And Yet Again.. No Indictment..

I have just heard Eric Holder... our Attorney General.. A Federal investigation will be conducted.

How can this happen? I really don't know Debby.. I really don't know.
 

I agree it's shameful, the least they could have done was give this guy some attention when he was saying repeatedly, 'I can't breathe', very sad that they didn't. What really needs to be addressed and stopped, it the senseless killing of American citizens for minor crimes. As far as these Grand Jury decisions, there needs to be investigations as to how they are reached. http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/03...-garner-was-murdered-by-police-for-no-reason/
 
Part of the problem is that prosecutors are never going to persue an indictment against a police officer, simply because they are dependent on police to be witnesses in their cases. Therefore there is a comflict of interest. Perhaps in the case of police, there should be an independent prosecutor assigned.. one who will not be trying cases using police witnesses... and therefore will not put in the fix.
 
I never thought about it much before QS, but you have a good point there, good suggestion too.
 
Appropriately, the grand jury has done there job, and after weeks of study and deliberation, they have made their decision.

To me, there is something that will really end this scuffling and fighting, would be for the people to recognize the dangers the police must live with and understand how not resisting when asked to submit to a arrest. So much easier for the police and all other folks if the instructions from the police were followed without all the verbal and physical resistance. So much nicer than what we have been seeing in recent weeks and months. It does not seem that anyone is preaching about respecting and honoring a police job and trying to make all encounters as peaceful as possible. Resisting and fighting in a police situation just adds more to the reasons why the police are trying to have a closed conversation with you. Had this person tried to cooperate more there would not have been the call for air. No chocking would have taken place. Likely something the Grand Jury studied and responded to in their final decision.

When I was a young person I was always told to say 'yes sir', 'no sir', and fully cooperate all the time. It seems that all the people do now is try to make it ever more difficult for the police to do anything at all.
 
Too many incidences of the police these days abusing their power to show blind respect anymore, IMO. Things were different when I was young too, the cops did not kill people for petty crimes like simple robbery or illegal sales of cigarettes. If you were pleading for help, they would listen, regardless of the situation.

People must acknowledge that there is a problem with law enforcement now, it has changed from to protect and serve, to an us against them mentality. It's a problem that needs to be addressed as far as I'm concerned. I been lucky not to have any encounters personally with cops, but I know I have to move slow and beware if I do, just to save my life.

It's a shame when we have to submit like guilty animals to avoid getting killed by a pumped-up (or irrationally fearful) cop. As I've said before, there are many good officers out there doing their jobs that they were hired to do, but we can't ignore the increasing number of problem cops abusing their power over American citizens. Even those in law enforcement would agree that there are bad cops on the force, but are hesitant to say so due to retaliation, possible loss of employment, or just basic harassment of fellow peers who do not or refuse to see the reality.
 
There is a stark difference between this man's death and the Ferguson Mike Brown incident. Brown, according to the decision handed down by the Grand Jury and corroborated by witnesses, assaulted the police officer and attempted to take away his firearm. Brown had just committed an aggravated robbery of a convenience store. We can argue the finality of the consequences, but Brown was violent in his behavior.

The gentleman in NYC was selling single cigarettes. He would purchase a pack of cigarettes for $7. He would, then, sell them individually for $0.50 or more. IOW, he'd make $3 to $5 selling the individual cigarettes to those who did not have the money to purchase a full pack. Entrepreneur?? Well... It is "illegal" to sell cigarettes singly without paying a retailer's tax on the tobacco and paying the sales tax. The local police had "rousted" this man many times before. 31 arrests, the most serious was finding evidence of a small amount of marijuana in one of his pockets.
When he was approached this time, he knew he was going to be arrested... again. Instead of working serious street crime, the officers once again decided to arrest this guy for selling single cigarettes. Yes, he resisted which he should not have done. But, for the severity of the crime he was committing, a physical takedown by four or five officers was not warranted. 31 times the officers had had opportunity to understand this man was not armed and meant no harm other than making a few bucks in an illegitimate way.
Consequences were paid. The man died during the arrest. When on the ground an in need of medical assistance, the officers did call for EMT's... who arrived 4 minutes later. Not one of the officers attempted to assist the man in distress. Upon arrival, the medical personnel did not immediately attempt to assist the man in distress. Collectively... they let him die.
One less vagrant selling cigarettes on the street corner. One less fat guy to drag in and out of a patrol car. One less time they retold their jokes about arresting a threat to society who sold cigarettes. Had it not been for a bystander's video, this entire incident would never have made the newspaper.

This Grand Jury consisted of 23 people. An indictment required 12 of those 23 to be convinced this one officer was guilty of felony manslaughter. As another poster explained, the DA is part of the same justice system as is the police officer. There is a bias in just how the case is presented to the Grand Jury. The DA doesn't have to convince 12 of the 23 the officer is gulty of a crime. The DA only has to convince 12 that there is not evidence enought to warrant indicting the officer and bringing him to trial.

A wrongful death lawsuit has already been filed by the victim's family. As with the O.J. Simpson case, just because the legal system fails, there is still the possibility of the civil court system meteing out its form of justice.
 
Back when I was youn, if you fought off the police, they ended up whacking you with their billy. That was the point for approaching police with a cooperative situation. Less likely for them to decide to spray you with gases or pull their guns to shoot. I put the threat to the police by all the offending folks that seem to think they have the right to act like idiots and destroy other people, their property, deny others right to use their own and legal property like sidewalks and streets. We have far too many smart mouthed folks running loose these days. They should learn to respect the laws and the law enforcers. The US was never built for the aggressive idiots to have power over the law abiding citizens and their law enforcers.
 
The Eric Holders announcement

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/12/03/eric-holder-announces-doj-investigation-violations-eric-garners-civil-rights.html

Good evening. I want to provide an update regarding the case involving Eric Garner, a Staten Island resident, who died tragically in July.Since Mr. Garner’s death, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, the Civil Rights Division and the FBI have been monitoring the local case closely while allowing the local investigation, led by the District Attorney’s office in Staten Island, to proceed first.Earlier today, the grand jury declined to return an indictment in this case. Now that the local investigation has concluded, I am here to announce that the Justice Department will proceed with a federal civil rights investigation into Mr. Garner’s death.This afternoon I spoke with the widow of Eric Garner to inform her and her family of our decision to investigate potential federal civil rights violations. I have been in touch with President Obama and Mayor de Blasio regarding our decision as well.Our prosecutors will conduct an independent, thorough, fair and expeditious investigation.In addition to performing our own investigative work, the Department will conduct a complete review of the material gathered during the local investigation.We have all seen the video of Mr. Garner’s arrest. His death, of course, was a tragedy. All lives must be valued. Mr. Garner’s death is one of several recent incidents across the country that have tested the sense of trust that must exist between law enforcement and the communities they are charged to serve and protect. This is not a New York issue or a Ferguson issue alone. Those who have protested peacefully across our great nation following the grand jury’s decision in Ferguson have made that clear.As the brother of a retired police officer, I know in a personal way about the bravery of the men and women in uniform who put their lives at risk every day to protect public safety. The vast majority of our law enforcement officers perform their duties honorably and are committed to respecting their fellow citizens civil rights as they carry out their very challenging work.It is for their sake as well that we must seek to heal the breakdown in trust we have seen. Earlier this week, I traveled to Atlanta to begin a series of interactions to begin this process – and officials around the country at every level of the Department of Justice will continue this vital ongoing work. As the Justice Department’s independent investigations into the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner proceed, I will continue these conversations as we seek to restore trust, to rebuild understanding and to foster cooperation between law enforcement and the communities they serve.I know that substantial numbers of people in New York and across the country will be disappointed and frustrated by the outcome of the state grand jury proceeding today. I know many will plan to voice their disappointment publicly through protests. This is the right of all Americans. But as I have said before, throughout our history, the most successful movements have been those that adhered to the principles of nonviolence. I urge all those inclined to demonstrate tonight and in the days ahead to remain peaceful in their demonstrations, and not to engage in activities that deflect our attention from the very serious matters our nation must confront.
 
So far, in 2014, there have been 107 police officers killed in the line of duty....about half of them in confrontations with criminal suspects. Perhaps things like that weigh on the minds of some of these cops when confronted with a potentially volatile situation.
 
Glad to hear that they're going to do a civil rights violation investigation for Mr. Garner's family. Small comfort I would imagine but at least they're doing it.

We live in a time where black is white and white is black and what should be obvious seems not to be. I can't even begin to imagine what state the world will be in fifty years from now at this rate. Once can only hope that these are birth pains of something better!
 
Don M. said:
So far, in 2014, there have been 107 police officers killed in the line of duty....about half of them in confrontations with criminal suspects. Perhaps things like that weigh on the minds of some of these cops when confronted with a potentially volatile situation.
Click to expand...

People today are more willing to take the side of the confronted person rather than the officers. Charles Barkley has it right, try living in today's society with no police officers.
 
"Try living in today's society with no police officers".

Right. Perhaps the police should be reassigned to little more than Traffic Duty, and writing speeding tickets. Let the thugs and gangs completely take over the cities, and then see how loud some of these people scream about police brutality. There is a very simple solution for ending police brutality....Obey the Laws.
 
Don M. said:
So far, in 2014, there have been 107 police officers killed in the line of duty....about half of them in confrontations with criminal suspects. Perhaps things like that weigh on the minds of some of these cops when confronted with a potentially volatile situation.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting those statistics, I'd like to see the source? I know there are cops that are killed, but there must be many causes aside from direct murder from criminals, isn't there? Unfortunately there is very little data on the amount of people killed by the police in 2014, although I could say I've seen a number around 1,000...but I don't know if any of those numbers presented by citizen investigations are accurate. There will never be any hard data for the public to read in regards to the amount of citizens that the police have killed in any one year, either lawfully, or just senseless murders. So although the cops have these things weighing on their minds, so do the citizens.
 
SeaBreeze said:
Where are you getting those statistics, I'd like to see the source? I know there are cops that are killed, but there must be many causes aside from direct murder from criminals, isn't there? Unfortunately there is very little data on the amount of people killed by the police in 2014, although I could say I've seen a number around 1,000...but I don't know if any of those numbers presented by citizen investigations are accurate. There will never be any hard data for the public to read in regards to the amount of citizens that the police have killed in any one year, either lawfully, or just senseless murders. So although the cops have these things weighing on their minds, so do the citizens.
Click to expand...

Try this source....or just search on Police officers killed....

http://www.odmp.org/search/year
 
There's more going on here than a wrestling match. For starters the reason for arrest or the entire confrontation was sell loose untaxed cigarettes in a city where they want to decriminalize pot for possession of a joint to be ticket. But the police are paid to enforce the law as is. But police have discretionary powers including powers not to arrest. They show the confrontation but I'm still unclear what was said before things went down-literally. One "expert" said failure to comply is automatically resisting arrest? Then apparently the officer in question might have been cleared by a grand jury for criminal proceedings but is in violation of police procedure(no choke holds). I must agree it still comes down the police escalating a situation for power ie demanding respect/I'll show you. This is worth a local protest or someone to martyr because it's much more clear what happened here.
 
SeaBreeze said:
Where are you getting those statistics, I'd like to see the source? I know there are cops that are killed, but there must be many causes aside from direct murder from criminals, isn't there? Unfortunately there is very little data on the amount of people killed by the police in 2014, although I could say I've seen a number around 1,000...but I don't know if any of those numbers presented by citizen investigations are accurate. There will never be any hard data for the public to read in regards to the amount of citizens that the police have killed in any one year, either lawfully, or just senseless murders. So although the cops have these things weighing on their minds, so do the citizens.
Click to expand...

The talking heads are bouncing around a 400 or so number of civilians killed by police with about 20% being Black Americans. Whites killed by police more than doubles that number. The problem with national statistics is the way they are collected and/or submitted. The FBI collects data but there have been glaring omissions including those killed at Sandy Hook. I don't wether the FBI uses only submitted data or they research data on their own.
 
Not sure how your grand jury system works, but is it not similar to a normal jury of "peers"?

Are these not normal citizens like you and me, assessing the facts?
 
Perhaps we need to just abolish the grand jury system and just go to preliminary hearings in open court instead. I'm not sure about this, but I think here they have the choice of a grand jury or a preliminary hearing.

I served on a grand jury for six months (yup, that's how they do it here, six months, three days a week -- your employer can't fire you for having to serve) not too long ago. We heard about a zillion cases -- most of them very small stuff, and we heard several in one day.

The grand jury is a secret proceeding. All of what I'm saying if about how it is done HERE, it may vary elsewhere. The GJ DOES NOT decide guilt or innocence, only whether, based on the information provided to it by the prosecution, and based on the statutory definition of the crime in question, there has been a crime committed and whether there appears to be evidence to charge the defendant with the crime. No defense case is presented. Testimony was usually limited to the arresting officer and maybe the victim. The defendant has the right to make a statement, and may bring his attorney into the proceedings, but the attorney cannot speak. ONLY the prosecutor presents his case, no defense is presented.

So don't crucify the poor grand jury -- they ONLY could decide based on what was before them and (just like a regular jury) could not depend on anything outside what was put before them in the proceedings or on their personal prejudices or feelings.
 
I have yet to hear why the man died. Maybe he had a medical problem that caused him to die where the chokehold the policeman used would not have caused death in a healthy person. That is the only reason I can think of for no indictment.

Once again people are judging the grand jury without all the evidence.
 
I don't thinks it's a Grand Jury problem at all... It's a Prosecutor problem. It's being said that a Prosecutor can get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich if he wants that ham sandwich indicted. The problem is that the prosecutor is an elected position. He/she has to deal with police unions.. He/she depends on the cooperation of the police for evidence and for witness testimony. If the police wanted to take down a prosecutor and make him ineffective and cause him to lose his position.. they could very easily do so. Therefore, there is a clear conflict of interest then it comes to indictments against a cop.

That said... it's not up to the Grand Jury to try a case.. their only function is to determine probable cause to go to a trial... which they can only do given what is provided to them by the Prosecutor. Since the New York Grand Jury proceedings must remain sealed... we will never know what was given to them or said to them. I am sure that in this case the video of the crime was shown to them.. in which case it seems like the Prosecutor AND the cop must have said.. "what are you going to believe? What WE tell you?.. or your lying eyes"


There has to be a change in how cops go before the Grand Jury.. This could be done in one of two ways.. Either go directly to a preliminary hearing that is open and transparent... OR assign a special independent prosecutor in ALL cop cases.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top