[Ronny Turiaf]

I do not live in America however after viewing this video I am disgusted with the law system
why does it take 4 men to take down 1 man who is unarmed?
why does the man in green not release his chokehold on eric gardner after he is handcuffed?

can anyone try and play devils advocate and try and reason with me why the man who killed eric garner should not get the life sentence in prison for manslaughter?

[Ronny Turiaf]

why didnt the person filming the video do something or say something?
its good that the incident was tapped on camera but he should've stepped in instead of letting them kill him.

[Kermit]

I don't have an issue with the choke being applied to subdue a much larger man who is resisting, but I do have an issue with how long it was being applied.

[Let's Go Rangers]

Better question

When told he was under arrest, why didn't the fat fuc just follow the lawful order of the police.

Guy got what was coming to him

A heart attack

[CountNo_Account]

You don't get "life" for manslaughter...

[Let's Go Rangers]

You don't get "life" for manslaughter...

He should get extra pay from the Department of Sanitation for taking out the garbage

[cloverfield]

In comparison to the Michael Brown incident this was indeed troubling. After viewing the tape a few times it's clear to see it should have been handled way better. Also keep in mind that he is being arrested for supposedly selling "loose cigs". The guy was no angel after being arrested many many times for the same thing but the cops clearly went overboard. Even when he is saying he can't breathe they don't care at all.

I agreed with the Michael Brown non-indictment but this should have resulted in SOMETHING.

[brooks85]

Better question

When told he was under arrest, why didn't the fat fuc just follow the lawful order of the police.

Guy got what was coming to him

A heart attack

lol this sheep, silly how predictable you are just like scumbag. Cut from the same cloth.

[Itsamazing777]

If you can speak you can breathe unfortunate but that pretty much sums it up

[Let's Go Rangers]

In comparison to the Michael Brown incident this was indeed troubling. After viewing the tape a few times it's clear to see it should have been handled way better. Also keep in mind that he is being arrested for supposedly selling "loose cigs". The guy was no angel after being arrested many many times for the same thing but the cops clearly went overboard. Even when he is saying he can't breathe they don't care at all.

I agreed with the Michael Brown non-indictment but this should have resulted in SOMETHING.

Where did police go overboard?
No trauma to neck

Hold was in place maybe 15-20 seconds then released

If you can talk,,,,,you're not being choked


Fat penetrate couldn't breathe because of weight.

Had he not pulled away from cops, he is still alive

[Let's Go Rangers]

lol this sheep, silly how predictable you are just like scumbag. Cut from the same cloth.

Except I'm always right

[cloverfield]

If you can speak you can breathe unfortunate but that pretty much sums it up

Quite possible he was summarizing his experience. He probably didn't have time to spit out a 10 word sentence. With his other health conditions I don't find it impossible that he was having trouble breathing in his situation.

Where did police go overboard?
No trauma to neck

Hold was in place maybe 15-20 seconds then released

If you can talk,,,,,you're not being choked


Fat penetrate couldn't breathe because of weight.

Had he not pulled away from cops, he is still alive

If you don't believe that he was being choked I don't know what else to tell you. I grant you that he should have put his hands behind his back immediately but he was hardly forcibly resisting arrest. I'm not saying that cop would have been found guilty...but there was enough to charge him with SOMETHING.

[Let's Go Rangers]

Quite possible he was summarizing his experience. He probably didn't have time to spit out a 10 word sentence. With his other health conditions I don't find it impossible that he was having trouble breathing in his situation.



If you don't believe that he was being choked I don't know what else to tell you. I grant you that he should have put his hands behind his back immediately but he was hardly forcibly resisting arrest. I'm not saying that cop would have been found guilty...but there was enough to charge him with SOMETHING.

Since the autopsy said that the chokehold had nothing to do with the death ...
what do you want to charge the officer with ?

[The Kraken]

Autopsies

Those are the biggest joke around. Completely unreliable and inconsistent. What a crap shoot

I have seen dozens done and have first hand experience with them on a family member.

How they're even admissible is Beyond me

[ttrace35]

Since the autopsy said that the chokehold had nothing to do with the death ...
what do you want to charge the officer with ?

Autopsy said it was a homicide due to neck compression. What a dumb fukk you are. You have to clue about any facts. Just a clown here to spew your racist views. Just say you hate black people and you wish they were dead. But your too much of a bitch to do that.

[Let's Go Rangers]

Autopsy said it was a homicide due to neck compression. What a dumb fukk you are. You have to clue about any facts. Just a clown here to spew your racist views. Just say you hate black people and you wish they were dead. But your too much of a bitch to do that.

It did?

Link please

Thanks in advance

[Let's Go Rangers]

It did?

Link please

Thanks in advance

http://nypost.com/2014/07/19/man-in-...amage-autopsy/
Man in chokehold death had no throat damage: autopsy

[ttrace35]

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local...269396151.html

Here you go fukk face.

[bigtymer56]

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local...269396151.html

Here you go fukk face.

Dont feed the troll...doubt rangers actually believes half the shit he posts.

[ttrace35]

Dont feed the troll...doubt rangers actually believes half the shit he posts.

you right . I'm done here.

[Let's Go Rangers]

On Wednesday, a New York grand jury refused to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the death of 43-year-old Eric Garner. Pantaleo is white; Garner is black. That one fact meant that the President of the United States and the Mayor of New York City took to the microphones to denounce American racism. President Obama talked about the “concern on the part of too many minority communities that law enforcement is not working with them and dealing with them in a fair way.” De Blasio went further, of course, calling for “action” and suggesting that the incident represented the culmination of “centuries of racism.”

Unlike the Michael Brown killing in Ferguson, Missouri, there is excellent cause for concern here. But that concern does not mean that facts of the case ought to become irrelevant.

The Case.
The incident was caught on tape by a friend of Garner’s, and shows Garner, who weighed some 400 lbs., being confronted by police over distributing unlicensed cigarettes (colloquially called “loosies”). The video shows Garner resisting arrest, although not violently so – he shouts at officers, “Every time you see me you want to arrest me, I’m tired of this, this stops today…I didn’t do nothing…I’m minding my business, officer…” while waving his arms animatedly -- before Pantaleo comes up behind him and places his left arm around Garner’s neck, bringing his right arm up below Garner’s right arm. Garner raises his hands, falling backwards, at which point three other officers physically grab Garner. He falls to the ground, Pantaleo hanging onto his back with his arm still around Garner’s neck. The officers tell Garner to put his hands behind his head, and Garner complains that he cannot breathe. Pantaleo forces Garner’s head to the cement. It is clear that witnesses do not believe Garner has been put in mortal danger.
Garner died a few minutes later.

The autopsy from the medical examiner attributed his death to homicide – meaning death at the hands of another party, not murder, in medical parlance – and stated that he died thanks to “Compression of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police.” But the autopsy further noted that Garner died thanks to acute and chronic bronchial asthma, obesity, and heart disease.

The Charges. First off, it is vital to note that nobody knows exactly the charges filed with the grand jury against Pantaleo. According to ABC News, the charges could have included “second-degree manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, felony assault, reckless endangerment.” The charges matter, since each individual charge carries with it requirements for different elements. As Professor Eugene O’Donnell of the John Jay Criminal College of Criminal Justice wrote in The New York Daily News:

As a practical matter — on the basis of past cases — the grand jury would likely indict only if it found malice or some intention to hurt Mr. Garner or that a gross disregard for Mr. Garner’s well-being is what created the tragic ending during this routine arrest. Finding that the officer was careless or that the arrest was bungled will not rise to the level of a crime.

The Arrest. It is vital to separate out the actions of the police from the rationale for their action. That’s because by virtually any logic, it is the height of irresponsibility and depravity for a man to end up dead for selling loose cigarettes. The law that led to this confrontation was pressed forward by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg; Garner had been arrested some eight times for selling “loosies.” As Lawrence McQuillan reported in The Washington Times:

In January 2014, tough new penalties for selling untaxed cigarettes took effect in New York City. In July, emboldened by the new law, the city’s highest-ranking uniformed cop, Philip Banks, issued an order to crack down on loosie sales days before Garner died.

So in terms of police cracking down on Garner, the real responsibility lies with Bloomberg and NYPD Chief Bill Bratton. Idiot laws lead to meaningless deaths.

The “Chokehold.” At issue in this case is the so-called “chokehold” used by Pantaleo. Chokeholds have been banned by the NYPD entirely since 1993; chokeholds are typically defined as holds that prevent people from breathing. Thanks to the video showing Garner stating that he cannot breathe, many pundits have wrongly suggested that Pantaleo was “choking” Garner by depriving him of air from his windpipe. Bratton himself suggested that Pantaleo used a “chokehold,” which is defined by the NYPD as “any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air.”

That does not appear to have been the case. Garner did not die of asphyxiation, as the head of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association noted at the time. The preliminary autopsy showed no damage to Garner’s windpipe or neck bones.

So what was Pantaleo doing? He was applying a submission hold, which is not barred by the NYPD, and is designed to deprive the brain of oxygen by stopping blood flow through the arteries. So say the experts on submission holds.

It appears that the so-called chokehold was instrumental in triggering Garner’s pre-existing health problems and causing his death, but Garner was not choked to death, as the media seems to maintain.

According to Garner’s friends, he “had several health issues: diabetes, sleep apnea, and asthma so severe that he had to quit his job as a horticulturist for the city’s parks department. He wheezed when he talked and could not walk a block without resting, they said.”
Excessive Force.
There is no clear and concise guideline available on excessive force. According to Mark Henriquez, project manager for the National Police Use of Force Database Project at the International Association of Chiefs of Police, only .44 percent of all force complaints were considered excessive from 1994-1998.

So, in deciding whether a grand jury should have indicted Garner, we should assess the following questions:

Was there any intent by the officers to kill Garner? That would certainly be an uphill case to make, as the grand jury likely found.

Did the “chokehold” kill Garner, or did his pre-existing health conditions kill him? If Garner had otherwise been healthy, would he have died from use of the “chokehold”?

If not, would use of the “chokehold” have been reckless?

Was the use of the “chokehold” reasonable use of force rather than excessive use of force? Was the “chokehold” necessary to subdue him?

Unfortunately, in situations like the Garner case, our gut tends to overwhelm our assessment of the facts. We are sickened, as we should be, by the idea that a man died over sale of loose cigarettes – which is an indictment of the law, rather than of the police. We are sickened by the fact that a man died while warning officers he could not breathe – but we must assess whether that death was caused by the officers, or intervening medical conditions.

When people’s lives are at stake, it is worthwhile to actually examine those facts, rather than pre-conceived narratives constructed for political gain. And it is worthwhile noting that even if the police did use excessive force against Garner – which, of course, is quite possible – that still does not establish that they did so for racial reasons.

[Let's Go Rangers]

On Wednesday, a New York grand jury refused to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the death of 43-year-old Eric Garner. Pantaleo is white; Garner is black. That one fact meant that the President of the United States and the Mayor of New York City took to the microphones to denounce American racism. President Obama talked about the “concern on the part of too many minority communities that law enforcement is not working with them and dealing with them in a fair way.” De Blasio went further, of course, calling for “action” and suggesting that the incident represented the culmination of “centuries of racism.”

Unlike the Michael Brown killing in Ferguson, Missouri, there is excellent cause for concern here. But that concern does not mean that facts of the case ought to become irrelevant.

The Case.
The incident was caught on tape by a friend of Garner’s, and shows Garner, who weighed some 400 lbs., being confronted by police over distributing unlicensed cigarettes (colloquially called “loosies”). The video shows Garner resisting arrest, although not violently so – he shouts at officers, “Every time you see me you want to arrest me, I’m tired of this, this stops today…I didn’t do nothing…I’m minding my business, officer…” while waving his arms animatedly -- before Pantaleo comes up behind him and places his left arm around Garner’s neck, bringing his right arm up below Garner’s right arm. Garner raises his hands, falling backwards, at which point three other officers physically grab Garner. He falls to the ground, Pantaleo hanging onto his back with his arm still around Garner’s neck. The officers tell Garner to put his hands behind his head, and Garner complains that he cannot breathe. Pantaleo forces Garner’s head to the cement. It is clear that witnesses do not believe Garner has been put in mortal danger.
Garner died a few minutes later.

The autopsy from the medical examiner attributed his death to homicide – meaning death at the hands of another party, not murder, in medical parlance – and stated that he died thanks to “Compression of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police.” But the autopsy further noted that Garner died thanks to acute and chronic bronchial asthma, obesity, and heart disease.

The Charges. First off, it is vital to note that nobody knows exactly the charges filed with the grand jury against Pantaleo. According to ABC News, the charges could have included “second-degree manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, felony assault, reckless endangerment.” The charges matter, since each individual charge carries with it requirements for different elements. As Professor Eugene O’Donnell of the John Jay Criminal College of Criminal Justice wrote in The New York Daily News:

As a practical matter — on the basis of past cases — the grand jury would likely indict only if it found malice or some intention to hurt Mr. Garner or that a gross disregard for Mr. Garner’s well-being is what created the tragic ending during this routine arrest. Finding that the officer was careless or that the arrest was bungled will not rise to the level of a crime.

The Arrest. It is vital to separate out the actions of the police from the rationale for their action. That’s because by virtually any logic, it is the height of irresponsibility and depravity for a man to end up dead for selling loose cigarettes. The law that led to this confrontation was pressed forward by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg; Garner had been arrested some eight times for selling “loosies.” As Lawrence McQuillan reported in The Washington Times:

In January 2014, tough new penalties for selling untaxed cigarettes took effect in New York City. In July, emboldened by the new law, the city’s highest-ranking uniformed cop, Philip Banks, issued an order to crack down on loosie sales days before Garner died.

So in terms of police cracking down on Garner, the real responsibility lies with Bloomberg and NYPD Chief Bill Bratton. Idiot laws lead to meaningless deaths.

The “Chokehold.” At issue in this case is the so-called “chokehold” used by Pantaleo. Chokeholds have been banned by the NYPD entirely since 1993; chokeholds are typically defined as holds that prevent people from breathing. Thanks to the video showing Garner stating that he cannot breathe, many pundits have wrongly suggested that Pantaleo was “choking” Garner by depriving him of air from his windpipe. Bratton himself suggested that Pantaleo used a “chokehold,” which is defined by the NYPD as “any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air.”

That does not appear to have been the case. Garner did not die of asphyxiation, as the head of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association noted at the time. The preliminary autopsy showed no damage to Garner’s windpipe or neck bones.

So what was Pantaleo doing? He was applying a submission hold, which is not barred by the NYPD, and is designed to deprive the brain of oxygen by stopping blood flow through the arteries. So say the experts on submission holds.

It appears that the so-called chokehold was instrumental in triggering Garner’s pre-existing health problems and causing his death, but Garner was not choked to death, as the media seems to maintain.

According to Garner’s friends, he “had several health issues: diabetes, sleep apnea, and asthma so severe that he had to quit his job as a horticulturist for the city’s parks department. He wheezed when he talked and could not walk a block without resting, they said.”
Excessive Force.
There is no clear and concise guideline available on excessive force. According to Mark Henriquez, project manager for the National Police Use of Force Database Project at the International Association of Chiefs of Police, only .44 percent of all force complaints were considered excessive from 1994-1998.

So, in deciding whether a grand jury should have indicted Garner, we should assess the following questions:

Was there any intent by the officers to kill Garner? That would certainly be an uphill case to make, as the grand jury likely found.

Did the “chokehold” kill Garner, or did his pre-existing health conditions kill him? If Garner had otherwise been healthy, would he have died from use of the “chokehold”?

If not, would use of the “chokehold” have been reckless?

Was the use of the “chokehold” reasonable use of force rather than excessive use of force? Was the “chokehold” necessary to subdue him?

Unfortunately, in situations like the Garner case, our gut tends to overwhelm our assessment of the facts. We are sickened, as we should be, by the idea that a man died over sale of loose cigarettes – which is an indictment of the law, rather than of the police. We are sickened by the fact that a man died while warning officers he could not breathe – but we must assess whether that death was caused by the officers, or intervening medical conditions.

When people’s lives are at stake, it is worthwhile to actually examine those facts, rather than pre-conceived narratives constructed for political gain. And it is worthwhile noting that even if the police did use excessive force against Garner – which, of course, is quite possible – that still does not establish that they did so for racial reasons.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...ts-Eric-Garner


I've embarrassed you enough for the night


Hopefully you will learn to comprehend reports and extract the information correctly, not take others uninformed views as gospel.

The autopsy SPECIFICALLY noted that Garner died thanks to acute and chronic bronchial asthma, obesity, and heart disease.

[ttrace35]

You're a dumb fukk. Breibart is a right wing blog. Same as fox news. Stop being such a sheep.

[The Kraken]

http://nypost.com/2014/07/19/man-in-...amage-autopsy/
Man in chokehold death had no throat damage: autopsy

A correct chokehold does not cause anatomical or structural damage. They cut off blood supply to the brain. And they do it quickly. And when held, you die. No damage done, so the no damage is really not a shocker.

It was common place in jiu jitsu when you got choked out and had to tap to tell the person airway, blood or crank to let them know why you tapped. We were always taught to go for the choke to cut of blood supply because it's much much easier to occlude the carotid artery than the trachea.

Most officers have martial arts training.

[The Kraken]

On Wednesday, a New York grand jury refused to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the death of 43-year-old Eric Garner. Pantaleo is white; Garner is black. That one fact meant that the President of the United States and the Mayor of New York City took to the microphones to denounce American racism. President Obama talked about the “concern on the part of too many minority communities that law enforcement is not working with them and dealing with them in a fair way.” De Blasio went further, of course, calling for “action” and suggesting that the incident represented the culmination of “centuries of racism.”

Unlike the Michael Brown killing in Ferguson, Missouri, there is excellent cause for concern here. But that concern does not mean that facts of the case ought to become irrelevant.

The Case.
The incident was caught on tape by a friend of Garner’s, and shows Garner, who weighed some 400 lbs., being confronted by police over distributing unlicensed cigarettes (colloquially called “loosies”). The video shows Garner resisting arrest, although not violently so – he shouts at officers, “Every time you see me you want to arrest me, I’m tired of this, this stops today…I didn’t do nothing…I’m minding my business, officer…” while waving his arms animatedly -- before Pantaleo comes up behind him and places his left arm around Garner’s neck, bringing his right arm up below Garner’s right arm. Garner raises his hands, falling backwards, at which point three other officers physically grab Garner. He falls to the ground, Pantaleo hanging onto his back with his arm still around Garner’s neck. The officers tell Garner to put his hands behind his head, and Garner complains that he cannot breathe. Pantaleo forces Garner’s head to the cement. It is clear that witnesses do not believe Garner has been put in mortal danger.
Garner died a few minutes later.

The autopsy from the medical examiner attributed his death to homicide – meaning death at the hands of another party, not murder, in medical parlance – and stated that he died thanks to “Compression of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police.” But the autopsy further noted that Garner died thanks to acute and chronic bronchial asthma, obesity, and heart disease.

The Charges. First off, it is vital to note that nobody knows exactly the charges filed with the grand jury against Pantaleo. According to ABC News, the charges could have included “second-degree manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, felony assault, reckless endangerment.” The charges matter, since each individual charge carries with it requirements for different elements. As Professor Eugene O’Donnell of the John Jay Criminal College of Criminal Justice wrote in The New York Daily News:

As a practical matter — on the basis of past cases — the grand jury would likely indict only if it found malice or some intention to hurt Mr. Garner or that a gross disregard for Mr. Garner’s well-being is what created the tragic ending during this routine arrest. Finding that the officer was careless or that the arrest was bungled will not rise to the level of a crime.

The Arrest. It is vital to separate out the actions of the police from the rationale for their action. That’s because by virtually any logic, it is the height of irresponsibility and depravity for a man to end up dead for selling loose cigarettes. The law that led to this confrontation was pressed forward by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg; Garner had been arrested some eight times for selling “loosies.” As Lawrence McQuillan reported in The Washington Times:

In January 2014, tough new penalties for selling untaxed cigarettes took effect in New York City. In July, emboldened by the new law, the city’s highest-ranking uniformed cop, Philip Banks, issued an order to crack down on loosie sales days before Garner died.

So in terms of police cracking down on Garner, the real responsibility lies with Bloomberg and NYPD Chief Bill Bratton. Idiot laws lead to meaningless deaths.

The “Chokehold.” At issue in this case is the so-called “chokehold” used by Pantaleo. Chokeholds have been banned by the NYPD entirely since 1993; chokeholds are typically defined as holds that prevent people from breathing. Thanks to the video showing Garner stating that he cannot breathe, many pundits have wrongly suggested that Pantaleo was “choking” Garner by depriving him of air from his windpipe. Bratton himself suggested that Pantaleo used a “chokehold,” which is defined by the NYPD as “any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air.”

That does not appear to have been the case. Garner did not die of asphyxiation, as the head of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association noted at the time. The preliminary autopsy showed no damage to Garner’s windpipe or neck bones.

So what was Pantaleo doing? He was applying a submission hold, which is not barred by the NYPD, and is designed to deprive the brain of oxygen by stopping blood flow through the arteries. So say the experts on submission holds.

It appears that the so-called chokehold was instrumental in triggering Garner’s pre-existing health problems and causing his death, but Garner was not choked to death, as the media seems to maintain.

According to Garner’s friends, he “had several health issues: diabetes, sleep apnea, and asthma so severe that he had to quit his job as a horticulturist for the city’s parks department. He wheezed when he talked and could not walk a block without resting, they said.”
Excessive Force.
There is no clear and concise guideline available on excessive force. According to Mark Henriquez, project manager for the National Police Use of Force Database Project at the International Association of Chiefs of Police, only .44 percent of all force complaints were considered excessive from 1994-1998.

So, in deciding whether a grand jury should have indicted Garner, we should assess the following questions:

Was there any intent by the officers to kill Garner? That would certainly be an uphill case to make, as the grand jury likely found.

Did the “chokehold” kill Garner, or did his pre-existing health conditions kill him? If Garner had otherwise been healthy, would he have died from use of the “chokehold”?

If not, would use of the “chokehold” have been reckless?

Was the use of the “chokehold” reasonable use of force rather than excessive use of force? Was the “chokehold” necessary to subdue him?

Unfortunately, in situations like the Garner case, our gut tends to overwhelm our assessment of the facts. We are sickened, as we should be, by the idea that a man died over sale of loose cigarettes – which is an indictment of the law, rather than of the police. We are sickened by the fact that a man died while warning officers he could not breathe – but we must assess whether that death was caused by the officers, or intervening medical conditions.

When people’s lives are at stake, it is worthwhile to actually examine those facts, rather than pre-conceived narratives constructed for political gain. And it is worthwhile noting that even if the police did use excessive force against Garner – which, of course, is quite possible – that still does not establish that they did so for racial reasons.

There's a lot wrong with this article. A lot. Starting with my previous post. A correct chokehold does not asphyxiate, it cuts off blood supply to the brain. That can be deadly, especially in an unhealthy man with many co-morbidies. However, just because there was no damage also does not mean the trachea wasn't compressed for a long enough period of time for Garner to die. Push in on your trachea really hard, you will quit breathing. Yet your trachea is not damaged permanent. Held long enough , you will die but your trachea will be fine.

And believe it or not, that officer is responsible for that mans poor health. Had this case gone to court he almost certainly would have been found at minimum of negligent manslaughter.

Too much other stuff to type on the phkne

Lots of medically inaccurate asshmptions

[Let's Go Rangers]

There's a lot wrong with this article. A lot. Starting with my previous post. A correct chokehold does not asphyxiate, it cuts off blood supply to the brain. That can be deadly, especially in an unhealthy man with many co-morbidies. However, just because there was no damage also does not mean the trachea wasn't compressed for a long enough period of time for Garner to die. Push in on your trachea really hard, you will quit breathing. Yet your trachea is not damaged permanent. Held long enough , you will die but your trachea will be fine.

And believe it or not, that officer is responsible for that mans poor health. Had this case gone to court he almost certainly would have been found at minimum of negligent manslaughter.

Too much other stuff to type on the phkne

Lots of medically inaccurate asshmptions

I dont think petechial hemorrhaging was present, which would probably be common with asphyxiation.

Also I USED both chokehold and submission holds while working the job and I can tell you one time I had a guy wrapped up tight enough he COULD NOT SAY "I can't breathe"

I loosened up as he was going unconscious. .....then came out " you fuc.kin ..." and the hold went right back to BkofAma constrictor.

Cutting off blood supply ( submission hold ) is a great tool.
Renders the skel unconscious. ...
Cuff him up, he comes too, take him away.

Cops goes home in 1 piece
Scumbag goes to jail in 1 piece.

You just let off the carotid when the guy goes limp.

A chokehold....meaning A CHOKEHOLD ( NOT WHAT HAPPENED HERE ) IS a dangerous move and can be deadly if too much pressure is applied for too long.

Watch the video

Cop probably had submission hold for 10 seconds
Blubber but went down, cop then shifted and pinned the guys head to sidewalk while fat so was getting cuffed up

I know when I had to cuff someone that large many times we used 2 sets of cuffs just because a fat guy in 1 set of cuffs has trouble breathing with hands cuffed with single set.

Bottom line is if the guy complied, he would have been standing when cuffed, and probably double cuffed

He still would have been in distress because of his medical issues, but most likely would be alive today.

[Let's Go Rangers]

You're a dumb fukk. Breibart is a right wing blog. Same as fox news. Stop being such a sheep.

Typical lemming

Can't dispute the facts or debate the facts, so disparage the source reporting the facts

[The Kraken]

I dont think petechial hemorrhaging was present, which would probably be common with asphyxiation.

Also I USED both chokehold and submission holds while working the job and I can tell you one time I had a guy wrapped up tight enough he COULD NOT SAY "I can't breathe"

I loosened up as he was going unconscious. .....then came out " you fuc.kin ..." and the hold went right back to BkofAma constrictor.

Cutting off blood supply ( submission hold ) is a great tool.
Renders the skel unconscious. ...
Cuff him up, he comes too, take him away.

Cops goes home in 1 piece
Scumbag goes to jail in 1 piece.

You just let off the carotid when the guy goes limp.

A chokehold....meaning A CHOKEHOLD ( NOT WHAT HAPPENED HERE ) IS a dangerous move and can be deadly if too much pressure is applied for too long.

Watch the video

Cop probably had submission hold for 10 seconds
Blubber but went down, cop then shifted and pinned the guys head to sidewalk while fat so was getting cuffed up

I know when I had to cuff someone that large many times we used 2 sets of cuffs just because a fat guy in 1 set of cuffs has trouble breathing with hands cuffed with single set.

Bottom line is if the guy complied, he would have been standing when cuffed, and probably double cuffed

He still would have been in distress because of his medical issues, but most likely would be alive today.

We can certainly agree on this.

[Let's Go Rangers]

I also think if he was tased, that could have been looked at as excessive.

He pulled away from the police but wasn't swinging wildly or fighting them....
he was simply resisting, which required hands on, but probably not anything as severe as a taser
( especially because the police had numbers )a

He was so fat and out of shape...
if he was tasered he may have died from the amperage going through him

[Andy117]

He also wasn't doing anything that merited arrest.

[Kermit]

I heard on the news that the police sergeant(a black woman) was actually right there and overseen the arrest happen.

[The Kraken]

I heard on the news that the police sergeant(a black woman) was actually right there and overseen the arrest happen.

Not sure if that's true or not but even if it is, it doesn't really change anything.

Half of Americans view it from the officers perspective and half from the fat black guys perspective. There is a lot of good logical discussion that can be had and her being there or not would not be relevant to any of it. Maybe she hates blacks or fats or criminals. Who knows

[Let's Go Rangers]

He also wasn't doing anything that merited arrest.

So he should have complied with the arrest and filed suit afterwards

Problem solved

[Kermit]

Not sure if that's true or not but even if it is, it doesn't really change anything.

Half of Americans view it from the officers perspective and half from the fat black guys perspective. There is a lot of good logical discussion that can be had and her being there or not would not be relevant to any of it. Maybe she hates blacks or fats or criminals. Who knows

Her testimony may have influenced the Grand Jury.

[Andy117]

So he should have complied with the arrest and filed suit afterwards

Problem solved

That really would have gone far.