NYPD kill asthmatic father with chokehold

Emilander said:

Not trying to exonerate the cops, but this came out today: Garner died of a heart attack.
That's not to say that the arrest didn't contribute to his death, just that the chokehold didn't do much, if any damage according to the preliminary report from the medical examiner.

Click to expand...

"Just that the chokehold didn't do much, if any damage..."

Seriously?

You really want to try and suggest the illegal chokehold and cops dogpiling on Garner with one putting his knee on his head "didn't contribute" to his death?

Maybe Garner's general poor health and morbid obesity had him on a glide path to an early demise, but the reckless actions of the NYPD certainly hastened it.

De Blasio didn't cancel his trip; he just delayed it a day. He's currently in Rome.

The cop who used the chokehold was stripped of his badge and gun the other day, and is riding a desk, as is another cop who was involved.

The heart attack thing isn't a determination, just a theoretical.

There's a new twist - EMTs on the scene are on video doing exactly nothing but putting him on a gurney and slapping him on the shoulder. A new, seven-minute video came out, from a different angle, that shows the arrival of EMTs who administer exactly no medical care whatsoever, though he appears to be completely unresponsive. The EMTs are on desk duty as well. Story here -

About four minutes in, an EMT arrives asking the apparently unconscious Garner questions, and an officer tells him to answer but he still does not move, Smith reported.

A couple of minutes later, Garner is lifted onto a stretcher.

As CBS 2’s Steve Langford reported, Taisha Allen pulled out her phone to record the video of the father of six in custody.
“It’s crazy, and I was like, ‘Perform CPR on him,’ and they was like, ‘He don’t need CPR, or whatever,’ and that he was not breathing at the time.”

But officers said Garner was breathing.

Click to expand...

I don't dispute the NYPD has had some high-profile issues and serious brutality cases, along with other misconduct by officers. Two on-duty cops freaking raped someone a year or so ago. However, it ain't Mayberry. The NYPD is the largest force in the nation and would be something like the seventh-largest armed force in the world, if you compare it, sizewise, to national forces.

That there are some bad apples doesn't taint the entire force, especially if tptb are not trying to shade this - see Bratton saying it looks like a chokehold to him and chokeholds are verboten. He didn't say it wasn't what it seemed or that yes, they're technically not allowed BUT... which doesn't mean in some other case he wouldn't, but it's not just about protecting cops.

nighttimer said:

"Just that the chokehold didn't do much, if any damage..."

Seriously?

You really want to try and suggest the illegal chokehold and cops dogpiling on Garner with one putting his knee on his head "didn't contribute" to his death?

Maybe Garner's general poor health and morbid obesity had him on a glide path to an early demise, but the reckless actions of the NYPD certainly hastened it.

Click to expand...

I didn't say that it didn't contribute,

That's not to say that the arrest didn't contribute to his death,

Click to expand...

just that according to the medical examiner, the chokehold didn't cause damage to his throat or neck.

I don't doubt that the dogpile contributed to his death, given Garner's apparent health issues. However, chokehold aside, the video showed what appeared to be a relatively tame takedown of a physically large, resistant person. They didn't beat the shit out of him. They didn't pound on him while he was obviously unconscious. They took him down and cuffed him.

I added updated information that wasn't already posted in the thread. I was trying to be clear that I wasn't saying that the cops weren't, at least partly, responsible (given Garner's health issues).

Emilander said:

just that according to the medical examiner, the chokehold didn't kill him.

Click to expand...

That's an incredibly inaccurate statement.

No one, including the medical examiner, has made that determination yet, so to start saying "He had a heart attack, it wasn't the choke hold!" is a bit premature.

Oh, and from the bottom of your own linked information:

"At this time, no determination has been made by the Medical Examiner's office as to the cause and manner of death of Eric Garner," ME spokeswoman Julie Bolcer said. "The cause and manner of death are pending further studies, and no findings will be released until the investigation is complete. Any other information or suggestion to the contrary is simply not true."

Click to expand...

Prozyan said:

That's an incredibly inaccurate statement.

No one, including the medical examiner, has made that determination yet, so to start saying "He had a heart attack, it wasn't the choke hold!" is a bit premature.

Oh, and from the bottom of your own linked information:

Click to expand...

My mistake. I should have said that the chokehold didn't damage his throat or neck.

I linked to that article mainly for the video, specifically the last 20 seconds or so where they mention that the New York Post is reporting that the ME had said that the chokehold hadn't done damage. I assume they're quoting this story

A choke hold (as I recall) doesn't have to do damage to the neck or throat to be so dangerous as it seems to have been in this case.

When applied in a certain fashion, it's not even cutting off air. It's squeezing the carotid shut, cutting the flow of blood to the brain. Cutting off the air supply can take a while. Cut off the flow of blood to the brain, and the victim drops in seconds.

And an asthmatic, under a pile like this guy experienced? Is going to have a TOUGH time recovering from that condition, I imagine.

The chokehold, if it's determined to have been done, was major. Then ignoring the man's distress was (to me) the real killer. When a suspect goes that quiet that quickly, something is wrong. I don't want officers to surrender safety, but that should have thrown up red flags as soon as the guy went quiet.

robjvargas said:

A choke hold (as I recall) doesn't have to do damage to the neck or throat to be so dangerous as it seems to have been in this case.

When applied in a certain fashion, it's not even cutting off air. It's squeezing the carotid shut, cutting the flow of blood to the brain. Cutting off the air supply can take a while. Cut off the flow of blood to the brain, and the victim drops in seconds.

Click to expand...

To be completely pedantic about it, a hold that cuts off the blood flow is a strangle. A choke cuts off the oxygen.

But that's not to say that the media will always use the correct word. Especially if they don't have all the facts.

robjvargas said:

And an asthmatic, under a pile like this guy experienced? Is going to have a TOUGH time recovering from that condition, I imagine.

The chokehold, if it's determined to have been done, was major. Then ignoring the man's distress was (to me) the real killer. When a suspect goes that quiet that quickly, something is wrong. I don't want officers to surrender safety, but that should have thrown up red flags as soon as the guy went quiet.

Click to expand...

I agree that a chokehold can be dangerous. All I was trying to say is that Garner died as a result of a heart attack, not because he was choked to death. I pointed that out because there has been so much attention focused on the chokehold itself. Since there are reports that the chokehold did little or no damage to Garner's neck or throat, I think the chokehold didn't play as great a role as is being suggested. I think the dog pile did more to constrict his breathing, as Garner starts saying he can't breathe after the chokehold was released and while the officers were still on top of him.

I do agree that the video shows an alarming callousness on the part of the arresting officers after Garner was secured and it was obvious he was unconscious. That is unacceptable. Personally, I can understand the chokehold, if it was a chokehold (but it does look like a chokehold), and the dogpile in order to handcuff Garner. I'm not saying that a chokehold should have been used, but I can understand perhaps why the cop felt the need to do it. Garner was as big as both the two initial cops put together. But after the takedown, it's the cops responsibility to make sure the person arrested doesn't die on the street if it can be helped.

JimmyB27 said:

To be completely pedantic about it, a hold that cuts off the blood flow is a strangle. A choke cuts off the oxygen.

But that's not to say that the media will always use the correct word. Especially if they don't have all the facts.

Click to expand...

But the hold, wrapping the arm about the front of the neck like that, it's called a choke hold. Regardless of the effect it has on the victim.

So far as I know, anyway.

robjvargas said:

A choke hold (as I recall) doesn't have to do damage to the neck or throat to be so dangerous as it seems to have been in this case.

When applied in a certain fashion, it's not even cutting off air. It's squeezing the carotid shut, cutting the flow of blood to the brain. Cutting off the air supply can take a while. Cut off the flow of blood to the brain, and the victim drops in seconds.

Click to expand...

Cutting off the blood flow through the common carotids is cutting off air. Only to the brain as opposed to compressing the trachea, but the point of a blood choke is to create brain hypoxia, i.e. the brain doesn't get any more oxygen. If that condition continues the brain will suffer permanent damage and eventually die, within minutes.

I learned some strangleholds when I was doing judo. A proper rear naked chokehold should only be maintained for a couple of seconds, until the victim loses consciousness, and be released right after, and the victim ought to recover very quickly. If you know what you're doing, it's a fairly safe technique. If you don't (like that officer, apparently), it's extremely dangerous.

robjvargas said:

But the hold, wrapping the arm about the front of the neck like that, it's called a choke hold. Regardless of the effect it has on the victim.

So far as I know, anyway.

Click to expand...

Maybe by the lay person, but I was taught the two as separate techniques, back when I was training in ju jitsu.

robjvargas said:

But the hold, wrapping the arm about the front of the neck like that, it's called a choke hold. Regardless of the effect it has on the victim.

So far as I know, anyway.

Click to expand...

There are air chokes and blood chokes. In judo we'd call blood chokes strangleholds and air chokes chokeholds, but that's semantics; other martial arts call them all chokes. I can't really tell which the officer is trying to do in the video, but it looks like an attempt at a blood choke to me.

Emilander said:

I agree that a chokehold can be dangerous. All I was trying to say is that Garner died as a result of a heart attack, not because he was choked to death.

Click to expand...

Your source says the police claim he appeared to have had a heart attack. (Based on their long years of medical experience, no doubt.) The actual cause of death hasn't been determined. People can be choked without significant damage to their trachea.

JimmyB27 said:

Maybe by the lay person, but I was taught the two as separate techniques, back when I was training in ju jitsu.

Click to expand...

I think that's a semantic argument without relevance here.

CNN's headline: New York man dies after chokehold by police

Subtitle from NY Daily News: Garner, the Staten Island man who died after an officer put him in a chokehold, should have...

CBS 2 local news in NY, news story text: ...a man died in police custody on Staten Island after an officer apparently put him in a choke hold.

Maybe you're correct in a martial arts context. In broad, however, the exact name of the hold is unimportant to the story. The move the officer made is broadly known as a chokehold, and readers understand that meaning.

asroc said:

Your source says the police claim he appeared to have had a heart attack. (Based on their long years of medical experience, no doubt.) The actual cause of death hasn't been determined.

Click to expand...

The first report I linked to (ABC) cites the NYPD as the source of the "chokehold did no damage" claim. However in a later post, I linked to a story from the New York Post that ABC appeared to be quoting in their report:

New York Post said:

The forbidden chokehold used by a cop to take down a Staten Island man in a deadly encounter Thursday did not damage his windpipe or neck bones, sources said.

Click to expand...

And later:

But a source close to the Medical Examiner’s investigation said coroners are also investigating whether the chokehold still contributed to Garner’s death by aggravating his pre-existing conditions of obesity, asthma and possible heart disease. He died of cardiac arrest in the ambulance on the way to the hospital.

Click to expand...

I underestimated the effect chokehold may have had due to incorrectly assuming that the M.E.'s office was the source in the story.

A man selling loosies on the street died because he didn't comply fast enough? He was gesturing with his hands?

WTF is right.

Whether his overall physical health contributed to his death is immaterial. What it comes down to is that the police officers' actions brought about his death.

If a man has an eggshell skull and someone thumps him on the head, cracking it open, and the man dies, the person who thumped him on the head is still guilty. He shouldn't have performed the action that brought about the man with the eggshell skull's death.

rugcat said:

This was a big guy. I think the officers were afraid of him. That's no excuse; this is a travesty of police work, imo.

Click to expand...

If the officers were afraid of him, then they are very poorly trained. Unless I missed it, it did not appear that he made any aggressive moves towards any of the officers. What happened after that is nothing short of sickening.

Emilander said:

The first report I linked to (ABC) cites the NYPD as the source of the "chokehold did no damage" claim. However in a later post, I linked to a story from the New York Post that ABC appeared to be quoting in their report:



And later:


I underestimated the effect chokehold may have had due to incorrectly assuming that the M.E.'s office was the source in the story.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what the source is, just because a stranglehold doesn't leave any gross physical damage doesn't mean it wasn't dangerous. Fractures of the larynx or hyoid are typical, but not required.

And beyond this line from ABC

Police said he appeared to suffer a heart attack.

Click to expand...

there is no evidence he had a heart attack. (Cardiac arrest is not the same.)

Emilander said:

I don't doubt that the dogpile contributed to his death, given Garner's apparent health issues. However, chokehold aside, the video showed what appeared to be a relatively tame takedown of a physically large, resistant person. They didn't beat the shit out of him. They didn't pound on him while he was obviously unconscious. They took him down and cuffed him.

Click to expand...

They also killed him. You can't put the chokehold aside, Emilander, as much as you might want to try to.

"Relatively tame?" Three or four cops are jumping on one man and that's "relatively tame?"

Applying an illegal chokehold while that "physically large, resistant person" whimpers, "I can't breathe...I can't breathe" is "relatively tame?"

Despite being a "physically large" and "resistant person," I'm unaware of any of the cops suffering any injury of any sort inflicted upon their persons by the "physically large resistant person."

You are right the NYPD didn't beat the shit out of Garner and didn't pound on him while he was obviously unconscious. How lucky for Garner! If he wasn't so dead that is.

Emilander said:

I agree that a chokehold can be dangerous. All I was trying to say is that Garner died as a result of a heart attack, not because he was choked to death. I pointed that out because there has been so much attention focused on the chokehold itself. Since there are reports that the chokehold did little or no damage to Garner's neck or throat, I think the chokehold didn't play as great a role as is being suggested. I think the dog pile did more to constrict his breathing, as Garner starts saying he can't breathe after the chokehold was released and while the officers were still on top of him.

Click to expand...

I think you should save the amateur autopsies for the next time you're watching C.S.I. or Bones and leave the analysis to the experts. The lengths you are going to absolve the cops from responsibility for Garner's death are feebly transparent.

I do agree that the video shows an alarming callousness on the part of the arresting officers after Garner was secured and it was obvious he was unconscious. That is unacceptable. Personally, I can understand the chokehold, if it was a chokehold (but it does look like a chokehold), and the dogpile in order to handcuff Garner. I'm not saying that a chokehold should have been used, but I can understand perhaps why the cop felt the need to do it. Garner was as big as both the two initial cops put together. But after the takedown, it's the cops responsibility to make sure the person arrested doesn't die on the street if it can be helped.[/QUOTE]

That isn't the kind of cop Daniel Pantaleo was.

Over the weekend, the NYPD announced that Daniel Pantaleo, the officer who put Eric Garner in what appears to have been an illegal chokehold right before he died, had been taken off the streets while the incident is investigated. It turns out that Garner's death, which has prompted a great deal of public anger at the police in general and Pantaleo in particular, is not the first time someone has accused the eight-year veteran of misconduct.

The Staten Island Advance reports that Pantaleo has been sued twice for violating the civil rights of people he's arrested. In the first case, two men — Darren Collins and Tommy Rice — said that Pantaleo and another officer strip-searched them on a Staten Island street, in the middle of the day, after pulling them over. According to the 2012 lawsuit, Pantaleo and his colleague handcuffed Collins and Rice and then "pulled down the plaintiffs' pants and underwear, and touched and searched their genital areas, or stood by while this was done in their presence."

Later, at the 120th Precinct station, Pantaleo and a third cop strip-searched the men again. Collins and Rice's lawyer, Jason Leventhal, told the Advance that Pantaleo had lied about seeing crack and heroin in their vehicle, which is how he was able to arrest them. Leventhal's clients (one of whom was carrying crack, though not, as Pantaleo claimed, in plain view) ended up with criminal charges that were eventually dismissed. Meanwhile, New York City shelled out $30,000 to settle the lawsuit.

The details of the second lawsuit, which is still pending, are a bit unclear. The Advance reports that a man named Rylawn Walker sued Pantaleo this past winter for arresting him even though he was "committing no crime at that time and was not acting in a suspicious manner." Walker, who faced marijuana charges that were later thrown out, also claims that Pantaleo "misrepresented facts in the police reports and other documents that the plaintiff had committed offenses when in fact this was not true."

Pantaleo's alleged tendency to be dishonest will probably be less relevant in the Garner case, since there is video of the arrest. Still, the odds of Pantaleo losing his job — or even getting suspended from it — appear slim, at least based on the NYPD's history of handling chokehold complaints. The New York Times notes that, from 2009 to 2013, the Citizen Complaint Review Board (an independent agency tasked with investigating the behavior of NYPD officers) has received 1,022 chokehold claims. Of those, only nine resulted in administrative trials. Former NYPD chief Ray Kelly declined to discipline the cops involved in eight out of those nine cases. The punishment of the last officer was the loss of some vacation days.

Click to expand...

How other cops are reacting online to Eric Garner's death:

eltubs3314:

Anytime a person says "I'm tired of it. It stops today." That will almost always end with the use of force. He made that decision, not the Police. The Police must effect the arrest and rise above any resistance. That resistance or lack of resistance is determined by the suspect. This was a huge man and it appears to me they used minimal force. Sometimes people with pre-existing conditions die when they exert themselves. There are Police Officers that have heart attacks and die every year during physical altercations with subjects. You will not see main stream media featuring those in their headlines. This is nothing more than petty blame shifting and fuel for extremist with an agenda.
​

joe hoffman:

"This makes all cops look bad because, as far as the public is concerned, this man was murdered because he sold some cigarettes."
In the first place, if it turns out that the force used by the officers was legal and within departmental policy, it doesn't make ANY other cop look bad. If the public isn't willing to accept the fact that the officers did nothing wrong, they can go to hell. I could care less how the public perceives us when we're in the right and if YOU were any kind of law enforcement professional, you would understand that officer safety is FAR more important than public perception.
​

SAPDMAS:

Again if Mr walking heart attack had simply put his hamburger shovels behind his back, he wouldn't have had a heartbattackmfor over exerting himself. The NYPD did absolutely nothing wron. Tomthe guys slamming these NYPD officekrs, I and many here wouldn't want any of you guys around us on a critical,incident. Hopefully you guys are desk jockeys.
​

esu5:

I think they were very generous, maybe too generous in the amount of time they allowed this guy to vent. I wonder if that was because of his size? Or that they were awaiting backup, again due to his size. I also didn't see any kicks, baton strikes, punches, nothing that could be construed as excessive.


tpaw7:

You may say "f&ck the police" but you may not f&ck with the police. It's sad that he died, but that blame goes to he and he alone. The police generally don't show up ten deep at your door just to say hey. This pervasive mentality that these assholes seem to have about not listening to the lawful orders of the police is what leads to these deaths and injuries. All he had to do was comply and he would not be dead. Tough shit and too damn bad.


kopinyc:

A more accurate headline would be "Non Compliant Fat Bastard Gets Just Due In Resisting Law Enforcement Officers"
​

DisGraziato:

I guess it's the best thing for his tribe. He probably never worked a legit job. They city will pay off the family and they will be in Nigggaaa heaven for the rest of their lives!!
​

MY TWO SENSE:

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?
​

offlinepbadad:

Yes, they'll pay off the "family"...
It's a lot cheaper than a riot...
And therein lies the problem...
The cities of America are held hostage by the strong-arm tactics of the savages
​

Click to expand...

To serve. And to protect.

Who exactly?

nighttimer said:

How other cops are reacting online to Eric Garner's death:

To serve. And to protect.

Who exactly?

Click to expand...

Apparently to serve and protect the racists pieces of shit, and only those people. Ugh. I wanted to smack everyone in that example you gave, and people say we're "post-racial". Yea, and I'm 100% Swedish instead of being black. I don't think so.

OK, this drives me nuts on a site for writers. Words mean things, and we of all people should be using the correct words.

Chokeholds are not "illegal." In this case, they are prohibited by NYPD regulation, which does not have the power of law. Ergo, they are not illegal. Yes, the officers can be punished by NYPD, and that punishment might affect charges that might be brought by the City of New York. But the chokehold itself was not illegal.

I'd also like to share this blog post from an ex-cop, a writer, and a self-defense instructor. http://www.leelofland.com/wordpress/eric-garner-death-by-chokehold-maybe-not/

cmhbob said:

OK, this drives me nuts on a site for writers. Words mean things, and we of all people should be using the correct words.

Chokeholds are not "illegal." In this case, they are prohibited by NYPD regulation, which does not have the power of law. Ergo, they are not illegal. Yes, the officers can be punished by NYPD, and that punishment might affect charges that might be brought by the City of New York. But the chokehold itself was not illegal.

Click to expand...

Here's some "correct words" for you:

forbade: 2.to prohibit (something); make a rule or law against: to forbid the use of lipstick; to forbid smoking.

prohibited: 1.to forbid (an action, activity, etc.) by authority or law.

The rule couldn’t be clearer.

“Members of the NYPD will NOT use chokeholds,” the NYPD patrol guide clearly states. “A chokehold shall include, but is not limited to, any pressure to the throat or windpipe which may prevent or hinder breathing to reduce intakes of air.”

After several people were asphyxiated while in police custody, the NYPD forbade the use of chokeholds in 1983, stating it could only be used when an officer’s life was in danger.
Former Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly banned the use of chokeholds all together in 1993.

About a year later, on Dec. 22, 1994, Bronx resident Anthony Baez died after Police Officer Francis Livoti put him in a chokehold after a football he was throwing around with friends hit the cop’s car.

Livoti was acquitted of negligent homicide, sparking protests across the city. He was fired in 2007. A year later he was convicted in federal court of violating Baez's civil rights and served seven years.

On Friday, Police Commissioner Bratton said the NYPD would issue a reminder that chokeholds are prohibited and would retrain officers if necessary.

Click to expand...

First, it was the chokehold on Garner didn't do much damage to him. Now it's chokeholds aren't illegal (they are) and have been for over 20 years and no big deal because some ex-cop with a blog says its not.

Next, it will probably be it wasn't the cops and the illegal chokehold that killed Garner but he cleverly suffocated himself and caused his own heart to stop.

Don't believe any of that hype.

nighttimer said:

To serve. And to protect.

Click to expand...

In his excellent, funny and biting novel Night Watch, which is all about police, Terry Pratchett has the Watch headquarters building bearing a "Latin" inscription carved above the door. His protag, a jaded but honest cop named Sam Vimes, is asked by a new recruit what it means. The inscription reads:

FABRICATI DIEM PVNC

Vimes pauses and says, "To protect and serve."

caw


(It's helpful for translation purposes to remember that the Romans had no letters U or K in their alphabet.)

nighttimer said:

"Relatively tame?" Three or four cops are jumping on one man and that's "relatively tame?"

Click to expand...

Yes. Three or four cops jumping on a 6'3" 350lb man is relatively tame. I'm sure you can recall numerous incidents where the police have used far more force than was necessary to effect an arrest. If Garner hadn't died, no one would have heard anything about this.

Applying an illegal chokehold while that "physically large, resistant person" whimpers, "I can't breathe...I can't breathe" is "relatively tame?"

Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you're deliberately exaggerating or not. In the video of the arrest, Garner doesn't say he can't breathe until after the chokehold is released but while the cops are still on top of him.

Despite being a "physically large" and "resistant person," I'm unaware of any of the cops suffering any injury of any sort inflicted upon their persons by the "physically large resistant person."

Click to expand...

That's because there are different levels of resistance. Active resistance is fighting back. Passive resistance is physically not complying with commands.

You are right the NYPD didn't beat the shit out of Garner and didn't pound on him while he was obviously unconscious. How lucky for Garner! If he wasn't so dead that is.

Click to expand...

And if he hadn't died, no one would give a shit or even have noticed that this incident had occurred.

They also killed him. You can't put the chokehold aside, Emilander, as much as you might want to try to.

I think you should save the amateur autopsies for the next time you're watching C.S.I. or Bones and leave the analysis to the experts. The lengths you are going to absolve the cops from responsibility for Garner's death are feebly transparent.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you should heed your own advice. You're certain that the cops killed him and yet I should leave the analysis to the experts. Right.

I'm not trying to absolve the cops of anything. Disagreements about the use of force in this case aside, perhaps you missed the part when I said that the cops doing nothing while Garner was obviously unconscious after being handcuffed was fucking unacceptable. Your own certainty as to what happened is also feebly transparent.