefully applied to you" if you had to weight all the different factors that resulted in Mr. Garner's death. Sure, they're on the list somewhere. But I think it's a gross distortion of the facts to put them up at the top.

On the morning of July 17th a whole lot of out of shape petty criminals woke up in New York City. The vast majority of them were still alive on the morning of the 18th.

[Inkidu]

His "contributing factors" showed no sign of being about to kill him before a panicking cop applied a choke, already officially prohibited by the department, that can cause continuing, worsening tracheal damage even after it's released.

The victim's past has precisely no relevance to the question of whether the cop's action at that moment was reasonable or even legal.

Of all the issues in this forum this one was easiest for me. The cop is at fault, he should be punished as much as possible. For the sole reason that the choke hold was a banned tactic by the NYPD. It was a move that shouldn't have ever been employed.

Sadly, I think that the victims chronic issues made something that should have never happened in the first place lethal. :(

EDIT: Though it does raise an interesting question. It was obvious that the man was fighting despite calling for a time-out.

However more to the point:

You can't shoot him for obvious reasons.
You can't taze him because he has heart problems.
You can't pepper spray him because he's an asthmatic.

So, barring the fact that the move the cop used was not permitted how were they supposed to restrain him without using those options, and despite his conditions he was a big person with surprising strength, and for whatever reason he did not stop fighting the cops. (I won't presume whether it was deliberate or fight-or-flight response.)

[Cherri Tart]

Is it possible---and I ask this in all sincerity and ignorance---that Garner's previous crimes included violence and the police, being cautious, used force to subdue him, albeit excessive force as seen on video?  Some have argued that police officers enter into potentially violent situations and have protection of self and others foremost in mind, at the cost of the perpetrator in question. Again, NOT an excuse for the results, but a possible motive on their part.

An overweight asthmatic black man selling ciggerettes and not showing any signs of hostile aggression. yeah, looked pretty dangerous to me. i would have just shot him instead of using a choke hold, just to make sure. seriously, anyone watching the video feel at any time that any of the several officers present were threatened or in danger?

[Cherri Tart]

Of all the issues in this forum this one was easiest for me. The cop is at fault, he should be punished as much as possible. For the sole reason that the choke hold was a banned tactic by the NYPD. It was a move that shouldn't have ever been employed.

Sadly, I think that the victims chronic issues made something that should have never happened in the first place lethal. :(

EDIT: Though it does raise an interesting question. It was obvious that the man was fighting despite calling for a time-out.

However more to the point:

You can't shoot him for obvious reasons.
You can't taze him because he has heart problems.
You can't pepper spray him because he's an asthmatic.

So, barring the fact that the move the cop used was not permitted how were they supposed to restrain him without using those options, and despite his conditions he was a big person with surprising strength, and for whatever reason he did not stop fighting the cops. (I won't presume whether it was deliberate or fight-or-flight response.)

he was selling cigerettes. the cops started hassling him and than attacked him. if i a cop attacked me for no reason, i'd fucking put up a fight too. it's called panic response. why they felt compelled to go after him in the first place is beyond me. how about. why would they need to taze or pepper spray him for that? oh, right, he's a scary black man. forgot that part. come one, taze him, pepper spray him? he wasn't a threat. if they simply left him alone i am 100% certain that he wasn't going to rob, kill, maim, or blow up innocent bystanders. how the hell anyone can watch that video, an unbiased witness to the events, and still defend that happened is ludicris. the guy was treated like a mad dog and put down. wake up people, this shit needs to stop.

[consortium11]

Case seems simple to me; the New York police don't allow choke holds, Eric Garner was choked by a police officer which led to his death. Even if the officer claims that he only accidentally choked him during the struggle that's still what we'd call manslaughter... and far more likely murder. The fact that his poor physical condition/health may have contributed to his death is irrelevant in that regard; it's a basic principle of criminal justice that you take your victim as you find them.

That said

he was selling cigerettes. the cops started hassling him and than attacked him. if i a cop attacked me for no reason, i'd fucking put up a fight too.

If you accept that Eric Garner was selling cigarettes then it's not a case of the police "hassling" him or attacking him "for no reason". The selling of single, untaxed cigarettes is a crime in New York and it seems the police had a reasonable suspicion that he was doing that; reasonable suspicion allows the police to detain someone, they tried to detain him and then the tragedy occured.

One should (and I'd argue must) separate out whether the police acted legitimately in trying to detain Eric Garner and if they went about it in a legitimate manner. The answer to the first appears to be yes, the second appears to be no.

Of course one can debate about New York's punitively high taxes on cigarettes and (through a combination of the "broken windows" policies and pressure from the City which wants to protect its tax revenue) the way the police have a heavy pressure on them to strictly enforce such laws... personally I think both the level of tax and the enforcement of it are ridiculous... but that's a separate matter to the death itself. 

[Inkidu]

he was selling cigerettes. the cops started hassling him and than attacked him. if i a cop attacked me for no reason, i'd fucking put up a fight too. it's called panic response. why they felt compelled to go after him in the first place is beyond me. how about. why would they need to taze or pepper spray him for that? oh, right, he's a scary black man. forgot that part. come one, taze him, pepper spray him? he wasn't a threat. if they simply left him alone i am 100% certain that he wasn't going to rob, kill, maim, or blow up innocent bystanders. how the hell anyone can watch that video, an unbiased witness to the events, and still defend that happened is ludicris. the guy was treated like a mad dog and put down. wake up people, this shit needs to stop.

As Consortium points out he was breaking the law, and it did escalate. 

[Beguile's Mistress]

I got two phone calls today from the family of one of the two men who broke into my house.  It seems his attorney passed the numbers for my home and work on to the family.  His mother wants me to tell the police he was in my home under duress.  That would be a lie on my part because I was locked in my bedroom until the police arrived and handcuffed the two at gun point.  But that is okay with her because her boy is a good boy and don't do nothin' wrong.  The brother was much worse, used profanity to describe me, racial slurs against me and threats to try to subdue me.  Now according to some of the remarks in this thread since they are all members of a minority I shouldn't report anyone for suborning perjury, breaching my privacy or making terroristic threats mostly because nothing bad happened to me.  I now get to live in fear for my home which could be burned down like those stores in Ferguson according to the brother because I'm a stuck up white woman with a sense of privilege in the mother's words.

This is the reality of what many people are going to have to live with now along with the fact that if a police officer so much as points a gun at someone all hell will break loose.  I don't blame Darren Wilson or the police in New York for this either.  I don't blame anyone.  I just wish that everyone - EVERYONE - would take responsibility for their own actions and just not commit crimes.

[Valthazar]

This is the reality of what many people are going to have to live with now along with the fact that if a police officer so much as points a gun at someone all hell will break loose.  I don't blame Darren Wilson or the police in New York for this either.  I don't blame anyone.  I just wish that everyone - EVERYONE - would take responsibility for their own actions and just not commit crimes.

+1.   I have avoided posting in this thread, and the Ferguson one, because so many people want to vilify one side or the other.

[Inkidu]

+1.   I have avoided posting in this thread, and the Ferguson one, because so many people want to vilify one side or the other.

Another +1 from me.

[Ebb]

I got two phone calls today from the family of one of the two men who broke into my house.  It seems his attorney passed the numbers for my home and work on to the family.  His mother wants me to tell the police he was in my home under duress.  That would be a lie on my part because I was locked in my bedroom until the police arrived and handcuffed the two at gun point.  But that is okay with her because her boy is a good boy and don't do nothin' wrong.  The brother was much worse, used profanity to describe me, racial slurs against me and threats to try to subdue me.  Now according to some of the remarks in this thread since they are all members of a minority I shouldn't report anyone for suborning perjury, breaching my privacy or making terroristic threats mostly because nothing bad happened to me.  I now get to live in fear for my home which could be burned down like those stores in Ferguson according to the brother because I'm a stuck up white woman with a sense of privilege in the mother's words.

It's horrible that you were a victim of a crime like that, and it's reprehensible on the part of both the people who called you and their attorney that you should be subject to further harassment in this way. If you haven't already reported this to the police I hope that you do soon. You don't deserve to live in fear for your safety.

I doubt anyone posting in this thread, and I hope anyone here on Elliquiy, would disagree with that sentiment.

[Beguile's Mistress]

It's horrible that you were a victim of a crime like that, and it's reprehensible on the part of both the people who called you and their attorney that you should be subject to further harassment in this way. If you haven't already reported this to the police I hope that you do soon. You don't deserve to live in fear for your safety.

I doubt anyone posting in this thread, and I hope anyone here on Elliquiy, would disagree with that sentiment.

People live in fear everyday.  None of us should have to. 

I've reported the situation to the District Attorney's office.  I already have a relationship with them due to my own assault some years ago.  I have a button on my phone at work that records calls since we work with call ins and record for accuracy and training purposes.  Because I do a lot of work from home and make calls for the company I can record there as well.  Yay me! 

I see many people looking at the police as adversaries but I don't see them that way at all.  I also see many people who are wary and afraid of minorities simply because the bad actors among them.  Today after the first call to my office I did my tour through my department where at least half of the 400 people currently working there are non-white.  All I saw were people working hard to earn a living and provide for themselves and their families.  Didn't see one gangsta among them. 

[Ephiral]

This is the reality of what many people are going to have to live with now along with the fact that if a police officer so much as points a gun at someone all hell will break loose.  I don't blame Darren Wilson or the police in New York for this either.  I don't blame anyone.  I just wish that everyone - EVERYONE - would take responsibility for their own actions and just not commit crimes.

It's worth noting that the chokehold in question was a crime. It was not part of the very specific continuum of force this officer was authorized to use - under any circumstances. It was, in fact, specifically cited as not being authorized. So, regardless of his possession of a badge, when applying it? He was committing a crime.

So... this is just a little hypocritical.

What happened to you is horrible, should be responded to with the full extent of the law, and has zero bearing whatsoever on any attempt to curb police abuses.

[Zakharra]

This is the reality of what many people are going to have to live with now along with the fact that if a police officer so much as points a gun at someone all hell will break loose.  I don't blame Darren Wilson or the police in New York for this either.  I don't blame anyone.  I just wish that everyone - EVERYONE - would take responsibility for their own actions and just not commit crimes.

+1 from me too.  And I'm sorry to hear of the threats against you. If you got the phone calls recorded (the record function is a good idea for any phone), then that strengthens your case. Hopefully nothing bad will happen to you because of the threats. 
/hug

[Cherri Tart]

Case seems simple to me; the New York police don't allow choke holds, Eric Garner was choked by a police officer which led to his death. Even if the officer claims that he only accidentally choked him during the struggle that's still what we'd call manslaughter... and far more likely murder. The fact that his poor physical condition/health may have contributed to his death is irrelevant in that regard; it's a basic principle of criminal justice that you take your victim as you find them.

That said

If you accept that Eric Garner was selling cigarettes then it's not a case of the police "hassling" him or attacking him "for no reason". The selling of single, untaxed cigarettes is a crime in New York and it seems the police had a reasonable suspicion that he was doing that; reasonable suspicion allows the police to detain someone, they tried to detain him and then the tragedy occured.

One should (and I'd argue must) separate out whether the police acted legitimately in trying to detain Eric Garner and if they went about it in a legitimate manner. The answer to the first appears to be yes, the second appears to be no.

Of course one can debate about New York's punitively high taxes on cigarettes and (through a combination of the "broken windows" policies and pressure from the City which wants to protect its tax revenue) the way the police have a heavy pressure on them to strictly enforce such laws... personally I think both the level of tax and the enforcement of it are ridiculous... but that's a separate matter to the death itself.

Jaywalking is a crime too. A very minor infraction. So is littering. Yes, what he was doing was illegal. Is it on the same level as armed robbery or murder? Obviously not. A fine would not have been out of place. Lethal force, however, was.

[Inkidu]

They didn't use lethal force. They used force that unfortunately turned out to be lethal. If they'd used pepper spray and it triggered his asthma and he died from that, or the taser sent him into cardiac arrest they would still not be lethal options, and yes as previously stated, the NYPD is trained and knows explicitly not to use choke holds. So the cop should certainly be punished to the full extent of the law.

Okay, but say he was jaywalking and the cop approached him with the intent of writing him a ticket and the perpetrator starts pushing and shoving, what do you expect a cop to do when someone starts acting such a way to a simple citation?

[Zakharra]

Jaywalking is a crime too. A very minor infraction. So is littering. Yes, what he was doing was illegal. Is it on the same level as armed robbery or murder? Obviously not. A fine would not have been out of place. Lethal force, however, was.

From what I have heard, the police were called by the owner of the story he was selling in front of (a minority story owner from what I've heard), so he was going to be arrested anyways. His crime was higher on the list than jaywalking (selling illegal untaxed cigarettes is a huge no-no in NY City, they want all of the money they can squeeze out of people) so he was going to be arrested no matter what. And probably jailed for violating probation. I do agree the choke hold was unwarranted and the death very unfortunate, but I am not going to say or think that because the person who died is black that somehow makes it worse. It's unfortunate that a human being, Mr. Garner, died. Race and/or gender has no relevance in it as far as I see.

[Cherri Tart]

They didn't use lethal force. They used force that unfortunately turned out to be lethal. If they'd used pepper spray and it triggered his asthma and he died from that, or the taser sent him into cardiac arrest they would still not be lethal options, and yes as previously stated, the NYPD is trained and knows explicitly not to use choke holds. So the cop should certainly be punished to the full extent of the law.

Okay, but say he was jaywalking and the cop approached him with the intent of writing him a ticket and the perpetrator starts pushing and shoving, what do you expect ay

I expect the cop to behave as he should be trained to, to diffuse the situation. physical force should always be the last resort. Maybe that's a bit idealistic, but they should be above losing their tempers or trying to prove something. why they had to subdue him at all, is my question. and yes, he SHOULD be punished to the full extent of the law, but somehow, that's not going to happen because of the Grand jury's decision, yet again.

[Ephiral]

Okay, but say he was jaywalking and the cop approached him with the intent of writing him a ticket and the perpetrator starts pushing and shoving, what do you expect a cop to do when someone starts acting such a way to a simple citation?

Soft empty-hand control, with the goal of getting him into cuffs. Why are you acting like this is such a mystery? Use-of-force policies are a thing.

[Inkidu]

Several news reports state that Garner refused to be handcuffed. The key to defusing the situation was putting the parolee in handcuffs. Cops do it all the time just to detain people so stuff like this doesn't happen.

[Valthazar]

Eric Garner's daughter says that she does not feel this is a racial issue, but more an issue of police officers abusing their powers.  Despite this, it is unfortunate how the media continues to use this as an opportunity to divide people along racial lines.

[Ephiral]

Several news reports state that Garner refused to be handcuffed. The key to defusing the situation was putting the parolee in handcuffs. Cops do it all the time just to detain people so stuff like this doesn't happen.

Which is why I didn't say "politely ask him to surrender", but nice try.

[Inkidu]

Which is why I didn't say "politely ask him to surrender", but nice try.

Does not follow.

Generally if the cops try to handcuff you and you refuse that rarely works out will for anyone.

[Ephiral]

Does not follow.

Generally if the cops try to handcuff you and you refuse that rarely works out will for anyone.

And yet, somehow, more than thirty-three thousand people per day, most of them presumably unhappy about this, wind up alive and in handcuffs in the US.

[Inkidu]

And yet, somehow, more than thirty-three thousand people per day, most of them presumably unhappy about this, wind up alive and in handcuffs in the US.

Yep, and if he had just allowed himself to be detained the first time, you know in a bit of acceptance of his obvious perpetration of a crime, he'd still be alive.

[Apple of Eris]

I'd like to open up the floor on the Eric Garner death in NYC and police procedures.

He also died from more the just the 'chokehold' which makes for a nice slogan. What is buried in the CNN article was "But the medical examiner also listed acute and chronic bronchial asthma, obesity and hypertensive cardiovascular disease as contributing factors in Garner's death". Clearly his resisting arrest contributed to his death because of his poor health. You can bet nearly every criminal resisting arrest says they can't breathe, you are hurting them, the baby is sleeping or whatever they can think of.

Did he have asthma and was overweight and hard cardio problems? Sure. None of which were the -cause of death-. The Medical Examiner's report itself lists the cause of death as compression of the neck and chest, along with Garner's positioning on the ground while being restrained by police. The other conditions were merely contributing factors. Essentially if the police hadn't used an ILLEGAL procedure to take down a man who was unarmed and non-threatening this man would still be alive. The coroner even pronounced this a homicide for gods' sakes.  Saying it was the fault of the asthma this man is dead is like saying if you stab a hemophiliac it's not the stab wound that killed them, just the fact they won't stop bleeding.

And regardless of what the daughter says, this IS a racial issue. White suspects are routinely not taken down with force the way black suspects are. Police seem to be more ready and willing to use violence against African-American than whites, and that is a problem and an issue that needs to be addressed.

Look as a former attorney and as a victim of crime I've dealt with police a fair amount of time. Most of them are really good people, and I don't think anybody is arguing that the majority of them are not, so lets just take that argument right out of there. Protesting against the tactics used by some officers is not a condemnation of all police officers, it's calling attention to the abuses being perpetrated, probably not even maliciously, by some of these officers.

The next real issue I see is these prosecutors... These people have to WORK with police and if they try to hard to prosecute them, well that's going to really screw up their working relationships. What's truly needed in cases like these is an independent prosecutor, preferably federal or state, NOT local, who can deal with these cases when an officer is the defendant. The DA's office on local levels has too much at stake to truly go after abuses by local police forces, and it needs to change. I say this because when a prosecutor goes to a grand jury to seek an indictment, as the have in over 162,500 times in a two year span (2009-10) juries voted NOT to indict in only 11 cases. 11! That's a percentage so small my calculator gives me an error when I try to figure it out (I got this in excel 0.006769230769%). That's less than one one hundredth of a percent! Essentially ANYTIME a prosecutor moves to indict, that baby is going to trial. EXCEPT when they indict a police officer? Sorry, but that tells me something fishy is going on, and a man who need not have died will get no real justice.

[Ephiral]

Yep, and if he had just allowed himself to be detained the first time, you know in a bit of acceptance of his obvious perpetration of a crime, he'd still be alive.

So you're saying every one of those thirty-three thousand people surrender peacefully? You're seriously, seriously trying to pretend that soft-control techniques either do not exist, are not commonly authorized law enforcement practice, or never work?

EDIT: Because... it's important to note here: They didn't even try. The chokehold was literally the very first control hold attempted.

[Inkidu]

So you're saying every one of those thirty-three thousand people surrender peacefully? You're seriously, seriously trying to pretend that soft-control techniques either do not exist, are not commonly authorized law enforcement practice, or never work?

No.

[Zakharra]

And regardless of what the daughter says, this IS a racial issue. White suspects are routinely not taken down with force the way black suspects are. Police seem to be more ready and willing to use violence against African-American than whites, and that is a problem and an issue that needs to be addressed.

I have to disagree with you there. If Garner had been an overweight asthmatic white man who acted like Garner did; refusing to be cuffed and resisting, I don't see how the police would have reacted any differently. They still would have taken him down to the ground in order to cuff him., and likely done the same thing (assuming the same police officers) that happened here.  If the guy is big like Garner, then an average sized police officer might feel he/she needs to use more force to take down someone that might outweigh them by half or more. Especially if they are being uncooperative. White, black, Asian, Hispanic, race makes no difference. If you resist arrest you will be forced down and cuffed.

[Apple of Eris]

Actually, they generally try non-forceful measures first. And usually, unless there is an imminent threat, do their best to talk a suspect down. I don't see that at all in the video, I see an almost immediate escalation to force.

[Ephiral]

No.

Then I'm confused how you get from "soft-control techniques exist, are authorized, and are often effective" to "attempting to get handcuffs on a suspect who refuses rarely works out well for anyone".

[Shjade]

Again, NOT an excuse for the results, but a possible motive on their part.

If they're not an excuse for the results, why do their possible motives matter?

Yep, and if he had just allowed himself to be detained the first time, you know in a bit of acceptance of his obvious perpetration of a crime, he'd still be alive.

So resisting arrest - while unarmed and offering no overt violence, I might add, in addition to being heavily outnumbered - is now a crime that merits lethal force?

Duly noted.

[la dame en noir]

Why are people so quick to dismiss the racial inequality through higher power?

Is it because you don't experience it? or does it make you uncomfortable? It is VERY true that a police officer is more guarded around a black man than he is with a white male. Thats just the honest truth. I've seen it with my own damn eyes.

Everyone is afraid of us...because they don't understand us.

[Blythe]

I've been looking about doing some reading, and Pantaleo seems to have had previous accusations of misconduct  towards black men before what happened with Garner. With this in mind, the way he handled Garner looks worse.   :-\

[Cherri Tart]

I have to disagree with you there. If Garner had been an overweight asthmatic white man who acted like Garner did; refusing to be cuffed and resisting, I don't see how the police would have reacted any differently. They still would have taken him down to the ground in order to cuff him., and likely done the same thing (assuming the same police officers) that happened here.  If the guy is big like Garner, then an average sized police officer might feel he/she needs to use more force to take down someone that might outweigh them by half or more. Especially if they are being uncooperative. White, black, Asian, Hispanic, race makes no difference. If you resist arrest you will be forced down and cuffed.

Obviously we grew up in different neighborhoods. With all due respect, you're wrong. I've seen it happen too many times not to know better. Whites get treated differently than blacks all too often - not always, but often enough to be see the issue here. All too often blacks start out the encounter with one strike already against them. Race DOES make a difference, as do other factors; appearance, gender, etc - want to bet that, if Garner had been a white woman, acted in the exact same manner, that none of this would have gone down the way it did? btw, size makes no difference. I'm 5'1" and I could just as easily be a threat and take a lot more force to take me down than an overweight, out of shape black guy in poor health. Any GOOD cop would know this. It was a total over reaction, there is zero doubt about that.

[Silverfyre]

Race makes no difference?  This "I don't see race!" mentality is part of the whole problem of racism in this country.  Race IS a factor, especially in cases like this.  If race didn't make a difference, we wouldn't have the KKK or needed a Civil Rights Movement (and still do!).  The factor that "Oh, he had a criminal past!" is even being considered in justifying his death just shows it even more.  So the guy, because he was obese and had a criminal past, deserved what he got?  Keep digging for reasons to make yourself feel better over your continued privilege.  How disgusting.

This makes me physically ill to see this type of mentality in trying to justify racism and murder.

[Zakharra]

  Cherri Tart, Silverfyre, the problem I see with people calling it racist right off the bat because of the race of the police officer and perpetrator is that all too often people who  do that use the racist card first just because of the race of the police and perpetrator. Maybe I do live in an area with not as much violence (the nearest large city is Spokane (population 209,000)),  and certainly not as many deaths, but from what I have seen on the news here, if a perpetrator is  white or any race, male or female, they will use force to take you to the ground indiscriminately sometimes. They would do that to a white, a black, an Asian or Hispanic, male or female if they resisted arrest. Race and/or gender wouldn't make any difference. As someone said here, I would call that more of a case of police abuse of power if too much force is used than being race motivated if the perpetrator was a minority, much like I consider the Garner case. to be The man's own daughter she says doesn't consider the incident racist.

Which brings me back to the point I am trying to make:  Yes there are groups like the KKK and there was a major need for the Civil Rights movement, and there still is in some cases, but not all violence against minorities is because of racism. Those who consider the case racist might be looking at it that way because they have a tendency to look at -any- case against minorities as racist just because of the color of the skin. It is real easy to find racist things when you're predisposed to think of everything as racist. All I am asking is that people think before using the race card on an incident. Despite what you* or others might think, it doesn't automatically mean minority violence is racist.

  * the you is a general you, not meaning anyone here on E. I'm not accusing anyone here of racism, I just want people to think hard on it before calling any attack racially motivated just because the people involved were of different ethnic backgrounds.

[Silverfyre]

Race shouldn't make a difference is a wonderful sentiment but hardly the reality.

The amount of unarmed blacks that are shot and killed by police is alarmingly high. Police in the United States are fatally shooting one person a day on average, at least in 2007.  Now if that doesn't speak for an over usage of excessive force (based on racism or not), I don't know what does.  That doesn't even bring up the issue of racial profiling and how it fits into prison statistics and demographics.

Trying to justify that this murder was racially motivated or not is really moot at this point for the end results are the same; a police officer used excessive force in the form of an illegal choke hold and killed an unarmed man.  I think that is really the important issue but when it comes on a wave of visible racial profiling and police acts of brutality, it really points out the larger issue of racism in this country.  The data is there and while this incident might not (I personally doubt it) be related to race, racism is more than alive and well and it is running rampant.

(Sources: http://www.colorlines.com/archives/2007/11/killed_by_the_cops.html, http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/08/police-shootings-michael-brown-ferguson-black-men)

[Silverfyre]

So yes, I think we both see what happened to Eric Garner as being differently motivated but still agree that it was police brutality. This was a horrible excessive usage of force by the police and trying to justify his death for being a criminal and obese is just... sickening. 

[consortium11]

Jaywalking is a crime too. A very minor infraction. So is littering. Yes, what he was doing was illegal. Is it on the same level as armed robbery or murder? Obviously not. A fine would not have been out of place. Lethal force, however, was.

I'm not sure I quite see what your point is here.

No-one that I'm aware of is alleging that the police suspected him of selling "loosies" and decided to kill him for doing that. They suspected him of selling "loosies", decided to detain him and in the struggle when doing so used a choke hold which led to his death. As I've said above I think that should lead to criminal charges; either manslaughter (or the equivalent) or murder.

But the issue is that they were overzealous in attempting to detain him and used a choke hold while doing so. If they'd decided to detain him for jaywalking or littering the situation would be exactly the same. The only real difference between the crimes you list and selling untaxed cigarettes is that due to the huge amount of revenue New York makes from cigarette taxes the police have been put under pressure (combined with the "broken windows" policy) to strictly enforce those laws... but that's an issue for the state, vice tax and high tax advocates in general to face up to, not the police in this specific incident.

[Cherri Tart]

I'm not sure I quite see what your point is here.

No-one that I'm aware of is alleging that the police suspected him of selling "loosies" and decided to kill him for doing that. They suspected him of selling "loosies", decided to detain him and in the struggle when doing so used a choke hold which led to his death. As I've said above I think that should lead to criminal charges; either manslaughter (or the equivalent) or murder.

If he was a suspect in an armed robbery or a murder, then the police might have reason to believe that he was violent and might take precautions or be prepared to be aggressive if he did something that warranted it. Selling loose cigs, however, or Jaywalking, would probably not get the same level of readiness or automatically trigger such a reaction.

[Cherri Tart]

  Cherri Tart, Silverfyre, the problem I see with people calling it racist right off the bat because of the race of the police officer and perpetrator is that all too often people who  do that use the racist card first just because of the race of the police and perpetrator. 

Hard not to when all the the recent incidences involve white cops shooting black men and kids. should we, instead, play the gender card? cops hate dudes? not seeing a lot of white kids getting shot, or black cops doing the shooting. maybe not all are racially motivated, but it certainly suggest that it's an issue.

[Blythe]

More officers could have been brought in to restrain him properly or chase him down or whatever it took to do it right.

Ah, I have watched the video of what happened to Garner. I had to wait to watch it as I was worried it would upset me badly. I was right. I was horrified and angry after I watched it. Up until this point, I had only seen very small seconds of isolated clips. The full video...that was appalling.

I am retracting the part in bold here of what I said. I saw how many officers there were, how the chokehold was continued even after one of Garner's arms was behind his back to be cuffed, and he was well on the ground as multiple officers assisted. With that many officers present, Eric Garner could easily have been arrested nonviolently or with a minimum of force. That situation did not need more officers. All apologies for the rather inaccurate call for more officers that I made.

[Zakharra]

Hard not to when all the the recent incidences involve white cops shooting black men and kids. should we, instead, play the gender card? cops hate dudes? not seeing a lot of white kids getting shot, or black cops doing the shooting. maybe not all are racially motivated, but it certainly suggest that it's an issue.

A large part of the  problem with that is the news media is predisposed to play up white/black violence and likely slant it with the impression by the talking heads, that its racist. The 'if it bleeds, it leads' mentality, especially since much of the media and news journalists are activists in that they want to change the world rather than just report the news. Where I live, if someone is killed by police, race isn't an issue other than in passing. The focus though is on how the police handled/mishandled the situation rather than if it's a racial violence thing. I just think that far, far too many people are willing to throw down the racial card first upon hearing that someone who was arrested/hurt/killed was a minority and the police officer was Caucasian or looked Caucasian.  Too many people hear of a white police officer hurting/killing a black person and automatically think; 'That's racist' without looking at the facts of the case.

Look at the incident in Florida several years ago. The neighborhood watch man who did the killing was Hispanic and I believe self identified as Hispanic, but the news media was hellbent on portraying him as white because it fit their viewpoint.  They wanted a white man killing a black man so that's how they portrayed it. His actual ethnicity was overshadowed because of their personal bias to fit a profile they wanted.

All I'm asking is that people just step back and think about it before the race card is used.  Just because you (general you) think its racist, doesn't mean that it is racist.

Now on the topic, do I think the police overreacted? Yes.  It sounds like they did. I haven't seen the video so I an only going off of what I've heard, but it sounds like their was somewhat of an overreaction in the particular use of force. But I'm not going to automatically slap down the racist card because of the skin color of the police and perpetrator are different. I'd like to hear the facts of the case first before I make any determined decision.

[Valthazar]

Hard not to when all the the recent incidences involve white cops shooting black men and kids.
...
not seeing a lot of white kids getting shot, or black cops doing the shooting. maybe not all are racially motivated, but it certainly suggest that it's an issue.

The mainstream media thrives because of this belief - the idea that the news on CNN and Fox represent the world as it is.  This couldn't be further from the truth.  To the contrary, these outlets select news that drives controversy and attracts viewership. 

Recently, an unarmed white man was killed by a black cop, yet the media was mum on this story.  I'm not at all suggesting that this should have been covered as a 'racially based' incident (because I honestly doubt it was) or that it should have received national attention.  However, it is a great example of how the mainstream media cherry picks their topics to elicit controversy and viewership - and to also develop an overriding 'thesis' in their news presentation. 

[DiscoveringEzra]

How Anonymous Cops Online Are Reacting to the Death of Eric Garner

Fat fck perp who was anointed a Saint by all who knew him. Married, noticed how they put that in there, because 9 times out of 10 it's not the case. This video will gain a lot of traction and heads will roll. Pretty much every cop there will be modified.

As far as the grab around the neck, I would have done the same thing. That piece of sh!t was too fat and wide to grab anywhere else.
Seems it was conveniently edited as well. Maybe missing a few details of the mutts action?

[Cherri Tart]

Not sure the rest of you grew up. I grew up in Oakland, CA. maybe you haven't had the same experiences as me, and that's fine and perfectly understandable, but the thing of it is, I've seen this stuff first hand since I was a kid. No, not all white cop kills black dude are racially motivated, but enough of them are that I have absolutely no probably 'playing the race card' when one does. be surprised at how often, as a kid, we'd get busted and I'd get a free pass while the black kids I was with didn't. only difference? yeah, I'm white. Sorry, but after a while, you start calling a horse a horse - hoping I didn't mangle that saying, but yeah, totally appropriate.

[SouvlakiSpaceStation]

Race makes no difference?  This "I don't see race!" mentality is part of the whole problem of racism in this country.  Race IS a factor, especially in cases like this.  If race didn't make a difference, we wouldn't have the KKK or needed a Civil Rights Movement (and still do!).  The factor that "Oh, he had a criminal past!" is even being considered in justifying his death just shows it even more.  So the guy, because he was obese and had a criminal past, deserved what he got?  Keep digging for reasons to make yourself feel better over your continued privilege.  How disgusting.

This makes me physically ill to see this type of mentality in trying to justify racism and murder.

Thank you.

[Silverfyre]

The mainstream media thrives because of this belief - the idea that the news on CNN and Fox represent the world as it is.  This couldn't be further from the truth.  To the contrary, these outlets select news that drives controversy and attracts viewership. 

Recently, an unarmed white man was killed by a black cop, yet the media was mum on this story.  I'm not at all suggesting that this should have been covered as a 'racially based' incident (because I honestly doubt it was) or that it should have received national attention.  However, it is a great example of how the mainstream media cherry picks their topics to elicit controversy and viewership - and to also develop an overriding 'thesis' in their news presentation.

So, you point out one incident of a white guy being killed over how many incidents of black people being killed over the last year?  It is a racially based incident and race matters here.  So saying it is further from the truth is just trivializing a very large problem and while I will agree that the media and their sensationalist coverage of such events is equally troubling, it takes away from what is being raised when examining cases like the one this.

Why is it that some people (those in the majority who don't deal with things like racial profiling) are the first to start yelling "But WHITE people die are killed by cops too!" when this whole issue is about police brutalities towards people of color?  Yes, we get it.  White people get targeted by police brutality too.  But the statistics don't lie (please see my previous post for said statistics if you'd like the hard data) and police brutality and lethal force is more often used against people of color and minorities than whites.

I'm not dismissing those individuals that suffer at the hands of corrupt cops who happen to be white. It's just as horrible.  But, when it comes down to bringing that up to drown out the voices of those calling for justice over cases like Micheal Brown, it is just disgusting.

I'm getting really tired of people shouting over the voices that really matter here.  I've seen it happen in feminism issues, gender issues and race issues.  This "but think about the majority's problems" reasoning really is empty and just dismissive of the people that are getting targeted over and over again.  It's just like the thinking that goes into "reverse racism" and "men's rights activists" - let's highlight US and OUR problems so we can forget about THEM.

[Valthazar]

Whether or not this incident was racially motivated is a matter of subjective opinion, and one can likely make a valid argument either way with the facts currently available.  Stating with certainty that this incident was racially motivated is a questionable presupposition in this debate.  Police brutality against people of color is a legitimate issue in the United States, but basing an entire argument for this incident (where the assailant happened to be white, and the victim happened to be black) on this broader theme of race would appear to be a logical fallacy.

[Silverfyre]

The incidents highlight the broader theme of racism and police brutality so it is hardly a logical fallacy. The same could be drawn from your argument of the media working on solely the principal of sensationalism as it is just as subjective based on your outline.

Instead of yelling about the "subjective nature" of the crimes, how about you acknowledge the bigger issues here that are proven to be racially motivated by the statistics alone?

[Cycle]

Point 1:  the news networks like to put on segments to drive up their viewership.

Point 2:  people are upset with the justice system we have in the United States.

Point 1 does not eliminate, excuse, or invalidate Point 2.  Some people think.  Some people know better than to just blindly follow what a talking head spouts off on cable news.

Ten thousand people took to the streets in New York city alone.  I'd conservatively estimate five times that number have protested in over fifty cities across the nation. 

People are genuinely upset.  It's not a new story.  It's reality.  Those in charge need to stop talking and start listening.  Otherwise they'll never understand how to fix this situation.

[Apple of Eris]

Is this racism? That seems to be the question a lot of people, who are generally but not always, not minorities seem to ask in these cases.

Taken alone as a single incident, well it's hard to say, though the officer in question seems to have had a history of racial bias.

However when you add this point to the multitude of other points including shooting deaths of unarmed blacks, increased sentences for minorities convicted of the same crimes as whites, the racial bias in our drug sentencing laws, the fact that 1 in 3 black males will at some point in their lives be subjected to our criminal justice system... and you have to be blind not to see a pattern emerge that paints a pretty clear system of a judicial system that needs to be fixed; and part of that system is how law enforcement officers deal with minorities.

I don't think anyone, outside a few extreme voices, that the officers involved are hood wearing members of the KKK. What people are saying is that these officers fell prey to their own racial biases in determining when and how much force should be used. And are protesting against a system that protected an officer rather than punishing him in an instance where many, if not most people, felt excessive force was used against an unarmed civilian.

[Avis habilis]

Locked at OP's request.