The Eric Garner case

[jayinsat]

I try not to get caught up posting in this forum, but occasionally a topic is too tempting to pass up, so forgive me.

There is some merit to the argument of not resisting arrest. He was a huge guy and while he was not violent he was clearly, at the point where the video clip shows, not ready to meekly offer his wrists to the cuffs. Now here is what really bothers me about this situation. The video that I have seen only shows a very brief span of time and does not show the entire interaction. If it did I would very concerned about a swarm of five officers including a plain clothes officer swooping down and gang tackling a guy who was alleged to be committing a (by most reasonable standards) a minor crime.

I watch this clip and I wonder how did this situation so rapidly go from relative calm to a pretty brutal take down. It makes one wonder if there is a productivity driven time limit imposed on encounters like this which trigger to rush to physical confrontation. I find it unusual that there would be so many officers just coincidently on the scene, and IIRC from the initial news reports, that local store owners had complained about Mr. Garner's activities previously. It seems like this was an organized foray to arrest him. He had been reported to have been arrested before, one wonders whether that experience was a violent one also? Not that it predicts the actions of the next time. In either event it does not seem to be a very well thought out encounter. I wonder why more time was not spent in communicating with him? Being surrounded by 5 officers he wasn't going anywhere. Again it is hard to judge without more information but the opinion I am developing is that somebody screwed up and the whole thing was swept under the rug.

I try very hard to support our law enforcement people. They have a hard enough job doing what they can to deal with a mind bending array of issues. Here is the but and it is a loud one. There is and has been a growing attitude change in some officers if you are not with us, then you deserve anything that happens when you are against us. I might even agree with this in certain situations but not in all. I am not sure that everyone who becomes an officer has the same boundary lines that I would, nor even has the temperament or capacity to be able to discern the difference in situations. When one of these things happen I always wonder if there wasn't a bit of this attitude leaking out.

We have militarized our domestic police forces, we have supported the argument that cops need to be able to match force with drug czars and gangs. The average cop I see today is in much better physical shape and spends much more time in the gym and weight room than the cops did when I was growing up. Having the ability to use great force comes with the responsibility of knowing when to use it. I think this time a mistake was made.

Here is a full video for you.
[youtube][/youtube]
The thing that bothers me most is that NO ONE performed CPR!

[mojo84]

Would it have killed a healthy man?

There is also doctrine in law that you take your victim as they are, not if they are healthy.

I'm not saying they should make a take them or not decision based on health. I'm just curious if they should be held liable for tactics that typically prove OK for a healthy individual. Also, how much did his condition and actions contribute to his death.

Sometimes questions are just that, questions.

[mojo84]

Bottom line, while I believe overall the Ferguson grand jury made the right call, this decision appears to be a total miscarriage of justice.

I am in complete agreement.

There ARE two justice systems, but not black vs. white, it's blue vs. the rest of us.

I think it's more economically driven, rich and poor. A lot of the time it's how good a defense attorney and expert witnesses you can afford.

[cb1000rider]

If you resist you will die?
Avoiding so many Godwin references right now.
What if you quit resisting (as occurred). Do you still have to die?

I was listening to a "veteran" (self-proclaimed) of the NYPD this morning. I found a few things interesting:

1) That once the PD has determined that they're going to arrest you, they're trained to affect that arrest as quickly as possible. By doing so, they prevent verbal confrontations that escalate. By acting first and acting quickly, they're more likely to subdue with less force than using club, a tazer, or deadly force. They'll surprise you, tackle you, do whatever it takes to get you into a submissive position once you're "under arrest".

I can see this being used for a suspect that was known to resist, but it scares the heck out of me as a compliant citizen. If you want to arrest me, tell me that I'm under arrest and give me time to comply. I may argue with you, but I'm not going to physically resist.


Our legislative and judical systems have granted PDs large amounts of latitude in the amount of force needed to affect an arrest... Likely this is why the grand-jury no-billed. It would be very hard to prove that the amount of force used was intentionally excessive and as such the criminal aspect goes away. A civil aspect remains.


The issue that came up is that police are basically the lowest men on the legislative totem pole. Why exactly do we have to criminalize selling single cigarettes? And even if it is criminal, what turkey decided to spend tax dollars on actually enforcing it? There's going to be a civil action here and it'll cost a lot.

I think a 2nd logo on police cars might help solve this problem:
Somewhere under "protect and serve" they should print "resist and you may die"... We should at least make that clear, don't you think?

I'm a middle aged white guy and I'm more and more afraid of the police every day... I can't imaging what it must be like for others than don't meet that profile.

[ScooterSissy]

Choke holds are no longer taught in the academy. We now use lateral vascular neck restraint. It is NOT a choke hold but it does put the person to sleep by cutting off blood flow to the brain.

Great. This makes me feel all safe and warm.

Don't resist arrest and you won't find out how well it works.

I am not worried about me.

Individuals utilizing techniques that "cut off blood flow to the brain" are using techniques that are potentially deadly, and to state in a cavalier manner that this common and no big deal is obscene.

When I was a paramedic we did everything in our power and skill to maintain "blood flow to the brain" but LEO are trained to interrupt the person's life sustaining blood flow as a means of controlling them? People are ok with this?

The duties, and goals, of a paramedic are different than those of a policeman.

[ScooterSissy]

By the way, I understand that a single pack of cigarettes in NYC, with the city, state and federal taxes runs about $14.00. That would make a carton cost around $140.00. That's what has spurred the sale of single cigarettes, smuggled from neighboring states. I can remember buying a pack of cigarettes as a teenager for a quarter. Some of this problem can be placed on outrageous tax laws. The cops don't get to pick and choose the laws they must enforce (well, unless they're Holder or Obama).

Actually they do. Always have and always will, since like every other organization on the planet, the resources available to them put constraints on their activities. But hey, since they've solved all the violent crime, thefts, and rapes, I guess they got plenty of resources to arrest and kill people for selling cigarettes. On, and btw, according to witnesses, the officer who killed this guy flipped off the crowd after he did it. What does that say about attitude?

No one killed anyone for selling cigarettes. Resisting arrest is what got him killed.

[cb1000rider]

No one killed anyone for selling cigarettes. Resisting arrest is what got him killed.

Still, without this ridiculous level of micro-management legislation, this incident wouldn't have happened.
I'd be more understanding if he was smuggling cigarettes in from Indian reservations (or neighboring states) and selling bulk - but we've got legislation that prevents the sale of single cigarettes? And we enforce it? Seriously?

This is what we pay our government officials to spend their time doing... And create a situation where our PDs are looking at this level of stuff in a city as large as this one?

[VMI77]

By the way, I understand that a single pack of cigarettes in NYC, with the city, state and federal taxes runs about $14.00. That would make a carton cost around $140.00. That's what has spurred the sale of single cigarettes, smuggled from neighboring states. I can remember buying a pack of cigarettes as a teenager for a quarter. Some of this problem can be placed on outrageous tax laws. The cops don't get to pick and choose the laws they must enforce (well, unless they're Holder or Obama).

Actually they do. Always have and always will, since like every other organization on the planet, the resources available to them put constraints on their activities. But hey, since they've solved all the violent crime, thefts, and rapes, I guess they got plenty of resources to arrest and kill people for selling cigarettes. On, and btw, according to witnesses, the officer who killed this guy flipped off the crowd after he did it. What does that say about attitude?

No one killed anyone for selling cigarettes. Resisting arrest is what got him killed.

Sure they did, and without any evidence that he was doing anything illegal. I've watched the video several times and nothing he did justifies the force used, let alone his murder (or, homicide, according to the ME). They were there apparently because his sales were hurting the cigarette sales of the stores selling cigarettes and a store or stores called the police. That sounds more like a mafia protection racket than law enforcement.

This use of "law enforcement" resources is so absurd it beggars description. Even if he was selling cigs untaxed by NYC, and no proof has been offered that he did, the amount of revenue expended in this operation is far in excess of any taxes they could have ever collected from this seller. In the real world of business that's called stupidity and leads to bankruptcy. It's even more stupid since they killed the goose and now cannot receive any future tax revenue from him.

The cig tax/law is a two fold shake down operation. The city is shaking down consumers and then offering mafia like protection to the stores in order to eliminate their competition, which is also competition for the city. I have yet to see any proof offered that Garner was even doing anything illegal. He may have purchased legally taxed cigs and just offered a service that the stores weren't offering....."loosies."

It's pretty clear that his real crime was failing to bow low enough to the police and city tax authority. The cops decided to teach him a lesson by arresting him. I doubt that any of them intended to kill him, but it didn't bother them in the least that they did....no one even attempted to render aid...and the cop who killed him flipped off the crowd afterwards. And it's my understanding that the only indictment the DA managed to get is of the guy who took the video. You might like that kind of "law enforcement" but that's not the kind of country I want to live in. In my view, there is something seriously wrong with any government under which you can end up dead for the mere act of selling a legal item without the government's sanction or permission. And when it's on the scale of a single cigarette you're living under a government that has lost its sanity. It is certainly not a "free" country.

[anygunanywhere]

The duties, and goals, of a paramedic are different than those of a policeman.

I know this. My point was that it is not a humane way to force an individual into compliance by intentionally interrupting basic physiological processes that if not applied in a very strict manner can cause death. Training (and the term here is used loosely) cadets to use this technique and assuming that it will be applied consistently and strictly is a farce. Do LEO certify on a regular basis to allow them to use these techniques? Are they applied under strict supervision?

I highly doubt it. I fully suspect that if these techniques were reviewed for correctness and consistency the results would show that there is a vast difference in skill level. If these techniques are not dangerous then why are many forbidden?

When I was a paramedic I was certified and authorized to perform many techniques in the field that basic paramedics were not allowed to perform. I trained at Ben Taub under then HFD medical director Dr Paul Pepe and at Hermann hospital under Dr Red Duke and served on his trauma team. My actions were performed under the EMS service's medical directors authority. When I performed such techniques my performance was reviewed by the medical directors.

Professionals should act and apply techniques in a professional manner and should maintain their skills. This applies to anyone who professes to possess skills in any profession, including LEO. If Mr Garner had been fortunate enough to have been arrested by true professionals HE WOULD NOT HAVE DIED.

[VMI77]

The duties, and goals, of a paramedic are different than those of a policeman.

I know this. My point was that it is not a humane way to force an individual into compliance by intentionally interrupting basic physiological processes that if not applied in a very strict manner can cause death. Training (and the term here is used loosely) cadets to use this technique and assuming that it will be applied consistently and strictly is a farce. Do LEO certify on a regular basis to allow them to use these techniques? Are they applied under strict supervision?

I highly doubt it. I fully suspect that if these techniques were reviewed for correctness and consistency the results would show that there is a vast difference in skill level. If these techniques are not dangerous then why are many forbidden?

Here's another test....what would happen if, say, Mr. Garner pushed you, and you took him down in the exact same manner, and he died just like he did in this incident? What are your chances of walking away without a trial? My bet is zero unless you've got blue privilege. The police aren't supposed to be above the law. If you or I would stand trial for the same action they should too. In fact, the police, since they're trained, have backup, and get the latitude granted by the public trust, should be held to a HIGHER standard than the rest of us....if not under the law itself, then by the departments they work for.

[anygunanywhere]

The duties, and goals, of a paramedic are different than those of a policeman.

I know this. My point was that it is not a humane way to force an individual into compliance by intentionally interrupting basic physiological processes that if not applied in a very strict manner can cause death. Training (and the term here is used loosely) cadets to use this technique and assuming that it will be applied consistently and strictly is a farce. Do LEO certify on a regular basis to allow them to use these techniques? Are they applied under strict supervision?

I highly doubt it. I fully suspect that if these techniques were reviewed for correctness and consistency the results would show that there is a vast difference in skill level. If these techniques are not dangerous then why are many forbidden?

Here's another test....what would happen if, say, Mr. Garner pushed you, and you took him down in the exact same manner, and he died just like he did in this incident? What are your chances of walking away without a trial? My bet is zero unless you've got blue privilege. The police aren't supposed to be above the law. If you or I would stand trial for the same action they should too. In fact, the police, since they're trained, have backup, and get the latitude granted by the public trust, should be held to a HIGHER standard than the rest of us....if not under the law itself, then by the departments they work for.

Interesting question. I agree with your assessment. We were held to a higher standard - that was emphasized repeatedly during training.

[ScooterSissy]

No one killed anyone for selling cigarettes. Resisting arrest is what got him killed.

Still, without this ridiculous level of micro-management legislation, this incident wouldn't have happened.
I'd be more understanding if he was smuggling cigarettes in from Indian reservations (or neighboring states) and selling bulk - but we've got legislation that prevents the sale of single cigarettes? And we enforce it? Seriously?

This is what we pay our government officials to spend their time doing... And create a situation where our PDs are looking at this level of stuff in a city as large as this one?

Often (frequently, from my understanding from friends that live in NYC), folks selling single cigarettes are selling to minors. This wasn't his first arrest. He's heard in the video saying "I told yall last time to quit harassing me". Unfortunately, that's the attitude - enforcing the law = harassment (if you happen to not like the law). Between that comment, and him pulling his hand away (when the officer took his hand and told him to put his hands behind his back) and him saying "don't put your hands on me", he's made it pretty clear his intent not to comply. THAT's what got him in trouble. It's a shame he died; but when a motorist is speeding to work and dies, I don't say he "deserved it", but I also don't blame his boss' "If you're late, you're fired" policy.

[ScooterSissy]

Here's another test....what would happen if, say, Mr. Garner pushed you, and you took him down in the exact same manner, and he died just like he did in this incident? What are your chances of walking away without a trial? My bet is zero unless you've got blue privilege. The police aren't supposed to be above the law. If you or I would stand trial for the same action they should too. In fact, the police, since they're trained, have backup, and get the latitude granted by the public trust, should be held to a HIGHER standard than the rest of us....if not under the law itself, then by the departments they work for.

There's a difference though. As a citizen, I am not charged with affecting the arrest of a person for pushing someone. A policeman is.

[Keith B]

The duties, and goals, of a paramedic are different than those of a policeman.

I know this. My point was that it is not a humane way to force an individual into compliance by intentionally interrupting basic physiological processes that if not applied in a very strict manner can cause death. Training (and the term here is used loosely) cadets to use this technique and assuming that it will be applied consistently and strictly is a farce. Do LEO certify on a regular basis to allow them to use these techniques? Are they applied under strict supervision?

I highly doubt it. I fully suspect that if these techniques were reviewed for correctness and consistency the results would show that there is a vast difference in skill level. If these techniques are not dangerous then why are many forbidden?

Here's another test....what would happen if, say, Mr. Garner pushed you, and you took him down in the exact same manner, and he died just like he did in this incident? What are your chances of walking away without a trial? My bet is zero unless you've got blue privilege. The police aren't supposed to be above the law. If you or I would stand trial for the same action they should too. In fact, the police, since they're trained, have backup, and get the latitude granted by the public trust, should be held to a HIGHER standard than the rest of us....if not under the law itself, then by the departments they work for.

There is a difference. You cannot issue a lawful order on a misdemeanor offense like a police officer can. If the person was given a lawful order and refuses, then the officer has the right to arrest them. if they refuse to cooperate, then they are resisting arrest. if the person pushes the officer, then it is assault on a police officer.

Now, as a non-LEO, you can use force to stop a crime that is listed in TPC 9.31 and issue a citizens arrest, or 9.32 and use deadly force if it is justified. . However, in this case of a misdemeanor offense, you do not have the authority to engage the person like a LEO does.

I am not saying the officers were right in the use of excessive force in this case, however, when the individual refused to cooperate, they were justified in restraining and arresting Mr. Garner, where a non-LEO would not have been.

[ScooterSissy]

It's pretty clear that his real crime was failing to bow low enough to the police and city tax authority. The cops decided to teach him a lesson by arresting him. I doubt that any of them intended to kill him, but it didn't bother them in the least that they did....no one even attempted to render aid...and the cop who killed him flipped off the crowd afterwards. And it's my understanding that the only indictment the DA managed to get is of the guy who took the video. You might like that kind of "law enforcement" but that's not the kind of country I want to live in. In my view, there is something seriously wrong with any government under which you can end up dead for the mere act of selling a legal item without the government's sanction or permission. And when it's on the scale of a single cigarette you're living under a government that has lost its sanity. It is certainly not a "free" country.

The indictment of the guy taking the video had nothing to do with him taking the video. It was a gun charge.

On a similar note, the guy taking the video kept repeating "all he did was break up a fight", and those actions had nothing to do with why Garner was arrested.