Most people in the city believe the chokehold to be illegal because it is banned by the NYPD. The fact that it is not illegal is the reason the police officer in the Garner case was not indicted. He didn't break any laws in doing his job. A responsible mayor would have explained this fact after the decision to not indict was announced. Instead, he said nothing and told people to go protest if they were upset with the decision. And they did. Interestingly, Bill de Blasio is against making the chokehold illegal.
2
In a street-fight an untrained individual is instinctively prone to a "choke-hold." I have been in "head-locks" and I have tried to put opponents in a "head-lock" thinking I could then avoid punching and "really hurting" him! I never thought of the danger to the other in this. "Boys will be boys!" No one died. Yet, such a technique could become a "choke hold".
The police are professionals. They are not "boys' in a fight. Mr. Garner is a victim who died from inadequate police training. He was surrounded by police. No officer was in danger. But officer Pantaleo is also a victim in this. He is a victim of poor training and a police culture that needs improvement. He must be in shock by what he has done. He is probably a good cop! Good men make mistakes. Good doctors kill patients. The officers who were with Officer Pantaleo must also be in shock after this. A man has died of professional malpractice and there is plenty of guilt and shame to go around. But we can learn from this! No one else should die like this. And if Officer Pantaleo is a good cop ...I hope his career can recover and he can be a better cop. He is a victim of a culture that made his behavior inevitable. The culture and the training must be improved. Mr. Garner's family will never be healed from this. Good must come out of it. The best police force in the USA must become better. This can add meaning to the life and death of Mr. Garner. this can help heal all involved. -Rudy
The police are professionals. They are not "boys' in a fight. Mr. Garner is a victim who died from inadequate police training. He was surrounded by police. No officer was in danger. But officer Pantaleo is also a victim in this. He is a victim of poor training and a police culture that needs improvement. He must be in shock by what he has done. He is probably a good cop! Good men make mistakes. Good doctors kill patients. The officers who were with Officer Pantaleo must also be in shock after this. A man has died of professional malpractice and there is plenty of guilt and shame to go around. But we can learn from this! No one else should die like this. And if Officer Pantaleo is a good cop ...I hope his career can recover and he can be a better cop. He is a victim of a culture that made his behavior inevitable. The culture and the training must be improved. Mr. Garner's family will never be healed from this. Good must come out of it. The best police force in the USA must become better. This can add meaning to the life and death of Mr. Garner. this can help heal all involved. -Rudy
3
One hopes that all the cops, enough of them were there to grab every extremity of Mr. Garner's, will do that next time and recognize that there are enough of them to restrain him without the need for anyone to end up with their arm around his neck.
And, then, for them and the EMTs to not open their mouths or make a move to stop what was happening when Mr. Garner started saying he could not breathe is mind boggling. Would they have just stood around and watched if Ofc. Pantaleo had been punching Mr. Garner to death? Where did they learn to do-nothing to stop out of control situation/behavior they witnessed that day?
Yes, there was a lot of malpractice by every 'professional' at that scene.
Unfortunately, from Mr. Lynch on down, none of them want to admit any errors were made by any of them. That's the real root of the defiance to the mayor and taxpayers, the desire to rationalize what they know was wrong.
And, then, for them and the EMTs to not open their mouths or make a move to stop what was happening when Mr. Garner started saying he could not breathe is mind boggling. Would they have just stood around and watched if Ofc. Pantaleo had been punching Mr. Garner to death? Where did they learn to do-nothing to stop out of control situation/behavior they witnessed that day?
Yes, there was a lot of malpractice by every 'professional' at that scene.
Unfortunately, from Mr. Lynch on down, none of them want to admit any errors were made by any of them. That's the real root of the defiance to the mayor and taxpayers, the desire to rationalize what they know was wrong.
2
It is not surprising how many people support the chokehold and seek plausible reasons to keep it from being deemed illegal. We all know though that if a white suspect was placed in a chokehold and was killed, there would be outrage.
Black lives have always been a dime a dozen. Going back to for generations. The elders could tell you stories of lynchings that sound familiar with the present day homicides of unarmed blacks. Whites don't know this history, they wouldn't teach it in school. They are totally ignorant to what the black experience has been like in a nation founded upon a bedrock of "racism".
Now many whites want to make excuses for the current state of affairs with police and blacks. Yes crime is an issue in the black community.
At one time the police helped to perpetuate vice and crime. Yes the NYPD was notorious. They built a culture of indifference and contempt for black lives. Going home to their suburban enclaves self righteously with graft in their pocket from vice. Then raising their children to believe that blacks are somehow inferior and criminally disposed. The same community that would deny a successful black doctor from moving his family into for fear that other black professionals may want to move there.
We can go on and on with the way black America was shaped by the white establishment. Blacks know full well, whites just won't accept it and would rather remain ignorant to a historical social reality....
Black lives have always been a dime a dozen. Going back to for generations. The elders could tell you stories of lynchings that sound familiar with the present day homicides of unarmed blacks. Whites don't know this history, they wouldn't teach it in school. They are totally ignorant to what the black experience has been like in a nation founded upon a bedrock of "racism".
Now many whites want to make excuses for the current state of affairs with police and blacks. Yes crime is an issue in the black community.
At one time the police helped to perpetuate vice and crime. Yes the NYPD was notorious. They built a culture of indifference and contempt for black lives. Going home to their suburban enclaves self righteously with graft in their pocket from vice. Then raising their children to believe that blacks are somehow inferior and criminally disposed. The same community that would deny a successful black doctor from moving his family into for fear that other black professionals may want to move there.
We can go on and on with the way black America was shaped by the white establishment. Blacks know full well, whites just won't accept it and would rather remain ignorant to a historical social reality....
3
Here's a quote from this article in relation to the choke hold: "Those taught the move decades ago said it was meant as a way of controlling a situation short of using deadly force. Vincent E. Henry, a retired officer, said he was instructed, as a cadet at the Police Academy, that chokeholds were 'a strategy of last resort.' 'It was not something you did casually,' he said." So, allegedly selling individual cigarettes on the street called for "a strategy of last resort?" This is the essence of the Eric Garner murder! Using deadly force for a minor infraction of the law. It's heinous--nothing short of murder in the first degree!
6
Here's an idea. Fire any officer who uses a chokehold and keeping firing the next and the next until they get the message, right? Maybe Citizens just should not stop protesting until laws are passed that prevent cops from becoming murderers, or as in the case of Pantaleo, will imprison cops who are clearly committing murder? In todays America lethal force should never be required to apprehend an unarmed target.
7
It is easy to make judgments post hoc, but difficult in the heat of battle.
It must be said, however, that not every takedown is battle or even adrenaline-fueled, but often merely gaining control of an uncooperative suspect.
It must be said, however, that not every takedown is battle or even adrenaline-fueled, but often merely gaining control of an uncooperative suspect.
1
BeadyEye@ That is where sound judgment comes into play. The heat of battle? He wasn't engaged in a war. The person this cop Pantaleo battled was unarmed, and at that point not a public threat, just an agitated man. This same cop has several complaints of abuse against him. This cop has committed this chokehold before, its just this time it ended in a death. He is severely unqualified and perhaps has psychological or racial issues.
Many cops need rigorous psychological assessments esp. white police. Since when were they anointed to perfection or infallibility? With a stressful job they of all professions should have strict oversight. The broad discretions they have demands it.
A "Battle"? What a mischaracterization of what a police officers job is, to serve and protect, not seek and destroy....
Many cops need rigorous psychological assessments esp. white police. Since when were they anointed to perfection or infallibility? With a stressful job they of all professions should have strict oversight. The broad discretions they have demands it.
A "Battle"? What a mischaracterization of what a police officers job is, to serve and protect, not seek and destroy....
6
Let's get real here. The definition is so vague that in the heat of a physical confrontation, even with video "replay", it will be very difficult to prove, which will make indictments very hard to get. Is it a chokehold if an officers arm brushes the subject's neck. Again, hard to determine but the amount of pressure and it's duration seem key. In the Garner case, his neck was held in the takedown and then again when he was down. It does not seem to me that either lasted long enough to do permanent damage to his airway (he would have not been able to say anything clearly) or to cause irreversible brain damage unless the video has been shortened. The autopsy here is key" was there any evidence of brain damage or damage to the windpipe?
2
The knee on his back was also going on. If it's against policy, then the officers should be held responsible at least internally. The officers are there to save lives, even that of criminals. Only in self-defense should deadly force arise.
3
My my, New York police are doing pretty much what they want to. Even cutting down on their own work load when they feel like it. Please.....PLEASE....no more about how the vast majority of police are all good guys. We're not naive. Or stupid.
In fact, I believe the comments of the head of their union pretty much reflect the attitudes of most of the New York police.
In fact, I believe the comments of the head of their union pretty much reflect the attitudes of most of the New York police.
6
The basic question is how to control large, strong people who refuse to cooperate. It has not yet been satisfactorily answered.
9
mikey@
If you are afraid, policy and procedure goes out the window. We can be certain that in the academy they must have ran that scenario" a large, strong man who refuses to cooperate".
If not then this idea that the NYPD is the greatest police force in the world is a farce. They don't even know how to confront "a large, strong man who refuses to cooperate" without killing him...
If you are afraid, policy and procedure goes out the window. We can be certain that in the academy they must have ran that scenario" a large, strong man who refuses to cooperate".
If not then this idea that the NYPD is the greatest police force in the world is a farce. They don't even know how to confront "a large, strong man who refuses to cooperate" without killing him...
3
Here in the Midwest the carotid control hold is legal, but only to be used as an ultimate last resort. Once disengaged medical attention is immediately called for and the perpetrator is not handcuffed behind his back as that could further effect breathing. It was later brought up that one of the main reasons for the whole Rodney King fiasco was because he was resisting arrest and the officers were not allowed to use the carotid control hold. Either way it can be very dangerous. By the way, did anyone think that maybe had former mayor Bloomberg not jacked the excise taxes to $13/pack and rigged it so they can no longer be bought online that smokers would not be buying them from Mr. Garner in the first place?
2
The choke hold is not an illegal move. It is one the NYPD bans which is an administrative policy decision. The media makes it sound like a police officer who uses it is violating the Penal Law. It isn't against the law! If the NYPD wants to ensure that its officers don't use these types of hold it needs to retrain the officers in an effective alternative. While some people here would love for a debate to take place between the police a suspect that leads to a meeting of the minds that isn't always the case. In Mr. Garner's situation he was going to be arrested as per the orders of higher ups in the Department. In fact, our Mayor's administration had filed paperwork to recoup huge amounts of tax money that people like Mr. Garner cheat the city out of it's called tax fraud.
The policing profession is going to evolve from cases like Mr. Garner's it will train and re-train officers in the use of verbal judo, and I would also hope real Judo as a self-defense/apprehension tactic for officers to use in non-armed arrest situations.
The fact is the NYPD is re-training its officers now, give it a chance. But as with anything once reasoning goes out the window as with Mr. Garner not complying to be handcuffed that is resisting arrest, which he would had been charged with if he had lived.
Policing will adapt and officers will become better prepared to deal with resisting suspects. The public and news media could use some retraining as well in what is legal and what isn't
The policing profession is going to evolve from cases like Mr. Garner's it will train and re-train officers in the use of verbal judo, and I would also hope real Judo as a self-defense/apprehension tactic for officers to use in non-armed arrest situations.
The fact is the NYPD is re-training its officers now, give it a chance. But as with anything once reasoning goes out the window as with Mr. Garner not complying to be handcuffed that is resisting arrest, which he would had been charged with if he had lived.
Policing will adapt and officers will become better prepared to deal with resisting suspects. The public and news media could use some retraining as well in what is legal and what isn't
6
Rob@ One nagging question that hasn't been answered is , why were they arresting Eric Garner? Where were the cigarettes or the buyer of the cigarettes he allegedly was selling. At no time were cigarettes produced. Were they on a sting and targeted him? No, the police say they responded to a fight, when they arrived it had already been broken up by Eric Garner. Left standing there and the police knowing he was arrested for selling cigarettes decided to accost him. There has never been proof that at that moment Eric Garner was actually selling cigarettes. Hypothetically speaking, it seems that they weren't going to leave without locking someone up.
Your premise is missing a key ingredient, what was the probable cause for approaching and attempting to arrest Eric Garner?
The police will never thoroughly explain that portion of it, and most of the public takes for granted that it was true, with no evidence. Except a past arrest record.
The police need to be better prepared to deal with that sometimes there isn't a need to arrest. That because you have broad discretions it doesn't translate into arresting people "just because" you can.
Retraining for is not practical, most of these guys have cultural incompetency issues, and racial issues. Strict psychological assessments are what is needed then the termination of the unqualified, cops who lack social reasoning....
Your premise is missing a key ingredient, what was the probable cause for approaching and attempting to arrest Eric Garner?
The police will never thoroughly explain that portion of it, and most of the public takes for granted that it was true, with no evidence. Except a past arrest record.
The police need to be better prepared to deal with that sometimes there isn't a need to arrest. That because you have broad discretions it doesn't translate into arresting people "just because" you can.
Retraining for is not practical, most of these guys have cultural incompetency issues, and racial issues. Strict psychological assessments are what is needed then the termination of the unqualified, cops who lack social reasoning....
3
NYPD continues to use that illegal hold because there are NO consequences for them after they use it. The only folks that suffer the consequences of the actions of the police are African American NY citizens.
4
@Doris: Not illegal.
4
The carotid artery choke bold kills some people by stopping their hearts. So Arm bars were encouraged.
A man was robbing and groping two elderly women. I slammed him into a chicken wing up onto his toes as the terrible sound of old cloth ripping, as he spun, stun still rammed up his back, and hit me with a hard left hook to my jaw. If he had a knife or gun I would not be writing this.
His arm danglednby its skin. Three minutes to Harborview ED. He lived thanks to a great surgeon who amputated at the shoulder. The surgeon told me that if I had tugged the skin would have ripped, opening up would have let the blood gush out and almost instant death.
Thq surgeon said there was nothing to save--arteries, veins, ligments, and tendons shreded, nothing but skin holding the arm and acting as a partial tourniquet.
We talked of options, arm bars, carotid sleeper holds, windpipe closes. All can be deadly for either person, especially when drugs, alcohol, madness, or great strength are involved. Combat wrestling is inherently dangerous.
The police arendamned if they do and damned if they don't. Whenever possible the eyes, ears, and mouth used for compliance aremthe best approach. And we need in our schools to train the their use in compliance and descalation for both sides.
A man was robbing and groping two elderly women. I slammed him into a chicken wing up onto his toes as the terrible sound of old cloth ripping, as he spun, stun still rammed up his back, and hit me with a hard left hook to my jaw. If he had a knife or gun I would not be writing this.
His arm danglednby its skin. Three minutes to Harborview ED. He lived thanks to a great surgeon who amputated at the shoulder. The surgeon told me that if I had tugged the skin would have ripped, opening up would have let the blood gush out and almost instant death.
Thq surgeon said there was nothing to save--arteries, veins, ligments, and tendons shreded, nothing but skin holding the arm and acting as a partial tourniquet.
We talked of options, arm bars, carotid sleeper holds, windpipe closes. All can be deadly for either person, especially when drugs, alcohol, madness, or great strength are involved. Combat wrestling is inherently dangerous.
The police arendamned if they do and damned if they don't. Whenever possible the eyes, ears, and mouth used for compliance aremthe best approach. And we need in our schools to train the their use in compliance and descalation for both sides.
5
The police have become judge, jury and executioner now. This is a part of our move to the right of politics and hatred for minorities for the 35 pr so years. The conservatives southern strategy worked in ALL states, not just the south, the police are a reflection of society.
3
Ramon, carotid artery holds cut off the blood supply to the brain, they do not stop the heart.
1
The pro-police comments are repetitive, sounds like someone handed out the talking points. I'd prefer an argument on the merits instead of simple attacks on the character of police critics. No matter what the measure of accountability that is asked of police. this crew will oppose it not by showing the strengths or weaknesses of the proposed measure, but by name calling and denigrating supporters of restraint. Don't the pro-chode proponents know that it was none other than that softy John Timoney was the strongest advocate of eliminating the chokehold?
7
After reading V1.0 of this story it was surprised that this man was not attacked by union thugs on trumped up Tea Party charges. Shows how awful is the hatred toward decent public servants who don't back down but defer appeasement, as a sinister modus operandi, to their local politicians.
Cops can use a use chokehold to defend their life and the life of others. Just like they can use their firearms.
The NY Times gets it wrong EVERY TIME!
The NY Times gets it wrong EVERY TIME!
3
Statute, please?
7
Whose life was the cops who killed Eric Garner defending? Philip Morris? R.J. Reynolds?
16
What did the Times get wrong? They wrote that the chokehold is banned, not that it is illegal. And I doubt if any police officer would get a hard time for using it to defend life; the trouble is that they use it when they get mad at someone who accidentally hits their patrol car with a thrown football.
I think the main problem isn't about specific takedown techniques, it's about cops who can't control their anger. More training is OK, but what we really need is more personality screening at the hiring stage.
I think the main problem isn't about specific takedown techniques, it's about cops who can't control their anger. More training is OK, but what we really need is more personality screening at the hiring stage.
2
So the enforcers of the law get to decide which laws they'll choose to obey, with no repercussions. I don't know if the Greeks have a word for it, but there's a phrase in English that's a perfect description of such a situation. It's called a 'police state'.
16
Too often, one of the most readily available tools for quieting a person is never applied -- time. With time, individuals can calm down, police can organize backup and bystanders can be moved out of harm's way. What was the rush to subdue Eric Garner? Where was he going to flee? And -- for that matter -- so what if he walked away. He'd be down the block five minutes later.
12
Police are universally trained to take and keep control of a situation.
3
Most of the posts in here are HILARIOUS.
Liberals who hate police, prison guards, DA's and soldiers. 'Progressives' who express outrage over the tactics used to subdue career criminals then demand MORE police protection. Justice-hating fools who don't understand the great risks taken by the people they express so much vitriol over.
Make up your minds, folks. If you hate law enforcement, don't expect laws to be...
Enforced.
Liberals who hate police, prison guards, DA's and soldiers. 'Progressives' who express outrage over the tactics used to subdue career criminals then demand MORE police protection. Justice-hating fools who don't understand the great risks taken by the people they express so much vitriol over.
Make up your minds, folks. If you hate law enforcement, don't expect laws to be...
Enforced.
7
Bravo.
Like the regulation against using chokeholds? Is that enforced?
4
I've got news for you, liberals don't like crime and criminals anymore than the next man. What they also don't like is bad, incompetent and unnessarily violent policing, and not without reason. I suppose your solution is that everyone over twelve should carry a gun. Too many police can only see black or white ( not intended as a pun), they need to be able to recognize shades of gray when they see it.
3
"The trouble, Mr. Messina said, was that the department had not given officers a comparable alternative. “It’s like telling you, don’t use your fork anymore,” he said. “But they don’t give you something else.” "
The analogy to a fork speaks volumes about a mind-set of some police. A human being is not a meatball on a plate of spaghetti waiting to be stabbed.
The analogy to a fork speaks volumes about a mind-set of some police. A human being is not a meatball on a plate of spaghetti waiting to be stabbed.
3
Quite. I suppose the person without a fork does not have a spoon or fingers. If so (no fingers) how would he hold the fork?
The article states:
He pointed to the police in Kansas City, Mo., where officers developed the “lateral vascular neck restraint” — a kind of chokehold — meant to cut off the flow of oxygenated blood to the brain and render a suspect unconscious.
The carotid artery choke hold was not developed by police officers; it has been used in judo for probably over a hundred years. It is not a difficult technique to learn and will not endanger any lives or cause permanent damage if the hold is let go when the person loses consciousness.
He pointed to the police in Kansas City, Mo., where officers developed the “lateral vascular neck restraint” — a kind of chokehold — meant to cut off the flow of oxygenated blood to the brain and render a suspect unconscious.
The carotid artery choke hold was not developed by police officers; it has been used in judo for probably over a hundred years. It is not a difficult technique to learn and will not endanger any lives or cause permanent damage if the hold is let go when the person loses consciousness.
4
Let the Coroner's Report be read literally. It categorically states it was a homicide - a death caused by asphyxia due to obstruction of the larynx ( chokehold) and compression of his chest, a fact reinforced by the video camera. Garner was more susceptible because of his obesity, asthma and cardiovascular disease. Lets call a spade a spade. The risk factors DID NOT KILL him but the Police Officers' actions did. And the actions were banned!! An unarmed man is dead and the obvious is obvious. Still there is a debate. What are we debating?
14
Unlike other nations, America has 300Million+ guns in circulation, with large parts of many of our cities and even small towns virtually controlled by murdering, gun-wielding thugs. *Every* stop a police officer makes in America is potentially his/her last, because *anyone* in America can get a gun - whether they are known, violent criminals, mentally ill, stressed to the point of breaking, etc...
Try living with that reality every second of every day as you (a police officer) does your job. Consider that this is one reason why the "always escalate" dictum is largely in play. In addition, while doing that dangerous job, try experiencing everyone around you taking your picture; filming your every move and word as you try to subdue someone who might have a gun, or is resisting your *legal* demand - or, surrounded by people who are literally encouraging the perp with words of support; yelling at the police officer; demanding (in disrespectful tones) the police officer's name, etc. etc. Try living that life for a few weeks and see what is does to your self-protective instincts, and the propensity to make sure, *very* quickly, that a potential threat is controlled quickly.
Yes, we need more and better police training, but it gets very old listening to people who want to blame police for the relatively *few* incidents (relative to total arrests).
There ARE some bad cops; get rid of them, but let's stop with generalizing *occasional* poor behavior to all cops.
Try living with that reality every second of every day as you (a police officer) does your job. Consider that this is one reason why the "always escalate" dictum is largely in play. In addition, while doing that dangerous job, try experiencing everyone around you taking your picture; filming your every move and word as you try to subdue someone who might have a gun, or is resisting your *legal* demand - or, surrounded by people who are literally encouraging the perp with words of support; yelling at the police officer; demanding (in disrespectful tones) the police officer's name, etc. etc. Try living that life for a few weeks and see what is does to your self-protective instincts, and the propensity to make sure, *very* quickly, that a potential threat is controlled quickly.
Yes, we need more and better police training, but it gets very old listening to people who want to blame police for the relatively *few* incidents (relative to total arrests).
There ARE some bad cops; get rid of them, but let's stop with generalizing *occasional* poor behavior to all cops.
5
You should be writing a letter to the NRA, not the NYT. Seriously, if police unions are so strong, why can't you all get together and apply some pressure on the NRA? Why?
2
Most police are corrupt dishonest dangerous bullies. We have had this proof before us for 150 years and recently from Serpico to Scalese. We do not want to face the truth and we do not want to pay for decent police and training
3
Your comment is a perfect description of what police go through in simply trying to arrest someone in a minority community. I have witnessed it and was appalled at the disrespect and antagonism shown by the "community". When times columnist nick kristof wrote that white people dont get it he ignored the fact that most white people go an entire lifetime without a single encounter with a policemen other than traffic infractions. The question really is why does the left support Criminals over the Police.
4
I observed the irony of the photo in which the room where the police work out is lined with padding. How Ironic!
1
NYPD had no reason to approach Mr. Garner period. Selling "loosies" is NOT A CRIME. A convenient store around the corner has a sign at his register: Selling 'loosies' $300 fine (FOR HIM) Don't ask us to sell them." CIVIL offense NOT A CRIME. But, again, white police, black citizen, guess the outcome. Add a DA square in the corner of the NYPD, their buddy, and no way those police would even be slapped on their wrists.
It seems to me, police across the US are too quick to resort to deadly force--shoot first, DON'T ask questions especially white officers, black "suspect." My God--little Tamir--12 year old kid. They needed only to distract him & have someone come up behind him and take the "gun."
Whenever there's a death/serious injury caused by police there must be an INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION/PROSECUTION. Let chips fall where they may. The DA cant do it. They're figuratively in bed with each other.
Finally, police need to stand down. There's NO need for the militarization of US police. In a hostage situation a show of force can cause a paradoxical effect. There are trained hostage negotiators for such situations.
I managed a group home for "emotionally disturbed" adolescents. We were taught crisis intervention, deescalating confrontations &, if all else failed, safe take down/restraint. NEVER went near face or neck, positioned ourselves so we couldn't be bitten. Why aren't police so trained?
It seems to me, police across the US are too quick to resort to deadly force--shoot first, DON'T ask questions especially white officers, black "suspect." My God--little Tamir--12 year old kid. They needed only to distract him & have someone come up behind him and take the "gun."
Whenever there's a death/serious injury caused by police there must be an INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION/PROSECUTION. Let chips fall where they may. The DA cant do it. They're figuratively in bed with each other.
Finally, police need to stand down. There's NO need for the militarization of US police. In a hostage situation a show of force can cause a paradoxical effect. There are trained hostage negotiators for such situations.
I managed a group home for "emotionally disturbed" adolescents. We were taught crisis intervention, deescalating confrontations &, if all else failed, safe take down/restraint. NEVER went near face or neck, positioned ourselves so we couldn't be bitten. Why aren't police so trained?
9
And if the police attempt to provide the citizen with a fine, and he declines to take it or to move away ?
How about this rule: do not attempt to arrest anyone against his/her will.
Problem solved.
How about this rule: do not attempt to arrest anyone against his/her will.
Problem solved.
3
The entire discussion in this article about the chokehold is completely fallacious. The police could have issued Garner a citation. End of story.
There was never a reason to take Garner down. He was not fighting. He was doing nothing but telling the police to stop harassing him. This, to the cops, was a justification for throwing him to the ground and, ultimately, killing him.
A citation was all that was necessary, if you believe the police actually had a reason to charge him with selling loose cigarettes--something that never shows up in the video.
The NYPD, like the Cleveland, Albuquerque, Oakland and Portland police--among so many others--are simply an occupying army in communities they are supposed to protect and serve.
There was never a reason to take Garner down. He was not fighting. He was doing nothing but telling the police to stop harassing him. This, to the cops, was a justification for throwing him to the ground and, ultimately, killing him.
A citation was all that was necessary, if you believe the police actually had a reason to charge him with selling loose cigarettes--something that never shows up in the video.
The NYPD, like the Cleveland, Albuquerque, Oakland and Portland police--among so many others--are simply an occupying army in communities they are supposed to protect and serve.
8
So there is someone with a soul in Albany. When the four secret police were tried in Albany for executing a black man in his own doorway with over 40 bullets, the secret police gang was found innocent of murder by an Albany Jury.
4
Police are not better than criminals that they are trying to arrest. And they wonder why we don't trust them. Prosecute them to the full extent of the law and not in Staten Island. No excuses.
4
If the second amendment was alive and well in NYC, would there be a need for police to arrest anyone ?
2
Huh? What does the second amendment have to do with this?
4
With all the technology we have, why are there so few alternatives to lethal force. Certainly we can stop a behavior without killing, while helping to protect the officer in danger.
Let's do this...
Let's do this...
8
Technology is not the answer. Humane behavior is.
We need police trained to be the least racist they can be; police only hired after intense psychological testing; police who know they will lose their jobs if they behave the way the vast majority of the PBA behave: like immature adolescents.
Most of all, we need to eliminate the fraudulent "broken windows" method of policing.
We need police trained to be the least racist they can be; police only hired after intense psychological testing; police who know they will lose their jobs if they behave the way the vast majority of the PBA behave: like immature adolescents.
Most of all, we need to eliminate the fraudulent "broken windows" method of policing.
5
At one time British police did not carry firearms. It is only recently that they have been issued guns on a regular basis. However, they managed to control those found breaking the law very well. Did the police start with a less confrontational approach? Did the police walk the beat to get to know the people living or frequenting the area?
Perhaps the police should take lessons in how to subdue someone from those who work in mental hospitals instead of from other police.
Perhaps the police should take lessons in how to subdue someone from those who work in mental hospitals instead of from other police.
3
The Bobbies did carry truncheons, which they applied liberally as needed.
In America, this is called "nightstick justice" and is forbidden.
In America, this is called "nightstick justice" and is forbidden.
Why are we surprised at this?
5
There are basically two kinds of "chokeholds": air chokes, and blood chokes.
Air chokes restrict the air supply. They hurt like hell, and are therefore more likely to induce compliance, but if the applier isn't careful, he can easily collapse the trachea or crush the hyoid bone, in addition to causing unconsciousness.
Blood chokes cut off the blood supply to the brain, which, if applied properly, will induce unconsciousness in 3-5 seconds.
I'd lay money that 99% of NYPD doesn't know this. This also appears to be the case in San Francisco. The police need to use dangerous techniques because they deal with dangerous situations, but some additional investment needs to be made in how thoroughly they are trained.
Air chokes restrict the air supply. They hurt like hell, and are therefore more likely to induce compliance, but if the applier isn't careful, he can easily collapse the trachea or crush the hyoid bone, in addition to causing unconsciousness.
Blood chokes cut off the blood supply to the brain, which, if applied properly, will induce unconsciousness in 3-5 seconds.
I'd lay money that 99% of NYPD doesn't know this. This also appears to be the case in San Francisco. The police need to use dangerous techniques because they deal with dangerous situations, but some additional investment needs to be made in how thoroughly they are trained.
8
OK, how much "initial investment" Who's going to compute how much Mr. Garner's life was worth. Not to mention the other minority victims NOT caught on video. Price scale? Compared to white woman who just did much worse but didn't even get slap on wrist. Get real! Poor black/brown folks aren't human beings in the eyes of NY's "finest".
2
When is the media going to get it right? Watch the video. The man was not choked. The take down hold had nothing to do with his death. He died from positional asphyxia, a well known phenomena, and still a big screw up by the NYPD. But not a "choke hold death"
12
both things happened, it started out as a choke hold then a cop literally "sat" on his neck with his knee/leg
2
And the coroner declared it a homicide.
2
The assassination of the two officers by a madman has nothing to do with the public's anger at nationwide abuse of citizens by police. Police never confronted this fellow until after the initial event. I wish people would stop trying to connect the two problems. Continued allowances for choke holds and guns as a first level action will never stop crazy people. Cops who behave this way do seem to think they need not use good judgement or even follow the rules that have been set up for them. Excuses, excuses, excuses.
21
it goes back to the screening of applicants and the hiring standards used. Who actually decides these things? There must be a board or committee that does it. Do these people just want mediocre, clean cut white kids out of Catholic school as cops? Those were the types who were hired dating back to the mid 1800's, when Irish Catholic and "proper" men with so-called "good conservative morals" ran the department- and also notorious for corruption, racism, patronage and being able to get away with murder. Say, it sounds much like what is going on at the NYPD TODAY!!!!
4
I first got into the field of local corrections in 1979. I was taught how to adminsiter a chokehold by another correctional officer. There was no department training at the time. In 1980, the hold was banned by our department due to the number of deaths it was causing elsewhere in the country. As a previous commenter points out, when used properly, it shouldn't result in death. The problem is, in the heat of a fight, and with limited training, it may be administered improperly. I really couldn't believe it when I learned it was still being used by some NYPS officers almost 35 years later.
14
Likewise, Flyer, I was also specifically trained in this technique during a class taught by a federal law enforcement officer..,mid 80s during which it was applied to student volunteers without incident. We were also pepper sprayed, as a matter of fact, I have been slammed to the ground so hard in training that my pepper spray was rendered completely useless, who cares right? One of my favorite stories was of a shorter officer I knew who rode a very large, dangerous outlaw piggy back, inside a bar until he "collapsed like a kneeling camel". There was clapping and cheering afterward. Ah the memories.
2
The men in blue who turn their backs on the mayor are would probably be the first ones in the line of duty would use the chokehold. If they have no respect for the mayor why would they have any respect for the common citizen?
23
What's more, they violated their own oath by pulling a "slowdown" on arrests out of adolescent pique -- instigated and exacerbated by their radicial union boss. Their juvenile prank accomplished no good and did a lot of harm.
2
The plus side of the NYPD's immature behavior was that it made clear they are uninterested in upholding the law, only in maintaining their chokehold on power.
Additionally, the statement that they would only make arrests if they were "absolutely necessary" and the fact that the city didn't descend into chaos when they stopped enforcing the law made it clear that a huge percentage of the activities of the force are not about protecting OR serving.
Additionally, the statement that they would only make arrests if they were "absolutely necessary" and the fact that the city didn't descend into chaos when they stopped enforcing the law made it clear that a huge percentage of the activities of the force are not about protecting OR serving.
3
I am certain that a chokehold did not kill that man. Not from seeing the video, over and over. What did then? Taking the incident apart, why was he having a confrontation with the police in the first place?
Because the police were enforcing the law against selling untaxed cigarettes in NYC. Why were the police doing that? Because Mayor Bill DiBlasio ordered them, through the chain of command, to do so.
The man, now dead, would not cooperate with the police. He said numerous times, "Just leave me alone, I just want to be left alone." So do countless other people accused of burglary, theft, murder and other various crimes.
All he had to do was go along, get his summons etc. and live to fight another day.
When the man was taken to the ground, the major contributing factor to his death, in my opinion, was his own obesity together with positional asphyxia. Police are supposed to be trained to watch for that and to avoid it with big people. This man's own fatness plus his struggles did him in.
But he did not cooperate and died as a result. Then Mayor DiBlasio threw his police department under the bus. That will never be forgiven or forgotten by the NYPD. Never.
The first few rules of how not to have a bad outcome when dealing with the police: Cooperate. Be polite. Follow instructions. Live long and prosper.
Because the police were enforcing the law against selling untaxed cigarettes in NYC. Why were the police doing that? Because Mayor Bill DiBlasio ordered them, through the chain of command, to do so.
The man, now dead, would not cooperate with the police. He said numerous times, "Just leave me alone, I just want to be left alone." So do countless other people accused of burglary, theft, murder and other various crimes.
All he had to do was go along, get his summons etc. and live to fight another day.
When the man was taken to the ground, the major contributing factor to his death, in my opinion, was his own obesity together with positional asphyxia. Police are supposed to be trained to watch for that and to avoid it with big people. This man's own fatness plus his struggles did him in.
But he did not cooperate and died as a result. Then Mayor DiBlasio threw his police department under the bus. That will never be forgiven or forgotten by the NYPD. Never.
The first few rules of how not to have a bad outcome when dealing with the police: Cooperate. Be polite. Follow instructions. Live long and prosper.
16
Common sense. Thank you.
2
Medical degree? The coroner has one, and he says it was the choke hold that killed Eric Garner. Next question.
14
Having been a cop in California, I'm amazed that so much of NYPD resources seem to be used for physical arrests (vs. a citation) for very low level misdemeanors or even what we would call infractions. Full on "Broken Windows" policing MAY have been necessary in NYC in the '70's but it looks like today all it does is force hundreds of unnecessary confrontations between the police and the citizenry and of course, put money in the city's coffers.
16
Sorry but this article is a FAIL, it should have at least described what a chokehold is versus just grabbing someone around the neck, which not particularly dangerous and what appears to have happened with Mr. Garner. In a chokehold the arm is positioned to place the throat in the crook of the arm and the forearm and bicep are squeezed to compress the carotid arteries, leading to unconsciouness. It is hazardous but not all that hazardous, especially compared to punching or hitting with a baton to subdue someone, even pepper spray and a Taser present some hazard. Violence is chaos and even the best practices often do not turn out turn out well.
It does not look to me like a chokehold was used in Mr. Garner's case, it was being swarmed and pulled down by several officers at once, one of the safer ways to do it and results in no injury in 99.999999% of the time. He "could not breath" because three cops were sitting on him, and EVERYONE says "I can't breath" or "that hurts" when be manhandled.
He died an hour later from a medical condition that the cops had no way of being aware of, he was a relatively young man, it was tragic but it would not have happened at all if he had submitted to arrest like he was legally obligated to do..
It does not look to me like a chokehold was used in Mr. Garner's case, it was being swarmed and pulled down by several officers at once, one of the safer ways to do it and results in no injury in 99.999999% of the time. He "could not breath" because three cops were sitting on him, and EVERYONE says "I can't breath" or "that hurts" when be manhandled.
He died an hour later from a medical condition that the cops had no way of being aware of, he was a relatively young man, it was tragic but it would not have happened at all if he had submitted to arrest like he was legally obligated to do..
14
First, the article described all those things. Second, the ME's report listed cause of death as being from the chokehold and chest compression with asthma and cardiovascular condition being a contributing factor. Even if you believe asthma and cardiovascular conditions to be so rare an officer could not conceive of them causing death, it's neither here nor there because (three), the position the offending officer used to ultimately subdue Garner is simply not allowed. In fact, your comments about the officer's lack of prior knowledge of Garner's condition is a pretty good explanation of why the move is banned in the first place. It is not always clear whether it will be lethal or not.
24
Crushing or compressing the airway to the point of restricting air flow is essentially strangling a person. It should not happen. Compressing arteries to render loss of consciousness, even if it occurs within 15 seconds, is unlikely to cause permanent damage if it is released relatively rapidly. This is more like a fainting episode that is induced by the compressor. There is generally enough oxygen to feed the brain for several minutes. But I'm not sure in the heat of the battle that it would be used correctly in many instances.
As far as Mr. Garner, the fact that he said "I can't breathe" and verbalized it pretty clearly several times makes me think his airway was actually okay (not crushed or constricted severely) and that the compression on his chest by several police on top of him had more to do with his death than the chokehold anyway.
As far as Mr. Garner, the fact that he said "I can't breathe" and verbalized it pretty clearly several times makes me think his airway was actually okay (not crushed or constricted severely) and that the compression on his chest by several police on top of him had more to do with his death than the chokehold anyway.
6
Better training and emphasis on retraining on how to control a bigger and stronger opponent, without resorting instinctively to a choke hold, is needed. When the Garner case was debated, I wrote that the choke hold of quotas placed on police officers is to blame for Eric Garner’s death. The officers involved, though not blameless, were part of a street crime unit; reduced to enforcing minor violations... Further revue revealed, the order came from 1 police plaza to enforce and place MR. Garner under arrest. To these officers it was an order given and an order to be enforced; resulting in the death of Mr. Garner. If officers were not plagued by the monthly number game and discretion was given back to the enforcing officer, perhaps we would not know the name of Eric Garner.
8
There is no moral obligation to obey bad orders or to respond to orders with illegal methods.
2
Mr. Johnson the law in NYS is even if the arrest is bad you have no right to resist, the court is to determine if it was lawful or not. Period. Sue later and make a ton of money. Now only his widow will get the cash.
1
Phil Messina is demonstrating a neck hold that is taught to South African commandos as a preferred method of breaking an opponent's neck (it shears the vertebra). That is one foolish way to try and subdue someone in a non-lethal situation.
From the Tamir Rice and Eric Garner videos it appears that a main problem may be not the use of chokeholds, but the utter disinterest on the part of some officers in attending to people who have been badly hurt by ANY application of force.
Oh, and broad failure of police departments to enforce basic discipline among their employees. It's very unsettling to see even a respected police leader like Bratton so timid in the face of open insubordination. We need radical change here.
From the Tamir Rice and Eric Garner videos it appears that a main problem may be not the use of chokeholds, but the utter disinterest on the part of some officers in attending to people who have been badly hurt by ANY application of force.
Oh, and broad failure of police departments to enforce basic discipline among their employees. It's very unsettling to see even a respected police leader like Bratton so timid in the face of open insubordination. We need radical change here.
17
mr messina spoke of a 100 year tradition of using chokeholds, a tactic that has been banned for twenty years. i hope we don't have too many 100 year veterans on the NYPD. in fact, i wonder how many officers that were on the force before the law was enacted are still 'on the job.' twenty and out is fairly commonplace
2
"Facts are stubborn things..." said President John Adams over 200 years ago. These chokehold stats should not surprise anyone with eyes, ears and a half a brain to objectively observe smartphone videos. Too bad these not-so-surprising revelations tarnish the vast majority of NYPD officers that act professionally to protect, serve and genuinely respect citizens -- citizens whose tax dollars pay for their salaries, benefits and equipment. Don't expect most of New York's hero-hyping dumb-down eyewitless news media to report substantively on these stubborn facts. Those days are long gone forever, if you still rely on them for real news.
4
There may be a "vast majority" of thoughtful, professional officers in the NYPD, but they are giving their thoughtless, unprofessional fellow officer a pass instead of standing up for what's right. That puts them all in the same category.
11
Faced with wrong-doing, to be silent is to acquiesce. To deny or defend the wrong-doing is to be an accessory.
5
A cop has to be thinking.....so then if in a fray with a person who resisting arrest and I grab him in a headlock to subdue him and that headlock slips to and arm around the neck.... I'M NOW THE BAD GUY?
Over 228,000 misdemeanor arrests last year with ZERO fatalities and I'm part of some idiotic conspiracy to kill people for some sick racial motive?
The city council passes a law that makes me responsible, without indemnification, for an alleged act of racal profiling while expecting me do do dozens of stops, any one of which could be an honest mistake in judgement and I suffer potential ruin?
I'm endlessly lectured on the evil of stereo typing while being stereo typed in the same breath by a host of haters and fools and no one seems to care or have the courage to speak up?
How can I endure such stupidity and still place myself in so vulnerable (both me and those who depend on and yes, even love me) position virtually every day; on duty or not?
Over 228,000 misdemeanor arrests last year with ZERO fatalities and I'm part of some idiotic conspiracy to kill people for some sick racial motive?
The city council passes a law that makes me responsible, without indemnification, for an alleged act of racal profiling while expecting me do do dozens of stops, any one of which could be an honest mistake in judgement and I suffer potential ruin?
I'm endlessly lectured on the evil of stereo typing while being stereo typed in the same breath by a host of haters and fools and no one seems to care or have the courage to speak up?
How can I endure such stupidity and still place myself in so vulnerable (both me and those who depend on and yes, even love me) position virtually every day; on duty or not?
8
All people want is accountability. If that's too much of a psychological burden for a police officer to bear, let him find another job.
2
You wrote;"A cop has to be thinking.....so then if in a fray with a person who resisting arrest and I grab him in a headlock to subdue him and that headlock slips to and arm around the neck.... I'M NOW THE BAD GUY?"
If that guy you have in a headlock is gasping for breath and pleading that he cannot breath, that should give you pause to consider if you are using excessive force.
The penalty for either selling loose cigarettes or resisting arrest should be decided by a judge and should not be death by police.
The punishment for minor infractions should not be death.
If that guy you have in a headlock is gasping for breath and pleading that he cannot breath, that should give you pause to consider if you are using excessive force.
The penalty for either selling loose cigarettes or resisting arrest should be decided by a judge and should not be death by police.
The punishment for minor infractions should not be death.
3
You make some illuminating points.
First off the vast majority of police officers do there jobs well and in accordance of the law, while everyday facing unknown dangers making split second decisions regarding the safety of citizens and themselves.
Now as to the ongoing issue of race bias and proper use of force issues. while I know that this is a very complicated and emotionally charged issue we can not keep letting it happen over and over, only dealing with it when it explodes on the front pages. It will take hard work and time but through better education in civll discourse from our class rooms to the work place we can do a lot better.
There will always be those that continue to be narrow minded selfish and yes prejudice that only care about their own agendas and beliefs, but we can certainly keep making life better for the majority.
1. government and the community leaders need to to make sure that local governments and agencies are filled with people that specifically in this case represent its citizens
2- Police officers that are more engaged in positive interaction with the community they serve instead of always seen as an adversary.
3- Those in leadership positions within the police departments need to set and maintain strict rules that are enforced to make sure all officers are taught first the use of proper verbal communications that can diffuse a situation and second the correct and legal use of force if the situation does escalate to a potential of danger to themselves and others.
Now as to the ongoing issue of race bias and proper use of force issues. while I know that this is a very complicated and emotionally charged issue we can not keep letting it happen over and over, only dealing with it when it explodes on the front pages. It will take hard work and time but through better education in civll discourse from our class rooms to the work place we can do a lot better.
There will always be those that continue to be narrow minded selfish and yes prejudice that only care about their own agendas and beliefs, but we can certainly keep making life better for the majority.
1. government and the community leaders need to to make sure that local governments and agencies are filled with people that specifically in this case represent its citizens
2- Police officers that are more engaged in positive interaction with the community they serve instead of always seen as an adversary.
3- Those in leadership positions within the police departments need to set and maintain strict rules that are enforced to make sure all officers are taught first the use of proper verbal communications that can diffuse a situation and second the correct and legal use of force if the situation does escalate to a potential of danger to themselves and others.
3
As a participant in many similar incidents, I do not think the chokehold killed Garner.
I think his obesity pressed to the ground cut off his wind. He should have been rolled off his belly as soon as control was gained. When you have someone under arrest you are basically responsible for his life.
The chokehold itself is a useful tool which should only be used in critical situations, e.g., losing a fight, not in routine takedowns like Garners.
I think his obesity pressed to the ground cut off his wind. He should have been rolled off his belly as soon as control was gained. When you have someone under arrest you are basically responsible for his life.
The chokehold itself is a useful tool which should only be used in critical situations, e.g., losing a fight, not in routine takedowns like Garners.
5
While acknowledging your personal experiences, the ME's report in this specific case identified the cause of death. It would not have occurred without the chokehold and chest compressions. The fact that Garner had asthmas and a heart condition is neither here nor there because even if the officers did not know about those conditions, they new police policy does not allow the use of chokeholds because they can be more dangerous than officers realize.
6
In other words, when he is unconscious and you've called for paramedics, you might want to perform CPR. As opposed to casually stepping over his body as though he was a piece of garbage. Watch the video!
Why don't politicians and news media champion the simple concept of NOT resisting arrest? Regardless of age, race, or sex if you are being arrested, comply with the police officer. If you are wrongfully arrested, let the court and your lawyer resolve it.
The bottom line is that once an officer has determined to arrest you, there is nothing you can do to change their mind. You will certainly will NOT dissuade them by resisting or arguing.
The bottom line is that once an officer has determined to arrest you, there is nothing you can do to change their mind. You will certainly will NOT dissuade them by resisting or arguing.
10
easy to say if you can afford a lawyer
7
Isn't that why the police are mad at de Blasio? For telling his son to be careful during any interactions with the police? Lawyers? You mean the overworked public defenders (god love 'em, I do) who might be able to help you in a few days, weeks or months?
Of course resisting isn't going to make an officer happy but it's part of the job. It's much better and more efficient policy to train the officers in correct procedure, or how to deal with difficult people, rather than expect the public to always behave the way we'd like.
I don't know what kind of world you want to live in, but a newspaper lobbying the public to OBEY sounds kind of creepy to me.
Of course resisting isn't going to make an officer happy but it's part of the job. It's much better and more efficient policy to train the officers in correct procedure, or how to deal with difficult people, rather than expect the public to always behave the way we'd like.
I don't know what kind of world you want to live in, but a newspaper lobbying the public to OBEY sounds kind of creepy to me.
6
Easy to say when "if you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed to represent you free of charge."
1
This shouldn't even be allowed! Innocent people are already getting murdered by the police. They say, "They're just doing they're jobs." How is shooting, suffocating, and now possibly choking someone to death, "doing your job?" Stick to the handcuffs and actually brief them when their in custody. Don't just murder someone, accidentally. This chokehold should stay banned. In the near future, there will be more riots and rallies.
7
This tactic was "banned" in name only by the NYPD. After Eric Garner's death I believed Officer Pantaleo when he stated he was using the hold he was taught in the academy. They are still teaching chokeholds in the academy, just by another name. If it is banned stop teaching it!
12
Under Bloomberg of the (roughly) 14 documented chokehold accusations leveled I think ONE officer lost vacation days, with no other recorded discipline. If it's going to be banned there must be enforcement. Otherwise . . .
27
Not all of the blame for using the choke hold can be laid at the feet of the police; people who don't want to cooperate with the police and take evasive actions provoke the potential use of excessive force from police. All a person has to do is comply. Do people really think that once they are engaged by the police that they're going to get away? That the police are just going to give up and let them go? Really?
15
Nobody's saying that the police have to let them go, just that this technique isn't allowed. Way to blame the victims.
8
You must have been watching a different video. I'm 66 and my last unarmed combat training was 44 years ago but I know I could have taken Mr. Garner down without touching his throat.
Of course I would not have felt compelled to argue with him and accelerate the situation either. Where was he going to escape too? Give him the summons and if he doesn't appear deal with it then. Selling loose cigarettes is a victimless misdemeanor similar to letting a parking meter run out.
Of course I would not have felt compelled to argue with him and accelerate the situation either. Where was he going to escape too? Give him the summons and if he doesn't appear deal with it then. Selling loose cigarettes is a victimless misdemeanor similar to letting a parking meter run out.
3
It doesn't give me any confidence to suggest that chokeholds be classified as deadly force and then be governed by the same rules that restrain the use of firearms. Neither seems to be a bar to injudicious taking of human life, better known as murder when civilians do it.
Much of this which occurs when multiple officers are on the scene is about "teaching lessons" not to defy police authority. Now, society does have some interest in that, but the supportive environment for police vengeance on those who don't immediately submit is toxic to our social institutions. Maybe we need clearer instructions to the public that they must submit or die...because that seems to be how many police see it.
In most other countries, police are adept at backing off and letting emotionally fraught situations cool off. Here, we get escalation right up to and including the death penalty, all over some loose ciggies. Frankly, letting that happen over and over is just evil, when with patience and an understanding even the most threatening of situations often resolve by simply backing off to the watchful waiting mode. We don't expect "suspects" to have this all figured out, but the lack of professionalism the "always escalate" doctrine demonstrates suggest the police are far too far away from figuring this out either. There's no reason other than pride to not choose deescalation over escalation as an effective tactic. The public should demand better. If officers want to be safer, so should they.
Much of this which occurs when multiple officers are on the scene is about "teaching lessons" not to defy police authority. Now, society does have some interest in that, but the supportive environment for police vengeance on those who don't immediately submit is toxic to our social institutions. Maybe we need clearer instructions to the public that they must submit or die...because that seems to be how many police see it.
In most other countries, police are adept at backing off and letting emotionally fraught situations cool off. Here, we get escalation right up to and including the death penalty, all over some loose ciggies. Frankly, letting that happen over and over is just evil, when with patience and an understanding even the most threatening of situations often resolve by simply backing off to the watchful waiting mode. We don't expect "suspects" to have this all figured out, but the lack of professionalism the "always escalate" doctrine demonstrates suggest the police are far too far away from figuring this out either. There's no reason other than pride to not choose deescalation over escalation as an effective tactic. The public should demand better. If officers want to be safer, so should they.
44
So many of our police officers are thugs who think they're above the law. A deadly tactic is banned and then they just ignore the ban with impunity. They get upset with the mayor and then just stop doing their jobs. We should fire half the NYPD now that they've made it obvious that the city can get along just fine without them.
26
If the command had been punishing them as was recommended by the Civilian Complaint Review Board, they wouldn't be out there hiking people to death with impunity. Ray Kelly has a lot of blood on his hands for failing to take the measures directed and routinely letting off officers behaving badly. The NYPD is a big fish that, like any other, rots from the head, and the citizens are left to deal with the stench.
10
So many of our civilians paint with a broad brush and blithely slander the entire police dept. Law enforcement stands between you and anarchy. Can you protect yourself, your loved ones, your property with no police assistance? Are they thugs when you call 911?
5
There's nothing "vexing" about choke holds. The police unions are just being insubordinate. No need for discussion. Put an end to it right away.
30
They are not just being insubordinate, they are being Republican disrupting the term of a duly elected mayor.
1
"For months the president of the union for city police officers, the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association, has said that Officer Pantaleo was not using a chokehold.
Mr. Bratton, who first said it appeared the officer had used one, has more recently suggested the officer may not have."
What a bunch of semantic nonsense.
Chokehold - any hold which causes choking
There, that's not so complicated, is it?
Mr. Bratton, who first said it appeared the officer had used one, has more recently suggested the officer may not have."
What a bunch of semantic nonsense.
Chokehold - any hold which causes choking
There, that's not so complicated, is it?
21
NO, but neither is this simple or obvious. . As pointed out in this article, the officer accused of choking Garner started out with an attempt at a headlock (without arm around the throat). His arm was on Garner's chest, not around the neck. Because the police were munchkin size compared to Garner, the Gentle Giant was able to pull away to the side. This led to officer's hand slipping around the neck as Garner was pulled to the floor. The officer was pulled by Garners motion between the Giant and a plate glass window of the store. He said he was afraid that both men would go thru the window in the tussle. So there was much more than the intentional chokehold story blasted by the media. Not semantic but very critical in evaluating the officer's intent. and action.
3
I just re-watched the video to be sure. Officer Pantaleo tried to grab under Mr. Garner's arm but then switched his grip to a chokehold (just like the one demonstrated by Mr. Messina in the video accompanying this article) with his left arm right across Mr. Garner's trachea and his right arm applying force. He held Mr. Garner in this chokehold all the way to the ground until he tried to roll him over. Mr. Garner can be heard saying "I can't breathe."
But don't believe me, just watch for yourself. You can't fool people with this longwinded, semantic nonsense.
The struggle starts at about 1:18 in this video: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2014/dec/04/i-cant-breathe-eric...
But don't believe me, just watch for yourself. You can't fool people with this longwinded, semantic nonsense.
The struggle starts at about 1:18 in this video: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2014/dec/04/i-cant-breathe-eric...
2
A number of people indicate a total lack of respect for all police officers, this based on the actions of a few. I wonder how they would feel if I disrespected all blacks based on the behavior of a few in the recent riots? Or disrespected all politicians because a few have been shown to be corrupt? Speaking from experience, the majority of police officers are competent, dedicated officers who are a credit to their uniform. As in every organization there are people who don't belong. They need to be weeded out. However, if we come to the conclusion (as some suggest) that all officers are inept what then is the alternative? Fire them all? And replace them with.....?
13
And what riots are you speaking of? There have been no "riots" in NYC. People are calling for the police to follow the rule of law. No one is "disrespecting" all cops. The idea that any criticism of the police is bad is akin to the whole "you're either with us or against us" mindset.
14
@Steve: If the Police want their respect back, here are a few simple steps:
Stop using banned police tactics. Banned means banned.
Let the good cops break the "thin blue line" and stop defending the bad ones. Let the bad cops be disciplined and, if necessary, prosecuted.
Get rid of Pat Lynch and any officer who is clearly fomenting insubordination.
Got it?
Stop using banned police tactics. Banned means banned.
Let the good cops break the "thin blue line" and stop defending the bad ones. Let the bad cops be disciplined and, if necessary, prosecuted.
Get rid of Pat Lynch and any officer who is clearly fomenting insubordination.
Got it?
23
I'm sorry, I mistook the fires and looting in Oakland and Ferguson for riots. I should remember to be more pc and call them "demonstrations".
3
A "slowdown" in enforcement activities by law enforcement officers and, yet, the city has not crumbled into ashes and ruin. Perhaps that is an indication that much of the enforcement being done was for far too petty things than warranted the manpower and resources. Not all city revenue is the same. It also begs the question as to whether or not NYPD is overstaffed. I wonder if the Union head took that into consideration when he orchestrated this mass act of disobedience.
I absolutely respect law enforcement but I will never cower away from calling the bad apples out when the situation warrants. It's about checks and balances and right now, I'm not seeing much of that in play.
Refusal to do one's job fully is a recipe for being fired for the vast majority of working Americans. Perhaps those in uniform in the NYPD need to stop and consider that fact and knock off the nonsense.
I absolutely respect law enforcement but I will never cower away from calling the bad apples out when the situation warrants. It's about checks and balances and right now, I'm not seeing much of that in play.
Refusal to do one's job fully is a recipe for being fired for the vast majority of working Americans. Perhaps those in uniform in the NYPD need to stop and consider that fact and knock off the nonsense.
27
Katie - I suspect that a decay in the quality of life would increase slowly but persistently if unchecked and people would start to smell it eventually. So I can't say (although I'm tempted to) that all the slowdown demonstrated was that we can cut the number of officers on the force. That said, I agree with your main point and I would have liked for the mayor to have stood up in front of the entire force and say something like this: "I'm your leader and I'm ordering you to cut it out now or get lost. If you feel more loyal to Patrick Lynch than to me, fine, go get a civilian job at the union headquarters. There are plenty of outstanding people who want to join the force."
5
You're only half right. Insubordination among the police -- a workforce whose self-perception of its power can and does go beyond the pale -- is a serious matter.
But your premature conclusion that the city has not descended into chaos because of decreased arrests and tickets for just a couple of weeks in the dead of winter is not evidence-based, and is potentially very dangerous. It certainly takes time for criminal actiivity -- which is institutional and not just individual, and which ebbs in the winter, just like other activities -- to adjust to new environments and new rules.
There is no good evidence shwoing the "broken windows" policing did not have much to do with the plummeting of NYC's violent and serious crime rates over a generation that makes NYC the nation's safest large city. The evidence that there is -- particularly the coinciding, time-wise, of "broken windows" with crime rate decrease -- rather strongly suggests that such policing is at least a factor. It would be a fool's errand to do away with it with what appears to work on the basis of an ideological agenda, which is what you proffer.
But your premature conclusion that the city has not descended into chaos because of decreased arrests and tickets for just a couple of weeks in the dead of winter is not evidence-based, and is potentially very dangerous. It certainly takes time for criminal actiivity -- which is institutional and not just individual, and which ebbs in the winter, just like other activities -- to adjust to new environments and new rules.
There is no good evidence shwoing the "broken windows" policing did not have much to do with the plummeting of NYC's violent and serious crime rates over a generation that makes NYC the nation's safest large city. The evidence that there is -- particularly the coinciding, time-wise, of "broken windows" with crime rate decrease -- rather strongly suggests that such policing is at least a factor. It would be a fool's errand to do away with it with what appears to work on the basis of an ideological agenda, which is what you proffer.
2
if this were the Army- Lynch and half the force would have been court martialed by now
1
The police, like priests, have long been given a status above the law. That is the problem.
It is no more reasonable to expect the Police Department to clean its own house than it was to expect that of the Church.
It is no more reasonable to expect the Police Department to clean its own house than it was to expect that of the Church.
24
a chokehold by an officer contributed to the death of an unarmed black man on Staten Island
-------------------------------------------------
What contributed to his death was his weight, his health and the fact the he resisted arrest. What should the police have done?
-------------------------------------------------
What contributed to his death was his weight, his health and the fact the he resisted arrest. What should the police have done?
7
The use of a banned practice should infuriate you, yet you prefer to blame the victim (his supposed compromised health) for his death. If you had watched the video, you would also notice that he is NOT resisting arrest.
20
How about not smother him to death?
21
What caused his death was the combination of the choke hold and the weight of four police officers sitting on top of him compressing his chest making it impossible for him to breathe. What the police should have done was subdue him in a non-lethal manner, arrest him, and take him to jail.
You have to love the 1st amendment - no matter how wrong you are, you still have the right to express your opinion for the world to read.
You have to love the 1st amendment - no matter how wrong you are, you still have the right to express your opinion for the world to read.
17
From repeated encounters with Eric Garner, NYPD should have known that police lives were not at risk in confronting him. On the day he died Garner's verbal confrontation drew an NYPD response that the police academy instructed long ago was to be used only as a last resort.
The issue of police self-control is central to avoiding repeats of the Garner case. According to NYPD's website, 21 is the minimum age to join the force. The part of the human brain that controls impulsive behavior does not mature until age 25 on average. Few people at age 21 have a substantial amount of adult-level life experience. Together these suggest that NYPD should re-consider its minimum hiring age.
The public has every right to expect that the police, who are armed civil servants, are under effective control, which starts with effective self-control by officers with physiologically mature brains and some quantity of adult-level life experience.
The issue of police self-control is central to avoiding repeats of the Garner case. According to NYPD's website, 21 is the minimum age to join the force. The part of the human brain that controls impulsive behavior does not mature until age 25 on average. Few people at age 21 have a substantial amount of adult-level life experience. Together these suggest that NYPD should re-consider its minimum hiring age.
The public has every right to expect that the police, who are armed civil servants, are under effective control, which starts with effective self-control by officers with physiologically mature brains and some quantity of adult-level life experience.
18
Raising the age until 25 might help a little, but isn't Pantaleo over 25? Weren't most of the others sitting on Garner also over 25? Cops like Panaleo should have been weeded out psychologically during the recruiting process, before a lot of money and time had been invested in his training at the Police Academy. It wouldn't surprise me if one-third of police shouldn't be carrying a gun and wearing a uniform conveying authority.
2
Pantaleo was reported to be age 29 -- and an eight-year veteran of NYPD -- in a story I read in November. Joined the force at 21 just out of college: no adult life experience, immature brain, armed with lethal force. No thanks!
This article begins by listing some of the disabling weapons available to police officers before having to draw his firearm. I don't understand it. Is it easier to choke someone instead of using a Taser? Is the close physical contact of the chokehold an advantage over pepper spray? Is the chokehold perfect and everything else not perfect?
6
Officers who use this technique effectively and their criminal subjects live longer. Only a baton or s.h. baton blow to the head, or gunshot wound will produce a similar unconscious and physically inert state. The only benefit of that outcome? It may preclude the need for mechanical restraints.
1
Watching Garner's murder, I was struck by how many police officers were there. I don't get it. Why were there five to seven police officers standing around on that particular sidewalk at that moment? I suspect that when the Feds get the answer to that question, a civil rights violation indictment will be issued.
Notice that the NYPD and its supporters have not flocked to post on this article about choke holds like they did with the De Blasio article. It is a safe bet that they are back on the police forums engaging in their racist and political rants.
Notice that the NYPD and its supporters have not flocked to post on this article about choke holds like they did with the De Blasio article. It is a safe bet that they are back on the police forums engaging in their racist and political rants.
25
More to the point, when the follow officers see one of their own violating department policy, why didn't they intervene? We all make mistakes. We have all been overcome with emotion in certain situations and done or said something we should have -- though I'm sure few of us have done so with such disastrous consequences. But when we see a co-worker or a family member about to make a mistake based on rage, I would hope that we would all step in and urge calm and restraint. Surely we have a right to expect as much from the police.
23
Your post is groundless, and worse. The police were there to enforce the law, in response to a neighborhood complaint, and in that case doing so meant effecting an arrest. Of course they should be present in numbers that help insure the success of their mission.
You state or imply that the cops have no business in neighborhoods and are racist ranters, not men and women (a black sergeant oversaw the team who engaged in the takedown) who are law enforcement professionals. Seems that you're a cop-hater.
Enlightened New Yorkers know that the police, and the work they've been doing for decades, are a substantial part of the reason why NYC is the nation's safest large city, and a good deal safer in most nabes than where you hail from, at that. They also know -- I'm from the neighborhood where this happened -- that men selling "loosies" near where they live, work, and have kids going to school, is without question inimical to their neighborhood's well-being. Spinning Mr. Garner's crime as less than serious is a lot of nonsense.
None of this means that the police and emegency medical responders did not engage in serious wrongdoing in the takedown, failure to intervene, and subsequent death of Mr. Garner.
I
You state or imply that the cops have no business in neighborhoods and are racist ranters, not men and women (a black sergeant oversaw the team who engaged in the takedown) who are law enforcement professionals. Seems that you're a cop-hater.
Enlightened New Yorkers know that the police, and the work they've been doing for decades, are a substantial part of the reason why NYC is the nation's safest large city, and a good deal safer in most nabes than where you hail from, at that. They also know -- I'm from the neighborhood where this happened -- that men selling "loosies" near where they live, work, and have kids going to school, is without question inimical to their neighborhood's well-being. Spinning Mr. Garner's crime as less than serious is a lot of nonsense.
None of this means that the police and emegency medical responders did not engage in serious wrongdoing in the takedown, failure to intervene, and subsequent death of Mr. Garner.
I
5
Surely you jest?
". . . pinning Mr. Garner's crime as less than serious is a lot of nonsense."
". . . less than serious . . . is nonsense" is the same as "serious." You think selling individual cigarettes is a serious crime? What would assault be -- monumental? Deadly assault -- stupendous and earth shaking? Murder or rape -- galactically significant?
I think you need adjective help.
". . . pinning Mr. Garner's crime as less than serious is a lot of nonsense."
". . . less than serious . . . is nonsense" is the same as "serious." You think selling individual cigarettes is a serious crime? What would assault be -- monumental? Deadly assault -- stupendous and earth shaking? Murder or rape -- galactically significant?
I think you need adjective help.
4
If you look at police experience beyond America you will see that chokeholds are unacceptable elsewhere. The 1993 decision to ban chokeholds correctly recognizes their dangers. This is not one of those situations where the an ill-informed public don't understand what police need to do to deal with a suspect and keep themselves safe. The police themselves have decided that chokeholds should not be used. The problem is police training, which puts both public and police at risk.
14
the chokehold is not the subject. the subject is: why are police officers allowed to get away with killing civilians? It would be one thing if it were self defense, but resisting arrest does not merit death. Instead of spelling out "chokeholds are banned" how about: killing unarmed civilians is banned and punishable by imprisonment of the officer involved?
37
At times it is necessary that a LEO take actions that may result in the death of a person resisting arrest or attempting to injure or kill the LEO. If a person does not want to be killed or be injured by a LEO all that person has to do is obey the LEO's commands. Killing an unarmed civilian, based upon the circumstances, is not and never has been illegal.
6
Your simplistic formula would result in police simultaneously being killed and injured on the job at greatly higher rates and leaving the profession in droves, such that the very civilians most benefitting from their presence and protection -- poor inner-city dwellers, disproportionately people of color -- would suffer the most from their absence.
A good example would be the Ferguson case, in whcih an unarmed civilian, per all the existing physical evidence at hand (and contradicted by zero physical evidence), engaged in point-blank physical struggle with an officer in his car, likely going for the officer's gun.
A good example would be the Ferguson case, in whcih an unarmed civilian, per all the existing physical evidence at hand (and contradicted by zero physical evidence), engaged in point-blank physical struggle with an officer in his car, likely going for the officer's gun.
4
"- poor inner-city dwellers, disproportionately people of color -- would suffer the most from their absence."
Exactly Dennis. Who do you think is responsible for most of the violent crime in America?
Exactly Dennis. Who do you think is responsible for most of the violent crime in America?
2
The most worrisome thing is that ISIS sleeper cells described by Senator Feinstein will celebrate after reading that police have been further tethered when the times call for a no-holds-barred attitude regarding our security posture. This unnecessary debate will save terrorists a lot of time and treasure otherwise wasted on probing for reaction.
1
Talk about conflating completely unrelated items. Huey Long was right: fascism in this country will come in the guise of national security.
15
The sad thing is, people like the "air Marshal" are the mirror image of the ISIS fanatics they rail against.
11
Hey there, I missed you on the last thread, Air Marshal. In answer to your question (if you'll recall, you said we should "join up" or settle for what we've got, meaning the current state of affairs in police/citizen interactions), here are my ideas:
We should have citizen oversight boards. Police work for us, not the other way around. We should continue to decriminalize or legalize drugs. Police departments should have officers get out of their cars and walk a beat. Modify the reasonable use of force doctrine so that courts can consider events leading up to an altercation. Stop incarcerating so many poor people and minorities. Congress should put a stop to giving surplus military equipment to municipalities. Quit giving so much power to the private prison industry. Justice Department investigations. Body cameras. Lobby local city councils. Protest.
Not easy, but certainly lots more to do than join up or take it.
We should have citizen oversight boards. Police work for us, not the other way around. We should continue to decriminalize or legalize drugs. Police departments should have officers get out of their cars and walk a beat. Modify the reasonable use of force doctrine so that courts can consider events leading up to an altercation. Stop incarcerating so many poor people and minorities. Congress should put a stop to giving surplus military equipment to municipalities. Quit giving so much power to the private prison industry. Justice Department investigations. Body cameras. Lobby local city councils. Protest.
Not easy, but certainly lots more to do than join up or take it.
3
It's comforting to know that in addition to being in the military there are still honest ways to make a living where you can kill a fellow human without any consequence of doing so. Plus, just like being in the military, or being a priest, you can demand respect just because of how you dress and not because you earned it. You're just automatically the "finest" and a "hero" to boot. What a country; the best that ever was, is, or will be, under some god no less!
37
The priests and their bishops are finally being punished; the military (except for a few low-level scapegoats) and police not yet.
4
It seems as soon as someone puts on that uniform he/she becomes sacrosanct in this country.
All 'police' is free to do as they like usually, 1st amendment rights stop existing (otherwise you be charged w/either obstruction or lying), and in general a shoot first, ask later mentality is evident. If you sign up to be a uniformed person (military or running the streets of cities) you know that you can be hurt, shot at etc, it doesn't just materialize a second prior to an incident.
Sure, police has a right to defend themselves, but the case in Ohio where the cop jumped out and shot immediately, or the case in NYC where the uniformed person shot someone from above in a dark staircase are not self-defense.
If there would be meaningful regulation in regards to guns, and a less omnipotent behavior of uniformed individuals, things would be a lot better.
For my part, I have no respect for so called law enforcement in this country in its current state, nor do they deserve it.
All 'police' is free to do as they like usually, 1st amendment rights stop existing (otherwise you be charged w/either obstruction or lying), and in general a shoot first, ask later mentality is evident. If you sign up to be a uniformed person (military or running the streets of cities) you know that you can be hurt, shot at etc, it doesn't just materialize a second prior to an incident.
Sure, police has a right to defend themselves, but the case in Ohio where the cop jumped out and shot immediately, or the case in NYC where the uniformed person shot someone from above in a dark staircase are not self-defense.
If there would be meaningful regulation in regards to guns, and a less omnipotent behavior of uniformed individuals, things would be a lot better.
For my part, I have no respect for so called law enforcement in this country in its current state, nor do they deserve it.
40
If police were punished for their lethal and disproportionate overreactions, their behavior would improve. Their superiors at most slap them on the wrist. The police commissioner should be given a warning if not be fired.
3
Some 50 years ago I lived in Queens along with lots of police neighbors. Most were hard working and nice neighbors. But there were a handful who disregarded all the rules. They parked their vehicles anywhere, anytime regardless of the signs. They held parties, got drunk and made noise till all hours. When their child was accused of wrong doing they made sure to get together with the complaining neighbor and "have a talk." They believed a badge was a 24 hr/365 day a year get out of jail card.
This report and the actions of the past few weeks suggests that there still are dysfunctional cops. The NYPD brass and politicians need to grow a backbone and straighten out this twisted logic of what it means to be a professional peace officer.
This report and the actions of the past few weeks suggests that there still are dysfunctional cops. The NYPD brass and politicians need to grow a backbone and straighten out this twisted logic of what it means to be a professional peace officer.
80
The shame is that the "good" cops look on without taking steps to admonish the "bad" cops.
7
The gentleman is a little rusty on his Aikido moves :) He is not controlling the wrist angle with his thumb(s). Otherwise not bad for an old timer :) The so called seatbelt take down was invented to avoid the obvious issues that can arise with any hold that involves the neck. The carotid choke leads to quick unconsciousness without compromising the airway, however, during a struggle a carotid hold can quickly become any other choke hold. Tasers are a much better alternative that can reduce injury to the officers and the civilian. To those that complain about Tasers they should be reminded that the alternatives are bullets or sticks both which carry a much higher risk of death of severe injury.
4
Why should our police force be militarized in the first place? Unless they're responding to a violent crime, they need to stand down, holster their weapons, and avoid jumping to biased split-second decisions.
22
Contributed to? He'd still be alive if they hadn't strangled him, so how about using the right words.
55
Please don't ask any questions about the NYPD's use of chokeholds, or any of its procedures. The important thing to remember is that if the police do it, then it must be legal and good and fair and decent.
30
Please don't question any form of criminal activity. The important thing to remember is that although criminals do it, and it is illegal, bad, unfair and indecent, it still doesn't bother liberals.
2
If an office uses a chokehold, fire them. What about this is so difficult to understand?
If police management refuses to act the mayor needs to step in and ensure violent cops are off the streets.
If police management refuses to act the mayor needs to step in and ensure violent cops are off the streets.
32
It's not at all hard to understand. But history gets in the way. The police of NYC have a bad history of corruption and racism. I'd hate to take a poll of the middle management of the forces. I do remember "White shirts" pepper-spraying Occupy demonstrators who were already in custody and sitting quietly behind a police barrier. BTW, check the numbers of cops who attend the St. Patrick's Day Parade. (And my logo, sunburst on blue) represents my Irish birth and education.
Its very nice, my first guess was either a solar powered avatar or a broken pressure plate off the clutch of a '73 Corolla but there is so much more, isn't there?
It's more than a little odd that the disagreement over whether Officer Pantaleo actually employed a chokehold does not appear until the end of this article.
Consider the progression this article takes: from "the police in New York continue to use the tactic, and in July, a chokehold by an officer contributed to the death of an unarmed black man on Staten Island" to "Mr. Bratton, who first said it appeared the officer had used one, has more recently suggested the officer may not have."
If he didn't use a chokehold, as this line about Mr. Bratton suggests, then he didn't break any policy, and there is no need to vilify him. The NYT admits in this article that there is a dispute over whether a chokehold occurred, but still concludes early on that one did. What??
Perhaps it would also be relevant to note that the medical examiner found no damage to Mr. Garner's windpipe, or that he died of cardiac arrest, not asphyxiation, as would result from being choked to death.
Consider the progression this article takes: from "the police in New York continue to use the tactic, and in July, a chokehold by an officer contributed to the death of an unarmed black man on Staten Island" to "Mr. Bratton, who first said it appeared the officer had used one, has more recently suggested the officer may not have."
If he didn't use a chokehold, as this line about Mr. Bratton suggests, then he didn't break any policy, and there is no need to vilify him. The NYT admits in this article that there is a dispute over whether a chokehold occurred, but still concludes early on that one did. What??
Perhaps it would also be relevant to note that the medical examiner found no damage to Mr. Garner's windpipe, or that he died of cardiac arrest, not asphyxiation, as would result from being choked to death.
16
They used a choke hold, we have video proof. The police killed an unarmed men and didn't provide any kind of medical assistance or even attempt to resuscitate them. I feel bad for you guys living in the US and thinking this is up for discussion or even normal. Let me tell you something, in civilized countries like in the north of Europe there would never be such a pathetic discussion over details, the police murdered somehow, end of story.
8
You sound like a Philadelphia lawyer. Why was it necessary for 4 or 5 policemen to sit on Mr. Garner while Officer Pantaleo used a chokehold or a similar hold and while Mr. Garner repeated, I can't breathe? For selling a few cigarettes illegally, which is on the level of parking at a yellow curb or an expired meter violation.
6
Cause of death, from the medical examiner's report: "compression of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police."
The ‘disagreement’ about whether Pantoleo used a choke hold isn’t a disagreement at all. It’s a semantic game designed to diffuse blame.
The ‘disagreement’ about whether Pantoleo used a choke hold isn’t a disagreement at all. It’s a semantic game designed to diffuse blame.
2
Let's cut to the chase: the police like the choke hold and they don't care if it kills the suspect. They really don't. And why should they? It's not like they're punished for using it, even when the suspect dies. The fact that there's a law on the books doesn't seem to matter either, since apparently the police are correct in considering themselves above the law. How many cops have been indicted, no less convicted, for killing suspects with the choke hold?
Although it's not really funny, I'm going to paraphrase a joke by Louis C.K. that highlights the police's attitude towards this issue: "The officer was forced to use a choke hold on the suspect, and the suspect got himself asphyxiated."
The people at the very top of law enforcement are going to have to stop blaming the Mayor and the Mayor's family, throw caution to the wind and make the radical decision to hold their forces accountable for their actions. Otherwise we're going to be chasing our tails on this for years to come while suspects continue to get themselves asphyxiated.
Although it's not really funny, I'm going to paraphrase a joke by Louis C.K. that highlights the police's attitude towards this issue: "The officer was forced to use a choke hold on the suspect, and the suspect got himself asphyxiated."
The people at the very top of law enforcement are going to have to stop blaming the Mayor and the Mayor's family, throw caution to the wind and make the radical decision to hold their forces accountable for their actions. Otherwise we're going to be chasing our tails on this for years to come while suspects continue to get themselves asphyxiated.
65
A choke-hold was not used on Eric Garner - period.
He was taken to the ground from the neck in two seconds. He died because he was severely overweight, asthmatic, and exerting himself by resisting a lawful arrest causing a heart attack.
It is possible the officers on the scene did not properly address his condition once he stated he was in medical distress - but no one is even making that a point of contention. They are just chanting lies as they did in Ferguson, and betting most people are not really paying attention.
Two issues here:
1. Don't pass laws you don't want the police to enforce. That's all they do - they don't decide what's a crime.
2. Police are given clear guidelines on what kind of force they can use in what kind of situations. They should only be disciplined or prosecuted when they fail to adhere to those guidelines.
Don't like it? Tell your elected official's to change the guidelines - but then be willing to live with the consequences of bad police policies. But leave the cops alone.
Garner's death was a tragedy - but one entirely of his own making.
He was taken to the ground from the neck in two seconds. He died because he was severely overweight, asthmatic, and exerting himself by resisting a lawful arrest causing a heart attack.
It is possible the officers on the scene did not properly address his condition once he stated he was in medical distress - but no one is even making that a point of contention. They are just chanting lies as they did in Ferguson, and betting most people are not really paying attention.
Two issues here:
1. Don't pass laws you don't want the police to enforce. That's all they do - they don't decide what's a crime.
2. Police are given clear guidelines on what kind of force they can use in what kind of situations. They should only be disciplined or prosecuted when they fail to adhere to those guidelines.
Don't like it? Tell your elected official's to change the guidelines - but then be willing to live with the consequences of bad police policies. But leave the cops alone.
Garner's death was a tragedy - but one entirely of his own making.
13
Where is the logic in taking down someone who is selling loosies? Eric Garner poised no threat to anyone or any property. He was not attempting to evade the police. His empty hands were always in sight. All he was guilty of was having a bad attitude.
16
I can't breathe. How many times did the victim say that? The cops are sworn to protect. No one there that day protected Mr. Garner.
22
@Publius: I just watched the video and timed the choke hold.
From the time the choke hold was commenced, it was applied for 17 seconds until the officer released Mr. Garner's neck. Your assertion of two seconds is ridiculous.
For another 31 seconds (possibly more, there is a break in the video), Mr. Garner's head was pinned to the ground against a wall. His face was not visible. Wherther his airway was encumbered by a hand or fingers is not possible to ascertain in this video. He is motionless at this point except for being shaken by the officers.
No aid was given by the officers as he lay clearly unconscious and dieing.
The police are trained to handle situations without use of force. This was a cold blooded killing. Whether it was intentional is for a jury to decide.
From the time the choke hold was commenced, it was applied for 17 seconds until the officer released Mr. Garner's neck. Your assertion of two seconds is ridiculous.
For another 31 seconds (possibly more, there is a break in the video), Mr. Garner's head was pinned to the ground against a wall. His face was not visible. Wherther his airway was encumbered by a hand or fingers is not possible to ascertain in this video. He is motionless at this point except for being shaken by the officers.
No aid was given by the officers as he lay clearly unconscious and dieing.
The police are trained to handle situations without use of force. This was a cold blooded killing. Whether it was intentional is for a jury to decide.
24
The police officers who are breaking the law by using illegal chokeholds should be prosecuted. At the very least, they should be fired. The whole ‘broken windows’ policy is based on the theory that small crimes should be prosecuted before the perpetrator goes on to larger crimes. If a cop who uses the chokehold on someone who doesn’t die is prosecuted then he won’t be on the force to kill someone with a chokehold. As long as this is considered a crime but it’s ignored by the police force, it reinforces the feeling among cops that they’re above the law. It also reinforces the feeling in minority communities that the law won’t protect them.
32
lets be clear, they aren't illegal, they are not considered to be valid by policy. Go watch two kids wrestling and you will see similar moves attempted. Mr Garner died of asphyxiation, probably because a bunch of guys were sitting on his back keeping him from breathing and he was overweight and asthmatic making him more susceptible to this problem. The real question is whether aggressive enforcement of misdemeanor offenses is what we want that do not threaten the peace and tranquility. Having beat cops enforce sales tax laws is probably a mistake.
5
Chet: ... (choke holds) "aren't illegal, they are not considered to be valid by policy"
No. They are BANNED by NYPD policy.
No. They are BANNED by NYPD policy.
4
These rogue police officers have to be stopped. If de Blasio crawls down from this confrontation, the police will be emboldened and have nothing to fear from their lawlessness. It is imperative that those who are entrusted to enforce the law obey the law, especially rules that are adopted by their own department to protect civilians from excessive force at the hands of the very people entrusted to keep us safe.
I would like to think that I am fairly moderate in my views of the police. I used to think that almost all of them were people of good will who only wanted to do their job well. But when almost all police stand in solidarity with those who break the laws and department rules, that makes me deeply question my beliefs in that regard. If they provide cover to bad cops, they deserve no respect.
I would like to think that I am fairly moderate in my views of the police. I used to think that almost all of them were people of good will who only wanted to do their job well. But when almost all police stand in solidarity with those who break the laws and department rules, that makes me deeply question my beliefs in that regard. If they provide cover to bad cops, they deserve no respect.
55
"Rogue police officers"? Twenty or 30 years ago there was a big story/expose that showed the NYPD barrel of apples was rotten. Previously it had been said there were a few rotten apples in every barrel; in fact, it turned out most of the barrel was rotten. Alas, it's gotten so bad the cops and their union feel they run "enforcement," not the commissioner or mayor.
5
There are always excuses by the police apologists. It is against policy, but that's ok because it is a 100 year tradition. It's not really a chokehold because .... any excuses ... [the officer's left pinkie finger was not extended?]. If a police officer is prepared to engage in a life-threating act like choke hold, he/she should be just as prepared to discharge a weapon. The fact is it is used when not justified. This is not a complicated issue. The NYPD has had for years clear policy prohibiting choke holds. Too many police officers (no doubt in reliance upon the union leader/de facto chief of police) have decided to ignore it. As another commenter suggested, if an officer engages in a choke hold, he/she should be fired. Period. It is time for the major to exercise some leadership and stop kowtowing to the NYPD.
46
Has right-wing talk radio or Fox news been advocating what you've suggested? In the occasional snatches I've heard, they've been very lenient on the police.
2
Tangling with a man is no easy task, nor is it fun. The cops have a right to expect no meaningful resistance from a suspect and they should be free to defend themselves.
I've known men with muscular necks and upper body structure who I could not control with any sort of choke hold, and I know some who gasp for air running into the house from the car in the rain. It's not the hold per se that hurts a person, it's the poor evaluation of the suspect as and after these actions are performed.
A cop may be given to ignoring a suspect's complaints once he's established the adversarial relationship that comes with any sort of hands-on struggle. Certainly, the officers ignored Eric Garner's direct vocalization of inability to breath. And it does seem that "once you get them going" police express a warrior mentality, and whole situations go downhill rapidly.
As much as cameras, I'd like to see heart monitors on some police. At some point they seem to go over the edge, and it would be a good point to try to prevent.
I've known men with muscular necks and upper body structure who I could not control with any sort of choke hold, and I know some who gasp for air running into the house from the car in the rain. It's not the hold per se that hurts a person, it's the poor evaluation of the suspect as and after these actions are performed.
A cop may be given to ignoring a suspect's complaints once he's established the adversarial relationship that comes with any sort of hands-on struggle. Certainly, the officers ignored Eric Garner's direct vocalization of inability to breath. And it does seem that "once you get them going" police express a warrior mentality, and whole situations go downhill rapidly.
As much as cameras, I'd like to see heart monitors on some police. At some point they seem to go over the edge, and it would be a good point to try to prevent.
9
@CK: To categorically respond to your points:
1. "The cops have a right to expect no meaningful resistance from a suspect and they should be free to defend themselves." Mr. Garner was resisting however there was no aggression being exhibited other than pushing the officer's hand away. Look at the video.
2. "I've known men with muscular necks and upper body structure who I could not control with any sort of choke hold...." Your point is irrelevant. This hold forbidden by the NYPD. Forbidden. No equivocation allowed.
3. "A cop may be given to ignoring a suspect's complaints once he's established the adversarial relationship that comes with any sort of hands-on struggle." The man was unconscious. He no longer had the ability to be an adversary.
4. "I'd like to see heart monitors on some police. At some point they seem to go over the edge, and it would be a good point to try to prevent." What is needed here is psychological profiling and discipline that weeds out the bad cops BEFORE they're on the job and gets them OFF the job when they turn bad.
Stop making excuses for bad policing.
1. "The cops have a right to expect no meaningful resistance from a suspect and they should be free to defend themselves." Mr. Garner was resisting however there was no aggression being exhibited other than pushing the officer's hand away. Look at the video.
2. "I've known men with muscular necks and upper body structure who I could not control with any sort of choke hold...." Your point is irrelevant. This hold forbidden by the NYPD. Forbidden. No equivocation allowed.
3. "A cop may be given to ignoring a suspect's complaints once he's established the adversarial relationship that comes with any sort of hands-on struggle." The man was unconscious. He no longer had the ability to be an adversary.
4. "I'd like to see heart monitors on some police. At some point they seem to go over the edge, and it would be a good point to try to prevent." What is needed here is psychological profiling and discipline that weeds out the bad cops BEFORE they're on the job and gets them OFF the job when they turn bad.
Stop making excuses for bad policing.
10
You categorically missed my points.
The story is about application of force, a very necessary thing in police work. I was addressing that in general and it's misuse particular, not just one particular case. I did not make one excuse, nor did I defend the police. There is more how injuries happen than your, "cops have psych problems" which is really just an expression of dislike.
I am criticizing the police, while addressing realities that lead to cases like Garner, without stressing outrage, of which there is plenty in print without adding mine, or in fact yours.
The story is about application of force, a very necessary thing in police work. I was addressing that in general and it's misuse particular, not just one particular case. I did not make one excuse, nor did I defend the police. There is more how injuries happen than your, "cops have psych problems" which is really just an expression of dislike.
I am criticizing the police, while addressing realities that lead to cases like Garner, without stressing outrage, of which there is plenty in print without adding mine, or in fact yours.
4
Typo: "There is more TO how injuries happen ...."
Semantics aside, the video shows a choke hold.
It also shows significant violation of Garner's rights as both a citizen and a human being.
But I suspect neither had much to do with his death. He probably died as a result of the piling on (initial compression of his chest from four officers added to his own weight) followed by the constriction due to handcuffing him. Both of which the police still feel is justified because he 'resisted arrest'.
The police are of course wrong. He wasn't resisting arrest at that point. He was in a complete panic because he was drowning, the muscles of his lungs could not expand against the weight. The same panic induced by water boarding.
Is it just me or did there seem to be an awful lot of cops in casual plain clothes ready to jump in. More cops then citizens on that particular sidewalk.
It also shows significant violation of Garner's rights as both a citizen and a human being.
But I suspect neither had much to do with his death. He probably died as a result of the piling on (initial compression of his chest from four officers added to his own weight) followed by the constriction due to handcuffing him. Both of which the police still feel is justified because he 'resisted arrest'.
The police are of course wrong. He wasn't resisting arrest at that point. He was in a complete panic because he was drowning, the muscles of his lungs could not expand against the weight. The same panic induced by water boarding.
Is it just me or did there seem to be an awful lot of cops in casual plain clothes ready to jump in. More cops then citizens on that particular sidewalk.
99
Yes, all of us who saw the video would call it a choke hold. And then we watched 6 officers stand around and do nothing for over 5 minutes while Garner lay on the ground.
16
So it seems that the largest issue facing police departments is the inability to police themselves. I see numerous cases of violations of not only the law but also the department rules, that would get anyone immediately fired at any other job. It seems, for the most part this grants the offending officer a "paid leave". In all other workplaces this is called a vacation.
We see this occur with DA's who are work closely with the police. How is it that they can indict a ham sandwich, but can rarely indict an officer? Well the reason is the blue line, their life would become very difficult if they did. The current bullying tactics of the NYPD are proving how that works right now. The DA in Ferguson went to great lengths to make sure that officer was not indicted, providing a long convoluted, confusing presentation that predictably baffled the intended.
We obviously need a completely unbiased group to police the police, and a DA that does not work day in and day out with the very people they need to prosecute. The system is very broken, and is obvious the people are unsatisfied.
We see this occur with DA's who are work closely with the police. How is it that they can indict a ham sandwich, but can rarely indict an officer? Well the reason is the blue line, their life would become very difficult if they did. The current bullying tactics of the NYPD are proving how that works right now. The DA in Ferguson went to great lengths to make sure that officer was not indicted, providing a long convoluted, confusing presentation that predictably baffled the intended.
We obviously need a completely unbiased group to police the police, and a DA that does not work day in and day out with the very people they need to prosecute. The system is very broken, and is obvious the people are unsatisfied.
59
In no other modern country is the casual deployment of lethal force so easily tolerated and in fact celebrated. Americans seem to enjoy living in their self-created nightmare.
42
Believe it or not, there are policemen who would rather fight an armed thug than see a young lady walk into a family planning facility.
When a suspect says, "I can't breathe!" you let up, check his condition, and don't wait for him to say it a dozen times more. And to those who've claimed the contrary, you CAN speak while being choked, as long as you can exhale.
43
Apparently they were worried about him sprinting away from them.
The SF police department fairly recently shot a man in a wheelchair in the groin. That's right, a wheelchair. Now this person was disturbed and had a knife, but 5 large men could not find a broom to stick in the spokes? Push the wheelchair over? BTW these kinds of things occur daily in ER's and psych wards, no one seems to get shot.
A couple of 14 year olds could have ended that more peacefully.
The SF police department fairly recently shot a man in a wheelchair in the groin. That's right, a wheelchair. Now this person was disturbed and had a knife, but 5 large men could not find a broom to stick in the spokes? Push the wheelchair over? BTW these kinds of things occur daily in ER's and psych wards, no one seems to get shot.
A couple of 14 year olds could have ended that more peacefully.
46
That´s just it. When thugs are allowed to, they will find ANY excuses to do what they like most: harming people for their own sick pleasure. I posit that MOST of those in police forces in the US have some serious ethical and mental issues, and are instinctively attracted to positions where they can inflict damage and abuse without consequences. The real problem is that the gullible American public for too long have been indoctrinated to love uniforms and authority, and to throw around the "heroe" label casually and without scrutiny of those that feed from that misperception. Now you are surrounded by a quasi-maffia force that has the upper hand and the weapons. Good luck to you unsuspecting, unarmed, law-abiding citizens, you can only hide in numbers and hope yours doesn't come up on the street when you meet these thugs in uniform.
18
Joseph, you say:
And to those who've claimed the contrary, you CAN speak while being choked, as long as you can exhale.
I think the claim is that you cannot speak if you cannot breathe, not just while being choked. You can exhale only if you can breathe.
And to those who've claimed the contrary, you CAN speak while being choked, as long as you can exhale.
I think the claim is that you cannot speak if you cannot breathe, not just while being choked. You can exhale only if you can breathe.
Also, look at the data on how police are subsequently rewarded, or have the files cleaned, even if they have been disciplined for breaking the rules and hurting people.
23
The chokehold could be acceptable only in an immediately dangerous situation, which Eric Garner selling cigarettes and saying he didn't want to be arrested would not have met. If there is a method to doing this safely, officers should be given training and refreshers on how to do so and given what conditions. No more life lost under murky circumstances.
14
the camera was running. If not for that fact Garner's death would have gone unnoticed.
9
The Staten Island precinct captain needs to explain why a team of six police officers was sent out in response to a complaint that one man was sitting on the sidewalk selling illegal cigarettes. One or two officers would have been sufficient. And to their everlasting shame, five officers stood by and watched their colleague administer the illegal chokehold. Not one of them had the compassion to aid the dying victim.
73
It appears there wasn't enough work for the police officers. Save taxes. Cut their budget.
6
I read a nursing textbook which explained to psychiatric nurses how to place a violent patient in restraints.
It took 5 nurses: 1 to hold each arm and leg, and 1 to talk to the patient calmly to explain to him what they were going to do.
I've never heard of nurses killing a disturbed patient trying to restrain him.
It took 5 nurses: 1 to hold each arm and leg, and 1 to talk to the patient calmly to explain to him what they were going to do.
I've never heard of nurses killing a disturbed patient trying to restrain him.
4
Norman, then let me be the first to educate you. It happens more often than it should. Usually as result of proning (lying on the chest) restrained patients on a bed or gurney after a tranquilizer and sedative are used. Patients are not adequately examined for physiological causes to altered mental status before admission to psychiatric services can have a very bad day. Early onset brain hemorrhage, for example example. An old saying comes to mind, "Well, at least Joe had a good psychiatrist."
If a coroner EVER rules that someone died of a homicide, and we as a society know who contributed to that outcome, then there should be a legal mechanism which mandates an indictment. It's the least we can do to pay our respects to the dead, and to ensure that a similar instance will not occur again.
It's ridiculous that Phil Messina argues that there is a "tradition of the chokehold." There have been plenty of 'traditions' which our society has let go of, for very good reasons.
It's ridiculous that Phil Messina argues that there is a "tradition of the chokehold." There have been plenty of 'traditions' which our society has let go of, for very good reasons.
70
One of our "traditions" was lynching Black folks. Strangely, sadly, I'm not sure we're over that just yet.
14
Right on. There used to be a tradition of allowing men to beat their wives senseless, to break their bones. Society now makes it illegal.
6
Here's an idea. Fire any officer who uses a chokehold and keeping firing the next and the next until they get the message.
152
Good idea.
And if every officer who turned his back on the mayor were fired for insubordination, we would have a better police force.
And if every officer who turned his back on the mayor were fired for insubordination, we would have a better police force.
4
PBA and Lynch will order a slow down again if that were to happen. The city gave the union way too much power back in the 1970's whith those contract giveaways. These liberal politicians created the monster we know as the PBA and now the citizens of NYC are paying for it dearly.
1
Mr Garner was not dying before the police got there; therefore, the choke hold which was placed on him did not "contribute" to his death. It caused his death.
139
Let me see if I've got this right: The NYPD has been doing something that was banned twenty years ago. And they're miffed because they feel dissed by the mayor?
147
the stop and frisk cops too were doing something that was banned almost 40 years ago, the pot bust after an illegal search.
8
I am glad that we have an opportunity to comment on this important issue. The NYPD fought the City Council tooth and nail when it first pass the legislation and then overruled Bloomberg's veto to establish the Inspector General. And this is exactly why, the NYPD does not want its activities scrutinized or to be held accountable for its actions. The NYPD can rationalize anything that its does, especially when it is criminal and illegal. Remember when their members were protesting that they were being told to stop fixing tickets. Of course, they will argue for choke holds even when it kills people. They defended the officers who sodomized Abner Louima too.
89
Citizens should not stop protesting until laws are passed that prevent cops from becoming murderers, or as in the case of Pantaleo, will imprison cops who are clearly committing murder. In this day and age, lethal force should never be required to apprehend an unarmed target.
85
How do you know someone is unarmed until you have subdued them and searched them and found no weapon---hmmm?
1
Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human. To commit murder you have to be in a premeditated state of mind to intentionally kill someone. In other words, you have to want to kill someone. You need to be more circumspect in your assertions above, which infer that the majority of deaths that occur in confrontations between cops and suspects are the result of premeditation.
2
Martin: you don't. But you also don't presume everyone you encounter is a violent criminal. (Unless, of course, you're suggesting that you can judge criminality from a person's appearance).
7
Some facts, however, need to be stated clearly. A grand jury’s failure to indict does not mean that there was no culpabilility on the part of Officer Pantaleo. It only means that the grand jury did not find sufficient basis to indict. None of us but Officer Pantaleo will ever know what truly motivated his “takedown” maneuver. That he and the other officers, and the EMT personnel, at the scene allowed the situation to perdure long after the takedown, without any assistance to Garner, does raise questions in most people’s minds about motives, none of which can ever be proved.
So, ultimately, the conclusion that we are left with is that some officers need to be better trained about “takedowns” and “chokeholds” and treating even perpetrators with a degree of respect as human beings for their lives.