| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
....not the chokehold.
Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. https://news.vice.com/article/a-chok...r-the-nypd-did -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Quote:
|
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote:
Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... That I would suspect is a lot of the reason there was no bill passed down from the GJ... |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote:
On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... That I would suspect is a lot of the reason there was no bill passed down from the GJ... So are you saying that the medical examiner changed his mind and modified his autopsy report made back in August? |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote:
On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 08:46:21 +0000, RGrew176
wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I was pointing out the 'union' position. Either the cop was wrong or the union is wrong. I'll let the liberals sort that one out. But, the fact still remains that the choke hold was not against the law. It was against NYPD 'policy' for which the GJ cannot indict. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 10:23 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 08:46:21 +0000, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I was pointing out the 'union' position. Either the cop was wrong or the union is wrong. I'll let the liberals sort that one out. But, the fact still remains that the choke hold was not against the law. It was against NYPD 'policy' for which the GJ cannot indict. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) It may not have been a "choke" hold at all, but just a hold... In fairness where else on that guy could you get your arm around him? In most of the video, the elbow, not the forearm is across the throat. If he was talking, he was breathing... every perp says "you're breaking my arm, or you're choking me". The cops can not let go, I have gone over that before... |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps he read the coroner's report? -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 10:31 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps he read the coroner's report? I never said anything about Peter King... -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:35:21 -0500, KC wrote:
On 12/4/2014 10:31 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps he read the coroner's report? I never said anything about Peter King... I was, responding to Luddite's comment, suggesting that perhaps Peter King had read the autopsy report. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 10:39 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:35:21 -0500, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:31 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps he read the coroner's report? I never said anything about Peter King... I was, responding to Luddite's comment, suggesting that perhaps Peter King had read the autopsy report. No problem, just trying to keep things clear. Either way, just for the record, I have not taken a stand on this one yet. I think I can see what happened there but I am not sure. I do know one thing though, I "heard" that 18 of the 24 on the GJ were "not white", and 9 were black. This is just what I heard. If that is the case, it takes 12 to pass down a bill, and they didn't. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 10:25 AM, KC wrote:
On 12/4/2014 10:23 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 08:46:21 +0000, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I was pointing out the 'union' position. Either the cop was wrong or the union is wrong. I'll let the liberals sort that one out. But, the fact still remains that the choke hold was not against the law. It was against NYPD 'policy' for which the GJ cannot indict. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) It may not have been a "choke" hold at all, but just a hold... In fairness where else on that guy could you get your arm around him? In most of the video, the elbow, not the forearm is across the throat. If he was talking, he was breathing... every perp says "you're breaking my arm, or you're choking me". The cops can not let go, I have gone over that before... You have obviously been watching and listening to Peter King. Almost word for word what he's been promoting, especially on Fox News. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 10:35 AM, KC wrote:
On 12/4/2014 10:31 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps he read the coroner's report? I never said anything about Peter King... No. You are just quoting him almost word for word. It's ok. You can believe whatever you want to believe. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. -- Sent from my iPhone 6+ |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 1:25 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. There may be a civil suit settlement with the city but if it turns out he was still breathing well after the cop released him, the cop can't be held accountable for "death by chokehold". Hell, the family of the guy that died of Ebola at the Texas hospital that tried their best to treat him were awarded a undisclosed "settlement" to avoid a civil trial. Maybe the GJ was shown this version of the video. Today was the first time I saw it on any of the major media outlets. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
F*O*A*D wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. Caused by stupidity of a minor criminal. Also by the greed and control of lifestyle by government. He would not be selling loose cigarettes if there was not a $10 or so tax on a pack of cigarettes in NYC. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:49:03 -0500, KC wrote:
On 12/4/2014 10:39 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:35:21 -0500, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:31 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps he read the coroner's report? I never said anything about Peter King... I was, responding to Luddite's comment, suggesting that perhaps Peter King had read the autopsy report. No problem, just trying to keep things clear. Either way, just for the record, I have not taken a stand on this one yet. I think I can see what happened there but I am not sure. I do know one thing though, I "heard" that 18 of the 24 on the GJ were "not white", and 9 were black. This is just what I heard. If that is the case, it takes 12 to pass down a bill, and they didn't. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) And reported on CNN last night was that the police'man' in charge of the detail was a black female sergeant. Question - shouldn't my signature disappear when you respond to a post of mine? -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:55:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:25 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:23 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 08:46:21 +0000, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I was pointing out the 'union' position. Either the cop was wrong or the union is wrong. I'll let the liberals sort that one out. But, the fact still remains that the choke hold was not against the law. It was against NYPD 'policy' for which the GJ cannot indict. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) It may not have been a "choke" hold at all, but just a hold... In fairness where else on that guy could you get your arm around him? In most of the video, the elbow, not the forearm is across the throat. If he was talking, he was breathing... every perp says "you're breaking my arm, or you're choking me". The cops can not let go, I have gone over that before... You have obviously been watching and listening to Peter King. Almost word for word what he's been promoting, especially on Fox News. Similar comments were made on CNN. No one argued with him about it. Do you think he is lying? -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 4 Dec 2014 18:25:47 GMT, F*O*A*D wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. That's what police unions are for - to protect bad cops, eh? -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 13:17:35 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Apparently you know more than the medical examiner. (Just couldn't resist!) -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/14 3:55 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On 4 Dec 2014 18:25:47 GMT, F*O*A*D wrote: "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. That's what police unions are for - to protect bad cops, eh? -- You keep repeating that, indicating your ignorance of the purposes of a labor union and that if there is a settlement, it will come from a governmental agency, not the cop. No surprise. -- I feel no need to explain my politics to stupid right-wingers. After all, I am *not* the Jackass Whisperer. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 4 Dec 2014 18:25:47 GMT, F*O*A*D wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. If that amount of scuffle was the 'cause' of the heart attack, how come all those NFL football players, who go through a lot worse every weekend, are still alive? With all your medical knowledge, Toad, that question should be a no-brainer. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/14 3:59 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On 4 Dec 2014 18:25:47 GMT, F*O*A*D wrote: "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. If that amount of scuffle was the 'cause' of the heart attack, how come all those NFL football players, who go through a lot worse every weekend, are still alive? And you wonder why so many of your posts get no responses from rational people. -- I feel no need to explain my politics to stupid right-wingers. After all, I am *not* the Jackass Whisperer. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 3:53 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:55:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:25 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:23 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 08:46:21 +0000, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I was pointing out the 'union' position. Either the cop was wrong or the union is wrong. I'll let the liberals sort that one out. But, the fact still remains that the choke hold was not against the law. It was against NYPD 'policy' for which the GJ cannot indict. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) It may not have been a "choke" hold at all, but just a hold... In fairness where else on that guy could you get your arm around him? In most of the video, the elbow, not the forearm is across the throat. If he was talking, he was breathing... every perp says "you're breaking my arm, or you're choking me". The cops can not let go, I have gone over that before... You have obviously been watching and listening to Peter King. Almost word for word what he's been promoting, especially on Fox News. Similar comments were made on CNN. No one argued with him about it. Do you think he is lying? Please don't take anything dick says about me or my sources as fact, in fact based on his record here lately, you can pretty much dismiss anything he says about me as just another harryism, dick is still wondering why nobody stands around and claps for his dissertations here anymore, poor guy. Seems when dick finds himself woefully uninformed, he writes off what I say any way he can.. Of course a few months later when he finally catches up, I don't expect an apology... -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
L'il Snot snorts...
"Please don't take anything dick says about me or my sources as fact, in fact based on his record here lately, you can pretty much dismiss anything he says about me as just another harryism, dick is still wondering why nobody stands around and claps for his dissertations here anymore, poor guy. Seems when dick finds himself woefully uninformed, he writes off what I say any way he can.. Of course *a few months later when he finally catches up, I don't expect an apology... " Oh man.....where is that 'Twilight Zone intro when I need it. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 7:31 PM, True North wrote:
L'il Snot snorts... "Please don't take anything dick says about me or my sources as fact, in fact based on his record here lately, you can pretty much dismiss anything he says about me as just another harryism, dick is still wondering why nobody stands around and claps for his dissertations here anymore, poor guy. Seems when dick finds himself woefully uninformed, he writes off what I say any way he can.. Of course a few months later when he finally catches up, I don't expect an apology... " Oh man.....where is that 'Twilight Zone intro when I need it. I am sure harry can find it for you dummy.... |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/14 6:51 PM, KC wrote:
Please don't take anything dick says about me or my sources as fact, in fact based on his record here lately, you can pretty much dismiss anything he says about me as just another harryism, dick is still wondering why nobody stands around and claps for his dissertations here anymore, poor guy. Funniest post of the day... -- I feel no need to explain my politics to stupid right-wingers. After all, I am *not* the Jackass Whisperer. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 18:51:17 -0500, KC wrote:
On 12/4/2014 3:53 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:55:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:25 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:23 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 08:46:21 +0000, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I was pointing out the 'union' position. Either the cop was wrong or the union is wrong. I'll let the liberals sort that one out. But, the fact still remains that the choke hold was not against the law. It was against NYPD 'policy' for which the GJ cannot indict. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) It may not have been a "choke" hold at all, but just a hold... In fairness where else on that guy could you get your arm around him? In most of the video, the elbow, not the forearm is across the throat. If he was talking, he was breathing... every perp says "you're breaking my arm, or you're choking me". The cops can not let go, I have gone over that before... You have obviously been watching and listening to Peter King. Almost word for word what he's been promoting, especially on Fox News. Similar comments were made on CNN. No one argued with him about it. Do you think he is lying? Please don't take anything dick says about me or my sources as fact, in fact based on his record here lately, you can pretty much dismiss anything he says about me as just another harryism, dick is still wondering why nobody stands around and claps for his dissertations here anymore, poor guy. Seems when dick finds himself woefully uninformed, he writes off what I say any way he can.. Of course a few months later when he finally catches up, I don't expect an apology... -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) I wasn't really expecting an answer from him. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 15:58:42 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 12/4/14 3:55 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On 4 Dec 2014 18:25:47 GMT, F*O*A*D wrote: "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. That's what police unions are for - to protect bad cops, eh? -- You keep repeating that, indicating your ignorance of the purposes of a labor union and that if there is a settlement, it will come from a governmental agency, not the cop. No surprise. So you agree with the New York Police Union Chief? New York Police Union Chief: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...garner-n261586 You'll note that's from NBC, not FOX. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 9:23 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 18:51:17 -0500, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:53 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:55:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:25 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:23 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 08:46:21 +0000, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I was pointing out the 'union' position. Either the cop was wrong or the union is wrong. I'll let the liberals sort that one out. But, the fact still remains that the choke hold was not against the law. It was against NYPD 'policy' for which the GJ cannot indict. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) It may not have been a "choke" hold at all, but just a hold... In fairness where else on that guy could you get your arm around him? In most of the video, the elbow, not the forearm is across the throat. If he was talking, he was breathing... every perp says "you're breaking my arm, or you're choking me". The cops can not let go, I have gone over that before... You have obviously been watching and listening to Peter King. Almost word for word what he's been promoting, especially on Fox News. Similar comments were made on CNN. No one argued with him about it. Do you think he is lying? Please don't take anything dick says about me or my sources as fact, in fact based on his record here lately, you can pretty much dismiss anything he says about me as just another harryism, dick is still wondering why nobody stands around and claps for his dissertations here anymore, poor guy. Seems when dick finds himself woefully uninformed, he writes off what I say any way he can.. Of course a few months later when he finally catches up, I don't expect an apology... -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) I wasn't really expecting an answer from him. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Not worth answering. BTW John, I don't know if you did this on purpose or not but the way you have your "signature" formatted results in it not being deleted in replies. You recently commented on this wondering why it keep showing up. I've been deleting it manually but I left it as is in this reply. Formatted properly the signature is usually stripped by most newsreaders including Thunderbird which I am using. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 16:01:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 12/4/14 3:59 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On 4 Dec 2014 18:25:47 GMT, F*O*A*D wrote: "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. If that amount of scuffle was the 'cause' of the heart attack, how come all those NFL football players, who go through a lot worse every weekend, are still alive? And you wonder why so many of your posts get no responses from rational people. No. The question is just too f'ing hard for you to answer. Whenever you're backed into a corner, you come out with 'insults' or name-calling. Have you ever noticed that? -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 21:30:57 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:23 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 18:51:17 -0500, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:53 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:55:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:25 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:23 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 08:46:21 +0000, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I was pointing out the 'union' position. Either the cop was wrong or the union is wrong. I'll let the liberals sort that one out. But, the fact still remains that the choke hold was not against the law. It was against NYPD 'policy' for which the GJ cannot indict. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) It may not have been a "choke" hold at all, but just a hold... In fairness where else on that guy could you get your arm around him? In most of the video, the elbow, not the forearm is across the throat. If he was talking, he was breathing... every perp says "you're breaking my arm, or you're choking me". The cops can not let go, I have gone over that before... You have obviously been watching and listening to Peter King. Almost word for word what he's been promoting, especially on Fox News. Similar comments were made on CNN. No one argued with him about it. Do you think he is lying? Please don't take anything dick says about me or my sources as fact, in fact based on his record here lately, you can pretty much dismiss anything he says about me as just another harryism, dick is still wondering why nobody stands around and claps for his dissertations here anymore, poor guy. Seems when dick finds himself woefully uninformed, he writes off what I say any way he can.. Of course a few months later when he finally catches up, I don't expect an apology... -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) I wasn't really expecting an answer from him. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Not worth answering. Why not? You've made several (disparaging?) comments about him. Do you think he's lying? BTW John, I don't know if you did this on purpose or not but the way you have your "signature" formatted results in it not being deleted in replies. You recently commented on this wondering why it keep showing up. Thanks. I asked the question because my attempt to do fix it failed. I've been deleting it manually but I left it as is in this reply. Formatted properly the signature is usually stripped by most newsreaders including Thunderbird which I am using. I can honestly understand why you might find it disagreeable. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/2014 9:42 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 21:30:57 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:23 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 18:51:17 -0500, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:53 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:55:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:25 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:23 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 08:46:21 +0000, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I was pointing out the 'union' position. Either the cop was wrong or the union is wrong. I'll let the liberals sort that one out. But, the fact still remains that the choke hold was not against the law. It was against NYPD 'policy' for which the GJ cannot indict. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) It may not have been a "choke" hold at all, but just a hold... In fairness where else on that guy could you get your arm around him? In most of the video, the elbow, not the forearm is across the throat. If he was talking, he was breathing... every perp says "you're breaking my arm, or you're choking me". The cops can not let go, I have gone over that before... You have obviously been watching and listening to Peter King. Almost word for word what he's been promoting, especially on Fox News. Similar comments were made on CNN. No one argued with him about it. Do you think he is lying? Please don't take anything dick says about me or my sources as fact, in fact based on his record here lately, you can pretty much dismiss anything he says about me as just another harryism, dick is still wondering why nobody stands around and claps for his dissertations here anymore, poor guy. Seems when dick finds himself woefully uninformed, he writes off what I say any way he can.. Of course a few months later when he finally catches up, I don't expect an apology... -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) I wasn't really expecting an answer from him. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Not worth answering. Why not? You've made several (disparaging?) comments about him. Do you think he's lying? BTW John, I don't know if you did this on purpose or not but the way you have your "signature" formatted results in it not being deleted in replies. You recently commented on this wondering why it keep showing up. Thanks. I asked the question because my attempt to do fix it failed. I've been deleting it manually but I left it as is in this reply. Formatted properly the signature is usually stripped by most newsreaders including Thunderbird which I am using. I can honestly understand why you might find it disagreeable. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ...Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Doesn't bother me at all Clara. I was going to tell you what's wrong with the formatting but decided to let you figure it out. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/14 9:28 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 15:58:42 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 12/4/14 3:55 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On 4 Dec 2014 18:25:47 GMT, F*O*A*D wrote: "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. That's what police unions are for - to protect bad cops, eh? -- You keep repeating that, indicating your ignorance of the purposes of a labor union and that if there is a settlement, it will come from a governmental agency, not the cop. No surprise. So you agree with the New York Police Union Chief? New York Police Union Chief: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...garner-n261586 You'll note that's from NBC, not FOX. -- My comment was about your ignorance, nothing more. -- I feel no need to explain my politics to stupid right-wingers. After all, I am *not* the Jackass Whisperer. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On 12/4/14 9:31 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 16:01:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 12/4/14 3:59 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On 4 Dec 2014 18:25:47 GMT, F*O*A*D wrote: "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. If that amount of scuffle was the 'cause' of the heart attack, how come all those NFL football players, who go through a lot worse every weekend, are still alive? And you wonder why so many of your posts get no responses from rational people. No. The question is just too f'ing hard for you to answer. Whenever you're backed into a corner, you come out with 'insults' or name-calling. Have you ever noticed that? -- No, Johnny...your assessment is wrong. No sense commenting on much of your nonsense. -- I feel no need to explain my politics to stupid right-wingers. After all, I am *not* the Jackass Whisperer. |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 21:59:59 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 12/4/14 9:28 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 15:58:42 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 12/4/14 3:55 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On 4 Dec 2014 18:25:47 GMT, F*O*A*D wrote: "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. That's what police unions are for - to protect bad cops, eh? -- You keep repeating that, indicating your ignorance of the purposes of a labor union and that if there is a settlement, it will come from a governmental agency, not the cop. No surprise. So you agree with the New York Police Union Chief? New York Police Union Chief: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...garner-n261586 You'll note that's from NBC, not FOX. -- My comment was about your ignorance, nothing more. Of course not. The corner's a bitch. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
Police Union - Disrespect Killed Garner
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 22:01:29 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 12/4/14 9:31 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 16:01:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 12/4/14 3:59 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On 4 Dec 2014 18:25:47 GMT, F*O*A*D wrote: "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:01:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 10:36 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:11:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 12/4/2014 9:26 AM, KC wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:46 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Poco Loco;1020850 Wrote: ....not the chokehold. Guess they didn't read the coroner's report. http://tinyurl.com/p8ggn2g -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) Make that the illegal choke hold. The choke hold had been banned by the NYCPD some time ago. I think the grand jury got this one wrong. I saw an interview last night by a guy that does the math:) Either way the hold was an "artery" hold not a choke hold. It could very well have cut off or slowed the blood flow but the coroners report was clear, "no bruising on the throat, no damage to the airway".... Ah, maybe you saw Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York. He's making the media circuit (was just on Fox News again) making these claims. Did he perform his own, independent autopsy? Perhaps the police union did: "Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer, however, argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died." http://tinyurl.com/omvs3k6 Surely you and Toad wouldn't contradict the unions, would you? A police union opinion on the cause of death is not the same as a medical examiner's autopsy and death certificate. If the medical examiner had not called Garner's death a homicide, there never would have been a GJ or any suggestion of potential charges brought on the police officer involved. I think they said "homicide" because the death was a result of the fight. With the ambiguous cause of death, I think they have to charge them all or let them all go,.He still seemed to be alive after they got him on the ground and #99 was holding his head down (not choking him). Long after the fight EMS is on video checking his pulse and talking to him. He still said he couldn't breathe. A few minutes later he was out and they picked him up, still breathing according to EMS. It sounds like the 3 heart attacks I have watched. (two at work and one diving in the keys) One guy died, 2 are still alive. I saw (and just posted about) that video. It was the first time I saw the extended version that showed what happened after the take down. I agree. My non-professional opinion is that he died of a heart attack. Caused by the police assault... I wonder how much the civil suit settlement will be. If that amount of scuffle was the 'cause' of the heart attack, how come all those NFL football players, who go through a lot worse every weekend, are still alive? And you wonder why so many of your posts get no responses from rational people. No. The question is just too f'ing hard for you to answer. Whenever you're backed into a corner, you come out with 'insults' or name-calling. Have you ever noticed that? -- No, Johnny...your assessment is wrong. No sense commenting on much of your nonsense. Of course not, the corner's a bitch. -- "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument with a liberal." ....Peter Brimelow (Author) (Thanks, Luddite!) |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:28 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com