Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: Racist Cops—or Liberal Slander?
Source:
VDare
URL Source: http://www.vdare.com/articles/racist-cops-or-liberal-slander
Published: Dec 4, 2014
Author: Pat Buchanan
Post Date: 2014-12-05 11:12:52 by nativist nationalist
Keywords: None
Views: 17959
Comments: 78
We have found the new normal in America. If you are truly outraged by some action of police, prosecutors, grand juries, or courts, you can shut down the heart of a great city. Thursday night, thousands of “protesters” disrupted the annual Christmas tree lighting at Rockefeller Center, conducted a “lie-in” in Grand Central, blocked Times Square, and shut down the West Side Highway that scores of thousands of New Yorkers use to get home. That the rights of hundreds of thousands of visitors and New Yorkers were trampled upon by these self-righteous protesters did not prevent their being gushed over by TV commentators. Watching cable, I saw one anguished man cry out from a blocked car that he was trying to get his sick dog to the vet. But his rights were inferior to the rights of protesters to block traffic, chant slogans and vent their moral outrage to TV cameras. From New York to Washington to Oakland, crowds acted in solidarity to block main arteries at rush hour. Has President Obama condemned this? Has Eric Holder? Remarkable. Underlings of Gov. Chris Christie have been under investigation for a year for closing off lanes to the George Washington Bridge. Contrast liberal indignation at Christie, with liberal indulgence of the lawbreaking Thursday night, and you will see what people mean when they talk of a moral double-standard. What were these protests about? A grand jury on Staten Island voted not to indict NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo in the death of Eric Garner last July. As the video that has gone global shows, Pantaleo sought to arrest Garner, a 6’5", 350-pound man arrested many times before. What was Garner doing? Selling cigarettes one by one on a main street, a public nuisance for the stores and shops in front of which he plied his trade, but not a felony, and surely not a capital offense. A misdemeanor at most. As Garner backed away and brushed aside attempts to handcuff him, Pantaleo grabbed him from behind by the neck to pull him down, as other cops swarmed in. Repeatedly, Garner cried, “I can’t breathe!” On the ground he again cried, “I can’t breathe!” And he died there on the sidewalk. Undeniably, terrible and tragic. Undeniably, not a natural death. And, undeniably, the way Garner was brought down and sat upon, an arm around his neck, contributed to, if it did not cause, his death. Yet Garner did not die by strangulation. According to the city medical examiner, he died from the “compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police.” The cops were holding him down by sitting on him. As Rep. Peter King said Thursday, “If [Garner] had not had asthma and a heart condition and was so obese, he would not have died.” The Washington Post reports that the medical examiner seemed to confirm this, describing “Garner’s asthma and hypertensive cardiovascular disease as contributing factors.” Why would a Staten Island grand jury not indict Pantaleo for murder or manslaughter in the death of Eric Garner? In a word, intent. Did Pantaleo intend to kill Eric Garner when he arrived on the scene? Did Pantaleo arrive intent on injuring Eric Garner? No and no. Pantaleo was there to arrest Garner, and if he resisted, to subdue him and then arrest him. That was his job. Did he use a chokehold, which the NYPD bans, or a takedown method taught at the police academy, as his lawyer contends? That is for the NYPD to decide. The grand jury, viewing the video, decided that the way Pantaleo brought down Garner was not done with any criminal intent to kill or injure him, but to arrest him. Garner’s death, they decided, was accidental, caused by Pantaleo and the other NYPD cops who did not intend his injury or death, with Garner’s asthma and heart disease as contributing factors. Now that grand jury decision may be wrong, but does it justify wild allegations of “racist cops” getting away with “murder”? This reflexive rush to judgment happens again and again. We were told Trayvon Martin was shot to death by a white vigilante for “walking while black,” and learned that Trayvon, when shot, had been beating a neighborhood watch guy nearly unconscious, “martial arts style,” while sitting on top of him. We were told that Ferguson cop Darren Wilson gunned down an unarmed black teenager for walking in the street, and learned that Michael Brown just robbed a convenience store, attacked Wilson in his patrol car, and was shot trying to wrestle away the officer’s gun. Liberals are imprisoned by a great myth—that America is a land where black boys and men are stalked by racist white cops, and alert and brave liberals must prevent even more police atrocities. They live in a world of the mind. The reality: As of 2007, black-on-white violent crime was nearly 40 times as common as the reverse. But liberals can’t give up their myth, for it sustains their pretensions to moral superiority. It defines who they are.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-19) not displayed.
.
.
.
#20. To: CZ82 (#7)
Naaah -- the SPLC/ACLU would only do what they also do in cases counter to their subversive agenda: HIDE. Truth is obvious: The SPLC/ACLU are both themselves HATE GROUPS. They hate based on race (white), creed (Christians), sexual orientation (heterosexual), and a litany of other bigotry. No one has ever gone after these Commie fronts for their hypocrisy, subversion of the USCON and justice, treason and spiteful treachery. Both orgs are gallows-worthy. And so are their treasonous supporters.
That would indeed be negligent and reckless. But addresses a specific condition... Now compare it ("Manslaughter") to a cop who is trying to control a non-compliant "gentle giant." There's all kinds of latitude in the latter case. But not in the former.
Whoops. Inconvenient FACTS.
Counselor, you're making quite a few assumptions here, aren't you? Firstly, Taxpayers pay for LAW ENFORCEMENT as well. That means keeping the peace, addressing nuisances, sweeping riff-raff off the street, AND maintaining public safety. Btw -- Hawking cigarettes (or lemonade) without a license AFTER SEVERAL COURTESY WARNINGS is still illegal -- like it or not. Secondly, Mr. Fats distress *was* addressed. Unfortunately, the street is NOT an ER. Fact is, you have NO idea what medical care was being administered to Mr. Fats at the scene, or if it appeared to be a "life-saving" situation. Nor whether the cops had called, who they called, and to what sense of "urgency" they conveyed. I can see you're setting up your "negligence" case. Great being a Monday Morning QB, ain't it? he petechial hemorrhages are difficult to dismiss. AND diagnosis on a street in the middle of mayhem (that Mr. Fats himself caused.) You'd probably also whine on about the "lack of care" a B-Slapped terrorist hadn't received as well.
I concede your points. I badly phrased my point. This would be an especially poor defense. Did the officer not see that the alleged perp was fat? Did he act in reckless disregard of of the alleged perp's fatness? Since they were not blind, the two original LEOs DID note the perp's "alleged" gargantuan girth and height...AND indifference to their "alleged" orders to stop breaking laws and desist in being a neighborhood nuisance. Any physical confrontation would have obviously been a challenge. That's why another half-dozen LEO were called as back up. The "recklessness" is ALL Fat-Boy's, who recklessly dismissed and challenged TWO cops, then a bunch of cops....That was UNTIL he finally decided six cops was so sufficient that he should comply. By that time Fat Boy's reckless decision cost him his life. Call it 'Death By Darwinism.' I say alleged as there seems to be no arrest warrant, no statements recorded to sustain a criminal complaint before the arrest, and I have seen no statement of any officer stating that any crime was seen occurring. I guess we'll have to await another Grand Jury slap down for statements and proof that Mr. Arrested 31 times was just clearly being hassled, and presumptively he was compliant before his 32nd and final arrest.
*sob, sniffle* Did the prosecutors ask the Grand Jury to consider the perp's 31 priors arrests? His dismissing repeated LE presence to cease and desist of his illegal commerce, chronic nuisance, and disturbing the peace? His physical intimidation of the LEOs in blowing them off? § 121.11 Criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation. A person is guilty of criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation when, with intent to impede the normal breathing or circulation of the blood of another person, he or she... Nice try. Resist simple requests for compliance, and the responsibility of "criminal guilt"is on...THE CRIMINAL. Btw -- Are you an ACLU/SPLC attorney??
Such is the rule of law. If the pro-Anarchists don't like the results of the law, they conspire to subvert it OR hog-tie LE.
Lol, you have GOT to be kidding. Your sense of propriety and common sense is sooo...special. Btw -- I am not offered the option of nullifying the insanity of Anarchists, Commies, and Fascists who are subverting our laws, and ignoring the USCON either. Where's MY recourse?? Why don't you expend your great energy seeking "justice" by investigating why it is that a nationwide epidemic of Blacks has led to assaulting, murdering, and otherwise victimizing WHITEY with impunity??
The Medical Examiner ruled it a homicide. The heart attack resulted from the illegal and prohibited choke hold and the subsequent chest compression while Garner was on the ground. Inconvenient facts.
You KNOW this based on a newspaper leak? Really? Nice catch. The GJ was sooo "secret" that details hemorrhaged...er...I mean "leaked" to external newspaper sources. Notice ONLY negative details are leaked. NOT Mr. Fat's arrest record, his "F-U's" to the cops, or that Fat-Boy said "couldn't breathe" nearly a dozen times. A pathological lying criminal who cries wolf often doesn't get the benefit of doubt in any case.
ANY death is a homicide. Big deal. The heart attack resulted from the illegal and prohibited choke hold and the subsequent chest compression while Garner was on the ground. Inconvenient facts. So were the "inconvenient facts" that Fat Boy's arteries were taxed, as was his fatty heart. I also reckon his lungs were adversely affectedly by the weed he smoked. The perp was a walking TIME BOMB. Another inconvenient fact: If you're not in the best of health -- and you challenge LE request to get your hands behind your back, GET THEM BEHIND YOUR BACK! Another inconvenient fact: If you DON'T, you find yourself physically CLAMPED DOWN and slammed to the ground. EVERYBODY knows this. Even IDIOTS. Chubby committed Stupid-cide.
The video is clear. It appears you have no idea what it shows and does not show. AND diagnosis on a street in the middle of mayhem The finding of petechial hemorrhages was made by the Medical Examiner at the morgue. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/visibleproofs/education/medical/ Pathologists—medical doctors who specialize in anatomical or functional abnormalities of a human body—with a special forensic training work as medical examiners and conduct medico-legal autopsies. Meet Drs. Marcela Fierro and David Fowler, who speak about their career and experiences as the chief medical examiners of Virginia and Maryland, respectively. [excerpt] [Dr. Fierro]: Petechial hemorrhages are small pinpoint hemorrhages generally seen and looked for in the lining of the eyes in the conjunctiva, either that of the lids which is called palpebral conjunctiva or the bulbar, that covering the bulb of the eye and they generally are sign of terminal asphyxia. Now what's interesting of course is what causes people to have petechae in the first place and it's generally because there's increased intravascular pressure that causes the small end vessels of the capillaries to rupture. When do you have that? You have that when you breathe against resistance or try and breathe against resistance. So what would cause that? Well, many varieties of asphyxia such as smothering, strangulation, anything that compresses on the neck, while the person is conscious and trying to breathe against it. So generally petechae are something that you need to account for—you have to explain those. Eric Garner did not compress his own neck or strangle himself.
A leak of information has neither more nor less validity than an official proclamation from the government. This is expecially true when the government is defending its own apparent or blatant misconduct. The Pentagon Papers were a leak. Investigative reporting relies on leaks. News sources that do not rely on leaks are invalid as providers of news. No, this did not originate with a leak to a newspaper. It was released by the chief investigative reporter for NBC 4 at 30 Rock in NY. It was picked up and reported by all, or virtually all major print and TV news sources, liberal and conservative. It is attributed by a reliable source to someone with knowledge of the charging documents. The veracity of the report has been uncontested by any news source, or the government. The Pentagon Papers were a leak. Watergate was a series of leaks. Recently, CIA and other government misconduct resulted from the Manning/Snowden leaks. Absent leaks, news would be little more than reading or listening to what Josh Earnest et al say on the record. You may choose to believe what you want. For example, you may choose to believe Eric Garner caused the petechial hemorrhages found in his autopsy. Or you may choose to believe that ambulance or hospital staff did it.
Joining me now, though, first is forensic pathologist Dr. Michael Baden. He was hired by the Garner family to review the medical examiner's final autopsy. [...] BADEN: But I think the autopsy itself -- the medical examiner did a great job on this. There's 27 pages in the report. And the female (ph), she found that there were 10 hemorrhages on the inside of the neck, in the muscles of the neck, petechial hemorrhages in the eye, hemorrhage in the tongue. And those are all evidence of neck compression. You're right, chokehold has many different meanings in all. What we're concerned at autopsy is was there pressure on the neck. This was sourced from a medical professional who reviewed the actual autopsy report. His factual assertions about what was in the report have not been contested. There were hemorrhages inside the neck and petechial hemorrhages in the eye.
I've noticed a lot of that, it almost seems like the KKK has designed the diet for a lot of blacks.
The video may be clear. True, neither one of us knows exactly what transpired. The video also misses the prelude, and conversations where Garner obviously refused to comply to simple LE requests. The part where Garner forewarns the LE that he has health conditions that *might* cause him to die -- I'm sure THAT'S on tape as well....OH WAIT. Eric Garner did not compress his own neck or strangle himself. REALLY?? Now you're going to go with, "Garner was strangled!"?? True, his fat neck *was* compressed in take-down. That's primarily because he didn't understand the English language command, "HANDS BEHIND YOUR BACK." OR, maybe he had an undiagnosed hearing problem.
The semantics of "leak" are irrelevant. I'd like to know how it was that a subversive network that has been an obvious political organ of propaganda for Bammy and the Dems was given this smidgeon of supposed "secret" GJ info.... Could it be to make the Grand Jury, Prosecutor, ANF Law Enforcement give the impression this case was Fixed?? Oooooh Nooooo...MSNBC/NBC and the law-breaking leaker of privied GJ info wouldn't possibly do that...would they?? You may choose to believe what you want. For example, you may choose to believe Eric Garner caused the petechial hemorrhages found in his autopsy. Or you may choose to believe that ambulance or hospital staff did it. Come on, Nolu. What's your dog in this fight? Garner is a victim of his own stupidity, negligence, and law breaking. And here you are defending ALL of it, while blaming LE because the behemoth of an intimidating, non-compliant criminal IGNORED commands. And risked his own life. The responsibility is his ALONE.
Emphasis, screaming CAPS in original. Boldface added. Nonsense. Do you always just make crap up? http://science.howstuffworks.com/autopsy2.htm The finding of the Medical Examiner ruled out natural causes, accident, suicide, and undetermined. A homicide is defined as a person being killed by another person. The Medical Examiner ruled that Eric Garner was killed by another person or persons. Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed. Class dismissed.
Combating ignorance and stupidity.
I've noticed a lot of that, it almost seems like the KKK has designed the diet for a lot of blacks. Yup. It's the KKK, Whitey, the Tea Party, Republicans, Conservatives, NASCAR rednecks, and Christians' fault that non-compliant criminal blacks pack on the LBS, form "petechial hemorrhages" then get "strangled."
[Liberator #23] Fact is, you have NO idea what medical care was being administered to Mr. Fats at the scene, or if it appeared to be a "life-saving" situation. [nolu chan #31] The video is clear. It appears you have no idea what it shows and does not show. [Liberator #35] The video may be clear. True, neither one of us knows exactly what transpired. The video also misses the prelude, and conversations where Garner obviously refused to comply to simple LE requests. The part where Garner forewarns the LE that he has health conditions that *might* cause him to die -- I'm sure THAT'S on tape as well....OH WAIT. You seriously claim that the video is unclear what medical care was administered to Garner at the scene because you don't know what happened before the video???
Combating ignorance and stupidity. I see. Your dog is a pitbull. Trained by Michael Vick. Backing Trayvon, Brown, and the Somali pirates doesn't exactly give you the moral OR legal high ground. Your energies and crusade are better served combating insanity and nonsense.
It is called investigative reporting. Investigative reporters seek out and talk to sources of information. That is what they are paid to do. And Rupert Murdoch's New York Post carried the story, certain evidence of a Grand Conspiracy. The prime suspects are the Jesuits, the Free Masons, the Pope, the Rosicrucians, and illegal alien subversives. From NY Post, newly found to be part of a subversive network and a political organ of propaganda for Bammy and the Dems. http://nypost.com/2014/12/06/da-didnt-ask-garner-grand-jury-to-weigh-lesser-charges/ By Rich Calder and Selim Algar December 6, 2014 | 6:23am Staten Island District Attorney Daniel Donovan did not include a lesser charge of reckless endangerment when he presented a grand jury with the case against cop Daniel Pantaleo, it was revealed Friday. From NewsMax, newly found to be part of a subversive network and a political organ of propaganda for Bammy and the Dems. http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/police-chokehold-killing-grand/2014/12/05/id/611453/ Friday, 05 Dec 2014 09:59 PM By Cathy Burke NewsMax The prosecutor in the chokehold death case of Eric Garner didn't ask a grand jury to consider a lesser charge of reckless endangerment against the white police officer seen in a cellphone video taking down the black man last July 17, an NBC affiliate reports. NBC 4 New York reports Staten Island District Attorney Daniel Donovan only asked the panel to look at manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide charges against police officer Daniel Pantaleo. The grand jury on Wednesday decided not to indict the officer, setting off protests in New York and cities across the country. In Friday night protests in New York, marchers conducted massive "die-ins" at Macy's in Herald Square and at Grand Central Station. It's not clear why Donovan left the lesser charge off the table, and he has said strict confidentiality laws surrounding grand jury proceedings prevent him from discussing the details of the case, the NBC affiliate reports.
You're conflating two separate observations (still gonna stay with your "strangled" claim??) The video is clear on Garner intimidating and threatening LE. He demanded that the scrawny LE not come near him and resisted. The video is also clear had Garner complied with his 32nd Arrest, six more over-officious cops wouldn't have had to overwhelm him. He brought it upon himself. Did you miss THAT part?? Cop are cops -- NOT ENTs. People pass out from many thing but don't die. Yes, Garner's medical care could have been quicker. But apparently YOU feel that all cops have a crystal ball and know medical conditions of their perps. Continue to flout the law and the Man is NOT going to give you the benefit of doubt -- as in Garner's case. Comply or be prepared to get roughed up, Counselor. I don't make the rules and laws. But if they were European Law, perhaps you'd take them and human nature more seriously.
I'm not criticizing any investigative reporting. But isn't it funny how NBC/MSNBC got the leaked scoop?? In case you've been on another planet, NBC/MSNBC is infamous for its Leftist talking heads and pro-0bumski sycophancy. In case you hadn't also noticed, some so-called "investigative reporters" are paid to incite flames...OR spike stories critical of the Leftist agenda OR certain people. Why don't these important "investigative reporters" report on the REAL epidemic of Black on White violent crime? The whites who've been bludgeoned to death? Gang Raped? Beat up in the nationwide "Knowck Out" Game? Where's your "investigative reporting" THERE, Mr. Counselor and utmost concern for "justice"?? Oh wait -- ELSEWHERE. Don't WHITE live count??
Your ignorance knows no bounds. I did not back Somali pirates. I backed the rule of law. Where the law provides for a right to due process, the accused person enjoys the right to due process. The nature of the alleged crime is irrelevant. The government creates the right to due process, defines the due process, and is bound by law to provide the due process. The U.S. Const., Amendment 5 The question in the homicides involving Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown has nothing to do with "backing" either one. The question is whether the actions of the killer were justified or excusable. Whether the dead body belongs to a saint or a sinner makes no legal difference.
Ok, let me spot you this one. +1 Nolu. I'll even ignore the cheating of the leaked story to the source at the corrupt, treasonous NBC "news." WHAT OF ALL THE BLACK ON WHITE VIOLENT CRIME THAT HAS GONE UNREPORTED AND UN-PROSECUTED BY MAJOR MEDIA AND COURTS?? Thank you for your anticipated attention in this matter.
I backed the rule of law. Yet, you refuse to back the law as it pertains to the Garner vs. LE Grand Jury
And your opinion in either case IS???.....
Thursday night, thousands of “protesters” disrupted the annual Christmas tree lighting at Rockefeller Center, conducted a “lie-in” in Grand Central, blocked Times Square, and shut down the West Side Highway that scores of thousands of New Yorkers use to get home. That the rights of hundreds of thousands of visitors and New Yorkers were trampled upon by these self-righteous protesters did not prevent their being gushed over by TV commentators. Unfortunately, Pat's observations still apply. Radical anarchists, Occupy Wall St hags and hippie-wannabes, thugs, and SEIU plants continue to be given a free reign to run roughshod over the rights of those trying to make a living, to a hospital, or conduct commerce. All these "lie-ins" ought to be protesting 0bumski's treason and destruction of the USCON and conducting a "lie-in" on Pennsylvania Ave. Instead these minions of destruction and mayhem would rather be gushed over by the Leftist media and Nancy Pelosi> They need to be pancaked by several semis, bulldozers, and the Tea Party Express bus.
[Liberator #43] You're conflating two separate observations (still gonna stay with your "strangled" claim??) Of course, I did not claim that Garner was strangled. It is sad that you must make believe that I did. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/visibleproofs/education/medical/ Pathologists—medical doctors who specialize in anatomical or functional abnormalities of a human body—with a special forensic training work as medical examiners and conduct medico-legal autopsies. Meet Drs. Marcela Fierro and David Fowler, who speak about their career and experiences as the chief medical examiners of Virginia and Maryland, respectively. [excerpt] Petechial hemorrhage [Dr. Fierro]: Petechial hemorrhages are small pinpoint hemorrhages generally seen and looked for in the lining of the eyes in the conjunctiva, either that of the lids which is called palpebral conjunctiva or the bulbar, that covering the bulb of the eye and they generally are sign of terminal asphyxia. Now what's interesting of course is what causes people to have petechae in the first place and it's generally because there's increased intravascular pressure that causes the small end vessels of the capillaries to rupture. When do you have that? You have that when you breathe against resistance or try and breathe against resistance. So what would cause that? Well, many varieties of asphyxia such as smothering, strangulation, anything that compresses on the neck, while the person is conscious and trying to breathe against it. So generally petechae are something that you need to account for—you have to explain those. Eric Garner did not compress his own neck or strangle himself. As you choose not to understand the obvious, I will endeavor to clarify it and reduce it to your level of comprehension. Dr. Fierro said that petechial hemorrhages of the eye are generally a sign of asphyxia. Asphyxia results in deficiency of oxygen and excess of carbon dioxide in the blood. Not enough oxygen and too much carbon dioxide bad. Dr. Fierro said, explaining what could cause petechiae in the eye, "many varieties of asphyxia such as smothering, strangulation, anything that compresses on the neck, while the person is conscious and trying to breathe against it." Possible explanations for petechial hemorrhages given by Dr. Fierro are: I observed that "Eric Garner did not compress his own neck or strangle himself." Eric Garner did not smother himself. Watch the homicide on the video and see if Eric Garner either smothered himself, strangled himself, or compressed his own neck. Dr. Fierro said: In the homicide of Eric Garner, no one alleges smothering. In the homicide of Eric Garner, the Medical Examiner did not find strangulation. That eliminates two of the possible explanations for the observed petechial hemorrhages. The Medical Examiner did find that there were compressions of the neck involved with the homicide of Eric Garner, and hemorrrhages were found in the neck of Eric Garner. I observed that Eric Garner did not compress his own neck. The alternative is that some other person or persons did that. In the video of the homicide, I clearly see another man holding Eric Garner in what appears to be a chokehold. You are free to speculate what caused the neck hemorrhages and petechial hemorrhages to the eye of Eric Garner. Perhaps it was Invisible Man.
The homicide notation by the ME was weighed by the grand jury and found to have no merit. My proof? The return of no true bill v Pantaleo. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.
Based on state laws of Florida, once the claim of self-defense was injected by George Zimmerman, the prosecution was required to prove that George Zimmerman did not believe his life was threatened. Zimmerman's statements taken by the police were able to be used in evidence to make his claim of self-defense. He did not testify. Disproving his claim was essentially impossible. In the Brown case, there is similar Missouri state law. Having nothing to do with being an LE, the claim of self-defense operates similar to Florida. http://www.moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/stathtml/55600000512.html 556.051. When the phrase "The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue" is used in the code, it means (1) The issue referred to is not submitted to the trier of fact unless supported by evidence; and (2) If the issue is submitted to the trier of fact any reasonable doubt on the issue requires a finding for the defendant on that issue. (L. 1977 S.B. 60) Effective 1-01-79 *This section was repealed by S.B. 491, 2014, effective 1-01-17. Due to the delayed repeal date, the version of this section in effect until 12-31-16 is printed here. In Brown/Wilson, the statements of Wilson to the grand jury would be the required quantum of evidence to submit the issue of justification by reason of self-defence. Wilson could decline to testify at trial and submit himself to cross-examination. It would be exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to prove that Wilson did not believe his life was in danger. There need not be any finding that Wilson's life was actually in danger. There need be only an absence of proof, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Wilson thought his life was in danger.
Stop being ridiculous. Stop trying to make believe that a grand jury is a judicial proceeding, or that a return of no true bill equates to a judicial opinion. It was a homicide. Garner is dead and another person or persons made him that way. The grand jury cannot find that an autopsy has no merit. Justice Scalia, writing for the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Williams, 504 US 36, 47 (1992) stated: "the grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside...." Williams at 46-48: The grand jury's functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised. "Unlike [a] [c]ourt, whose jurisdiction is predicated upon a specific case or controversy, the grand jury `can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not.' " United States v. R. Enterprises, 498 U. S. ___, ___ (1991) (slip op. 4) (quoting United States v. Morton Salt Co., 338 U.S. 632, 642-643 (1950)). It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even "the precisenature of the offense" it is investigating. Blair v. United States, 250 U.S. 273, 282 (1919). The grand jury requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation, see Hale, supra, at 59-60, 65, nor does the prosecutor require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment. And in its day to day functioning, the grand jury generally operates without the interference of a presiding judge. See Calandra, supra, at 343. It swears in its own witnesses, Fed. Rule Crim. Proc. 6(c), and deliberates in total secrecy, see United States v. Sells Engineering, Inc., 463 U. S., at 424-425. A True Bill is an "endorsement made by a grand jury upon a bill of indictment, when they find it sustained by the evidence laid before them, and are satisfied of the truth of the accusation. The endorsement made by a grand jury when they find sufficient evidence to warrant a criminal charge." Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed. A failure to find a True Bill indicates the grand jury found a lack of evidence for some element of the charge. That could be a lack of evidence of intent, if intent is an element of the charge considered.
I actually wanted your personal opinion given the facts, personal observations, and circumstances in each case. Did YOU believe Zimmerman felt his life was in danger? He WAS assaulted with the first blow from Martin, was he not?? Moreover, did you believe Trayvon was casing out the complex for a possible burglary? Since when is protecting one's turf or home with a firearm a federal/state offense?? Yet that's where we are. Regarding Wilson, DID indeed testify on his own behalf....That case wasn't close to indictable of LE. Yet, why was the looting and lawlessness tolerated (in your opinion?) And doesn't LE owe the citizenry protection against looting, shutting down stores, roads, and commerce instead of ignoring it? Is it becase lawyers like you would try and indict for murder the shooting of an anarcjists who are willing to martyr themselves? THAT makes the REST of us victims of YOUR legal threats and scrutiny of law enforcement (but not of scoff laws and criminals.) This nation is rapidly plunging into anarchy and a moral abyss because ACLU/SPLC types fog up the difference between right and wrong. You can either help us regain the right track, or contribute to this runaway freight train of moral relativism. We have ourselves enough Ron Kubys out there... American Law and Justice has always been based on morality. Much of it derived from Biblical principles and common sense. Lately it's based on the political winds, il-logic, and irrationality. You may rationalize that you're merely citing "law," but the heavy--handed interpretation of humanists and leftists are subverting it. Technicalities make a mockery of justice.
No. The grand jury may very well have properly found no true bill based on the charges available to them for consideration and the evidence presented to them. I do not believe there was any intent to kill or cause great physical harm. If the only charges presented did not include a negligence charge, not requiring intent, then I don't believe the grand jury could find a true bill. If no charge not including a required element of intent was available to the grand jury, the procedure was a farce. btw, they can always convene another grand jury for the same charges or additional charges. That is not double jeopardy.
A grand jury is not a judicial proceeding. "Testify. To bear witness; to give evidence as a witness; to make a solemn declaration, under oath or affirmation, in a judicial inquiry, for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact." Wilson did not subject himself to cross-examination by a hostile opposing counsel. He appeared before a grand jury with a very friendly District Attorney. It is not like testifying at trial.
Zimmerman stated all the elements for a case of self-defense. Martin is dead, there is no video. I do not believe Zimmerman's life was in danger. He may have believed it was. That is enough for probable doubt under the law.
You're wrong. Criminal negligent homicide was considered by the GJ and rejected, therefore it wasn't a homicide. Sorry.
No. Its not. Neither is wearing a hoodie or walking home.
Weighed and determined to lack enough evidence of intent to maim/kill. The 350 lb hostile behemoth's bad health was obviously an attributed factor. Though Pantaleo was very aggressive in his take down, a surgical neck hold of a 350 lb man just wasn't possible. He death was obviously accidental and most likely shocking to Pantaleo. Despite the verdict, the damage to LE is done, and THAT is what is accomplished by the Commie/ACLU/SPLC Anarchists types. It fulfills an agenda. It was never about about individual rights or "racism." The new Rules of Engagement for LE -- as with the military in Iraq/Afghanistan -- will cost MANY more LEOs their lives. Not only that, the criminal element (including these punk "Occupy" anarchists) will be THAT much more emboldened to challenge law enforcement at every turn. JUST AS IN THE CASE OF TERRORISTS. THIS case will be considered a watershed moment for all of civilized society. In a bad way. The hood will become an even more dangerous place. Look for black/brown-only cops policing in those areas in the very near future. The disruptions from Anarchists will be commonplace. NYC's Finest meter maids will certainly have NO time to enforce bans on cigarette and Tic-Tac sales. Drug sales, prostitution, and extortion will mushroom now. Inner-City Plantation murders start doubling....NOW. If there were 300 ChiTowm murders in 2014, expect 600 in the year 2015. Cops will NOT give a rats azz.
Comments (61 - 78) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestYou know how bad they (ACLU/SPLC) would schitt themselves if a black cop was indicted for shooting a white perp? They would change their tune in a big hurry and have to expose themselves for the hypocrites they truly are.
#21. To: CZ82 (#8)
Texas has what they call "Intoxication Manslaughter"...
#22. To: Vinny, nolu chan (#9)
Garner didn't die at the scene. While being transported to the hosp by ambulance, he suffered a heart attack, was rendered aid by the EMTs, and died an hour later in the hospital.
#23. To: nolu chan, Vinny (#10)
Correct, he was not pronounced dead at the scene. He went into obvious distress at the scene and the taxpayer-paid EMTS are clearly shown standing around not performing emergency life-saving care. Nor are the cops calling them to urgently provide care.
#24. To: nolu chan (#11)
(Edited)
How does negligent anything require intent? You do not have to intend to be negligent, you just have to do it. Negligent homicide connotes a lack of intent to kill.
Was the fat perp responsible for self-manslaughter?
#25. To: nolu chan (#12)
Staten Island's top prosecutor did not ask grand jurors to consider a reckless endangerment charge in the chokehold death of Eric Garner, a source familiar with the case told NBC 4 New York.
#26. To: Vinny (#13)
The ME called it homicide, however, the grand jury returned no bill.
#27. To: nolu chan (#14)
We do know that the grnd jury was not offered Reckless Endangerment or Criminal Obstruction of Breathing or Blood Circulation.
#28. To: Liberator (#22)
he suffered a heart attack, was rendered aid by the EMTs, and died an hour later in the hospital.
#29. To: Vinny, nolu chan (#15)
We do know that the grnd jury was not offered Reckless Endangerment or Criminal Obstruction of Breathing or Blood Circulation.
#30. To: nolu chan (#28)
(Edited)
The Medical Examiner ruled it a homicide.
#31. To: Liberator (#23)
Secondly, Mr. Fats distress *was* addressed. Unfortunately, the street is NOT an ER. Fact is, you have NO idea what medical care was being administered to Mr. Fats at the scene,
[T]he petechial hemorrhages are difficult to dismiss.
Medical examiners
Petechial hemorrhage
#32. To: Liberator (#29)
You KNOW this based on a newspaper leak?
#33. To: Liberator (#29)
The GJ was sooo "secret" that details hemorrhaged...er...I mean "leaked" to external newspaper sources.
[...]
#34. To: Liberator (#23)
AND diagnosis on a street in the middle of mayhem (that Mr. Fats himself caused).
#35. To: nolu chan (#31)
The video is clear. It appears you have no idea what it shows and does not show.
#36. To: nolu chan (#32)
No, this did not originate with a leak to a newspaper. It was released by the chief investigative reporter for NBC 4 at 30 Rock in NY.
#37. To: Liberator (#30)
The Medical Examiner ruled it a homicide.
ANY death is a homicide. Big deal. There are five legally defined manners of death:
Homicide. The killing of one human being by the act, procurement, or omission of another. A person is guilty of criminal homicide if he purposely, knowingly, recklessly or negligently causes the death of another human being. Criminal homicide is murder, manslaughter or negligent homicide. Model Penal Code, § 1111 et seq. See Manslaughter; Murder.
Negligent homicide. The criminal offense committed by one whose negligence is the direct and proximate cause of another's death. Criminal homicide constitutes negligent homicide when it is committed negligently. Model Penal Code § 210.4(1). Killing of a human being by criminal negligence. La.Rev.St. § 14.32. Although an intentional act is required, it is not necessary, unlike the crime of involuntary manslaughter, that a defendant realize the risk of death involved in his conduct. State v. Fisher, 141 Ariz. 227, 686 P.2d 750, 770 See also Homicide (Vehicular homicide); Negligent manslaughter.
#38. To: Liberator (#36)
Come on, Nolu. What's your dog in this fight?
#39. To: nativist nationalist (#34)
AND diagnosis on a street in the middle of mayhem (that Mr. Fats himself caused).
#40. To: Liberator (#35)
#41. To: nolu chan (#38)
(Edited)
Come on, Nolu. What's your dog in this fight?
#42. To: Liberator (#36)
The semantics of "leak" are irrelevant. I'd like to know how it was that a subversive network that has been an obvious political organ of propaganda for Bammy and the Dems was given this smidgeon of supposed "secret" GJ info....
DA didn’t ask Garner grand jury to weigh lesser charges
Report: Garner Grand Jury Not Asked to Consider Lesser Charge
#43. To: nolu chan (#40)
You seriously claim that the video is unclear what medical care was administered to Garner at the scene because you don't know what happened before the video???
#44. To: nolu chan (#42)
(Edited)
It is called investigative reporting. Investigative reporters seek out and talk to sources of information. That is what they are paid to do.
#45. To: Liberator (#41)
Backing Trayvon, Brown, and the Somali pirates doesn't exactly give you the moral OR legal high ground.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
#46. To: nolu chan (#42)
It's not clear why Donovan left the lesser charge off the table, and he has said strict confidentiality laws surrounding grand jury proceedings prevent him from discussing the details of the case, the NBC affiliate reports.
#47. To: nolu chan (#45)
I did not back Somali pirates.
#48. To: nolu chan (#45)
The question in the homicides involving Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown has nothing to do with "backing" either one. The question is whether the actions of the killer were justified or excusable.
#49. To: nativist nationalist (#0)
If you are truly outraged by some action of police, prosecutors, grand juries, or courts, you can shut down the heart of a great city.
#50. To: Liberator (#43)
[Liberator #35] REALLY?? Now you're going to go with, "Garner was strangled!"??
[nolu chan #31]
The finding of petechial hemorrhages was made by the Medical Examiner at the morgue.
Medical examiners
So generally petechae are something that you need to account for—you have to explain those.
#51. To: nolu chan, Liberator (#50)
In the video of the homicide, I clearly see another man holding Eric Garner in what appears to be a chokehold.
#52. To: Liberator (#48)
And your opinion in either case IS???.....
Until December 31, 2016--Burden of injecting the issue.
#53. To: Vinny (#51)
The homicide notation by the ME was weighed by the grand jury and found to have no merit. My proof? The return of no true bill v Pantaleo.
"[R]ooted in long centuries of Anglo-American history," Hannah v. Larche, 363 U. S. 420, 490 (1960) (Frankfurter, J., concurring in result), the grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It" 'is a constitutional fixture in its own right.'" United States v. Chanen, 549 F.2d 1306, 1312 (CA9) (quoting Nixon v. Sirica, 159 U. S. App. D.C. 58, 70, n. 54, 487 F.2d 700, 712, n. 54 (1973)), cert. denied, 434 U. S. 825 (1977). In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people. See Stirone v. United States, 361 U. S. 212, 218 (1960); Hale v. Henkel, 201 U. S. 43, 61 (1906); G. Edwards, The Grand Jury 28-32 (1906). Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the Judicial Branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm's length. Judges' direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. See United States v. Calandra, 414 U. S. 338, 343 (1974); Fed. Rule Crim. Proc. 6(a).
#54. To: nolu chan (#52)
#55. To: Liberator (#47)
Yet, you refuse to back the law as it pertains to the Garner vs. LE Grand Jury
#56. To: Liberator (#54)
Regarding Wilson, DID indeed testify on his own behalf....That case wasn't close to indictable of LE.
#57. To: Liberator (#54)
Did YOU believe Zimmerman felt his life was in danger? He WAS assaulted with the first blow from Martin, was he not??
#58. To: nolu chan (#53)
It was a homicide.
#59. To: Liberator (#54)
Moreover, did you believe Trayvon was casing out the complex for a possible burglary?
Since when is protecting one's turf or home with a firearm a federal/state offense??
#60. To: Vinny, nolu chan, e_type_ jag, CZ82, nativist nationalist, redleghunter (#51)
The homicide notation by the ME was weighed by the grand jury and found to have no merit. My proof? The return of no true bill v Pantaleo.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]