[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

The Victims of Benny Hinn: 30 Years of Spiritual Deception.

Trump Is Planning to Send Kill Teams to Mexico to Take Out Cartel Leaders

The Great Falling Away in the Church is Here | Tim Dilena

How Ridiculous? Blade-Less Swiss Army Knife Debuts As Weapon Laws Tighten

Jewish students beaten with sticks at University of Amsterdam

Terrorists shut down Park Avenue.

Police begin arresting democrats outside Met Gala.

The minute the total solar eclipse appeared over US

Three Types Of People To Mark And Avoid In The Church Today

Are The 4 Horsemen Of The Apocalypse About To Appear?

France sends combat troops to Ukraine battlefront

Facts you may not have heard about Muslims in England.

George Washington University raises the Hamas flag. American Flag has been removed.

Alabama students chant Take A Shower to the Hamas terrorists on campus.

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

Deadly Saltwater and Deadly Fresh Water to Increase

Deadly Cancers to soon Become Thing of the Past?

Plague of deadly New Diseases Continues

[FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

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: 18043
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  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 78.

#1. To: nativist nationalist (#0)

Why would a Staten Island grand jury not indict Pantaleo for murder or manslaughter in the death of Eric Garner?

In a word, intent.

Intent? Buchanan must be kidding.

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1209

manslaughter

n. the unlawful killing of another person without premeditation or so-called "malice aforethought" (an evil intent prior to the killing). It is distinguished from murder (which brings greater penalties) by lack of any prior intention to kill anyone or create a deadly situation. There are two levels of manslaughter: voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary manslaughter includes killing in heat of passion or while committing a felony. Involuntary manslaughter occurs when a death is caused by a violation of a non-felony, such as reckless driving (called "vehicular manslaughter"). Examples: Eddy Hothead gets into a drunken argument in a saloon with his acquaintance Bob Bonehead, and Hothead hits Bonehead over the head with a beer bottle, causing internal bleeding and death. Brent Burgle sneaks into a warehouse intent on theft and is surprised by a security man, whom Burgle knocks down a flight of stairs, killing him. Both are voluntary manslaughter. However, if either man had used a gun, a murder charge is most likely since he brought a deadly weapon to use in the crime. The immediate rage in finding a loved one in bed with another followed by a killing before the passion cools usually limits the charge to voluntary manslaughter and not murder, but prior attacks could convince a District Attorney and a jury that the killing was not totally spontaneous. Lenny Leadfoot drives 70 miles per hour on a twisting mountain road, goes off a cliff and his passenger is killed in the crash. Leadfoot can be charged with involuntary manslaughter.

nolu chan  posted on  2014-12-05   15:40:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: nolu chan (#1)

In a word, intent.

Intent? Buchanan must be kidding.

Sounds like Pat is right on, using the definition you supplied. The cop was not engaged in a felony, nor reckless behavior. He was doing his job, the job we pay him to do. His job involves interactions with criminals, an activity in which black people are disproportionately represented. That is not the fault of the police, or society, but the black people whose intent is to engage in those crimes.

nativist nationalist  posted on  2014-12-05   20:58:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: nativist nationalist (#2)

Sounds like Pat is right on, using the definition you supplied.

Nah. Pat relies on lack of intent. The autopsy ruled it a homicide. The ruling of homicide means an unnatural cause of death, not necessarily a crime. The prohibited choke hold, and the non-care by the EMT's or cops on scene are ample to find probable cause to indict if that was desired.

The death could be attributed to crushing or pressure by other cops while Garner was down. If the grand jury found that to be the major cause, no indictment would follow as all of those cops were granted immunity.

The cop did not do his job the way he was being paid to do it. The choke hold he used has been prohibited in NYC for about twenty years.

The best explanation for the lack of a true bill is:

link

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.

District Attorney Daniel Donovan only asked grand jurors to consider manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide charges against NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo, the cop seen on widely-watched amateur video wrapping his arm around Garner's neck as the heavyset, asthmatic 43-year-old yelled, "I can't breathe!" nearly a dozen times during the July 17 confrontation, the source said.

nolu chan  posted on  2014-12-05   23:29:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: nolu chan (#3) (Edited)

and the non-care by the EMT's

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.

Vinny  posted on  2014-12-07   9:38:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Vinny (#9)

and the non-care by the EMT's

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.

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.

The petechial hemorrhages are difficult to dismiss. That he did not die immediately does not change that the maner of death was ruled homicide and the events of the homicide did not occur in either an ambulance or hospital.

nolu chan  posted on  2014-12-07   15:10:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#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.

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.

Liberator  posted on  2014-12-10   13:15:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#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,

The video is clear. It appears you have no idea what it shows and does not show.

[T]he petechial hemorrhages are difficult to dismiss.

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/

Medical examiners

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.

nolu chan  posted on  2014-12-10   14:03:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: nolu chan (#31)

The video is clear. It appears you have no idea what it shows and does not show.

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.

Liberator  posted on  2014-12-10   14:49:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: Liberator (#35)

[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???

nolu chan  posted on  2014-12-10   15:11:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#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???

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.

Liberator  posted on  2014-12-10   15:46:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: Liberator (#43)

[Liberator #35] REALLY?? Now you're going to go with, "Garner was strangled!"??

[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.

[nolu chan #31]

The finding of petechial hemorrhages was made by the Medical Examiner at the morgue.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/visibleproofs/education/medical/

Medical examiners

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:

  • smothering

  • strangulation

  • anything that compresses the neck

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:

So generally petechae are something that you need to account for—you have to explain those.

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.

nolu chan  posted on  2014-12-10   16:25:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#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.

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.

Vinny  posted on  2014-12-10   16:50:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#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.

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:

"[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).

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.

nolu chan  posted on  2014-12-10   17:44:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: nolu chan (#53)

It was a homicide.

You're wrong.

Criminal negligent homicide was considered by the GJ and rejected, therefore it wasn't a homicide.

Sorry.

Vinny  posted on  2014-12-10   18:12:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: Vinny (#58)

It was a homicide.

You're wrong.

Criminal negligent homicide was considered by the GJ and rejected, therefore it wasn't a homicide.

Sorry.

That homicide occurred is uncontested. It is a fact. Feigning ignorance cannot change that fact. Another human being killed Eric Garner. That is homicide.

Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.

Homicide. The killing of one human being by the act, procurement, or omission of another.

nolu chan  posted on  2014-12-10   18:33:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#78. To: nolu chan (#61)

Another human being killed Eric Garner. That is homicide.

You are still wrong.

The word justifiable is your friend.

Vinny  posted on  2014-12-11   5:32:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 78.

        There are no replies to Comment # 78.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 78.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com