Ferguson, Missouri Grand Jury Decision Update: No Indictmen of Officer Who Shot Michael Brown

[Bocivus]

The fact the Mr. A can't give an answer as to why he isn't upset with the cops kicking the Oath Keepers out of Ferguson? Ask him.

Dude. Give up your crush on Ambien already. It's starting to get a little creepy.

[Bocivus]

Let's not rush to judgment again, people. The NY incident is worse than Ferguson and he didn't deserve to die, but not all "choke holds" are illegal in NY.

We don't know all the facts, and most (if not all) of us here don't fully comprehend the laws involved. The NY cop may not have broken any laws, but he may well have gone against policy (some "choke" holds are illegal, some are against NYPD policy, and some are acceptable from what I heard from a NY detective on the radio). If policy was broken, I would think the family has a good shot in a civil suit, and the cop should be suitably punished.

If he did break the law, then justice was not served today.

Well said. The video does look pretty bad for the police though. I also wonder how many people have said they can't breathe just so the police let up on them so they can escape or get a tactical advantage. I'm not saying that justifies choking the guy but it's something to ponder.

[riffraff]

The whole video is disturbing. ..after they killed him their treatment, or lack thereof, was that of a dead animal...absolutely no humanity at all...the disregard for human life was appalling.

For a country that sees themselves as superior to others in their way of life...the lie is growing.

[Kragar]

Well said. The video does look pretty bad for the police though. I also wonder how many people have said they can't breathe just so the police let up on them so they can escape or get a tactical advantage. I'm not saying that justifies choking the guy but it's something to ponder.

I agree it looks bad. Regarding the tactical advantage point, I think I made a similar comment in the original thread for that news story.

I heard the guy had so many health issues that could be a factor, in conjunction with the cop's actions, in his death. If I had to guess, I think that played a part in the decision not to indict.

[Buddhas Hand]

The real unvarnished truth is that Black racist cowards attack Whites in mobs, while White racist cowards prefer to utilize the police, be they knowingly or unknowingly inclined, which tends to lead to tit for tat situations.

These events don't happen out of thin air.

Damn black people , whites stole them from their families/homes, took them away to another country , forced them into slavery breeding them like animals in some cases, then they were supposedly emancipated , yet they were treated like second class citizens for a over a hundred years after the fact , they forced the whites to create societies like the KKK to protect innocent peace loving whites , lets face it most of americas problems can be laid at the feet of the blackman.

[Kragar]

Damn black people , whites stole them from their families/homes, took them away to another country , forced them into slavery breeding them like animals in some cases, then they were supposedly emancipated , yet they were treated like second class citizens for a over a hundred years after the fact , they forced the whites to create societies like the KKK to protect innocent peace loving whites , lets face it most of americas problems can be laid at the feet of the blackman.

One not-so-minor misstatement above. "Whites" did not do the stealing. They purchased slaves from other Africans. It was the various warring tribes (for lack of a better word) that took slaves from opposing tribes and sold them to white slave traders.

This doesn't diminish what the traders did, nor those that bought from them. But it was another black man that initially put each black African slave into bondage, and sold him/her as property.

[Gurn]

"This doesn't diminish what the traders did, nor those that bought from them. But it was another black man that initially put each black African slave into bondage, and sold him/her as property."

I'd like a link to that. If only because it seems such a definitive statement.

[Grapefruits]

I don't even know what to say..

A man was shown to be murdered on camera because of a choke hold which isn't permitted in detaining someone by American law enforcement, ever.

"Oh, we see no problem with this." Was the jury made up of other criminal cops?

I hope sh1t hits the fan tonight. It should.

It was a little more than just the choke hold that caused his death. Was it excessive force? i say it was, but it all could have been avoided if he chose not to break the law. Then there is the fact he chose to resist arrest.

[Tortorella's Rant]

It was a little more than just the choke hold that caused his death. Was it excessive force? i say it was, but it all could have been avoided if he chose not to break the law. Then there is the fact he chose to resist arrest.

Why were they aiming to tackle and arrest him in the first place on something where a citation would have sufficed. Apparently that is almost always how it is in these situations. The dude was selling cigarettes, not ounces of crack with a heater in his waistband. Just another example of bad judgment of cops, lack of training, whatever you want to call it.

[freebuddy]

Why were they aiming to tackle and arrest him in the first place on something where a citation would have sufficed. Apparently that is almost always how it is in these situations. The dude was selling cigarettes, not ounces of crack with a heater in his waistband. Just another example of bad judgment of cops, lack of training, whatever you want to call it.

City paid out $30K to settle 2012 lawsuit against chokehold cop Daniel Pantaleo

By John M. Annese

STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- One of the two civil rights lawsuits against Daniel Pantaleo, the NYPD officer who put Eric Garner in a chokehold Thursday, ended up costing taxpayers $30,000 in settlement money, according to the plaintiffs' attorney.

The suit, which was settled in January, accuses Pantaleo and another officer of strip-searching two men on a New Brighton street, pulling down their pants and underwear in broad daylight, in March 2012.

It alleges that Pantaleo and several other officers -- Joseph Torres, Ignazio Conca, and Steven Lopez -- "unlawfully stopped" a vehicle on Jersey Street in New Brighton. Another officer, Christian Cataldo, arrived at the scene later.

Two of the car's passengers, Darren Collins and Tommy Rice -- a federally convicted gun felon who had been released from prison five months prior -- wound up suing in Brooklyn federal court.

According to the lawsuit, after getting license and registration information from both the car's driver, Morris Wilson, and Collins, the officers ordered Collins and Rice out of the vehicle for a search.

After they were handcuffed, "Pantaleo and/or Conca pulled down the plaintiffs' pants and underwear, and touched and searched their genital areas, or stood by while this was done in their presence," the lawsuit alleged.

Pantaleo then took the two men to the 120th Precinct stationhouse, where Pantaleo and Torres strip-searched them again, forcing them "to remove all of their clothing, squat, cough and lift their genitals."

Both men were criminally charged, but the cases against them were ultimately dismissed.

According to Jason Leventhal, Collins and Rice's lawyer, Pantaleo had falsely claimed that he saw crack and heroin in plain view, on the vehicle's back seat, allowing the officers to arrest everyone in the car. Wilson admitted the drugs were in his pocket, not in plain view, when he ultimately took a plea deal, Leventhal said.

Collins and Rice each received $15,000 settlements from the city, Leventhal said.

"One of the fundamental, most important things a police officer needs to do is to tell the truth," Leventhal said. "He has no right to strip-search anyone in the middle of the street."

SECOND CASE STILL PENDING

The second lawsuit against Pantaleo is still open - filed by Rylawn Walker in Manhattan federal court this past February.

Walker accuses Pantaleo of arresting him on Feb. 16, 2012 even though he was "committing no crime at that time and was not acting in a suspicious manner."

The lawsuit doesn't specify the circumstances of the arrest, but alleges that Pantaleo "misrepresented facts in the police reports and other documents that the plaintiff had committed offenses when in fact this was not true."

Walker was charged with marijuana-related offenses, and the case against him was dismissed and sealed in criminal court a day later, the lawsuit alleges.

CAUGHT ON VIDEO

On Thursday, Pantaleo was caught on video placing Eric Garner, 43, in a chokehold as he tried to arrest the tall, heavyset man on charges of selling untaxed cigarettes.

Garner can be heard in the video repeatedly gasping, "I can't breathe! I can't breathe!" He was pronounced dead shortly after at Richmond University Medical Center, West Brighton.

Leventhal, who regularly handles civil rights cases lodged against the NYPD, said that based on the Garner video, Pantaleo ignored a "life-or-death rule of the NYPD patrol guide" prohibiting chokeholds, and ignored the department's use-of-force continuum.

"You don't just immediately jump on the guy's neck and choke him," Leventhal said. "I think it's a depraved indifference to human life to choke him like that."

The NYPD prohibits the use of chokeholds. Legal experts told the Advance the officer may well face departmental disciplinary charges over the incident, though it's not yet clear if he'll be criminally charged, or, ultimately convicted.

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2014/07/chokehold_cop_was_defendant_in.html

[freebuddy]

Dude. Give up your crush on Ambien already. It's starting to get a little creepy.

You're the one defending him (and answering for him too), not me. Why can't you cowards answer a simple question as to why he isn't upset that the cops are kicking out his Oath Keeper friends?

[freebuddy]

A Grand Jury Did Indict One Person Involved In Eric Garner's Killing -- The Man Who Filmed It

Nick Wing  The Huffington Post 12/03/14 06:51 PM ET

On Wednesday, a Staten Island grand jury decided not to return an indictment for the police officer who put Eric Garner, an unarmed black man, in a chokehold shortly before his death. A different Staten Island grand jury was less sympathetic to Ramsey Orta, however, the man who filmed the entire incident.

In August, less than a month after filming the fatal July 17 encounter in which Daniel Pantaleo and other NYPD police officers confronted Garner for allegedly selling untaxed cigarettes, a grand jury indicted Orta on weapons charges stemming from an arrest by undercover officers earlier that month.

Police alleged that Orta had slipped a .25 caliber handgun into a teenage accomplice's waistband outside a New York hotel. Orta testified that the charges were falsely mounted by police in retaliation for his role in documenting Garner's death, but the grand jury rejected his contention, charging him with single felony counts of third-degree criminal weapon possession and criminal firearm possession.

In Garner's case, on the other hand, jurors determined there was not probable cause that Pantaleo had committed any crime. A medical examiner ruled Garner's death homicide in part resulting from the chokehold, a restraining move banned by the NYPD in 1993.

The use of grand juries in high-profile police killings has attracted increasing scrutiny after such juries declined to indict both Darren Wilson, the police officer who shot and killed unarmed black teenager Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri this summer, and now Pantaleo. While the famous saying goes that a grand jury could "indict a ham sandwich," it's become clear that they also give much more leeway to police officers.

St. Louis County prosecutor Bob McCulloch's objectivity was regularly called into question throughout the Brown case. Critics argue that the close cooperation between law enforcement and prosecutors may make them more hesitant to bring charges against police officers.

In addition, in the Brown case, Wilson was allowed to offer hours of testimony in his own defense. For this and other reasons, critics accused prosecutors of abusing the grand jury process to achieve an outcome that would be favorable to law enforcement. It's not yet clear what role, if any, Pantaleo played in the grand jury proceedings.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6264746?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000021

[Kragar]

"This doesn't diminish what the traders did, nor those that bought from them. But it was another black man that initially put each black African slave into bondage, and sold him/her as property."

I'd like a link to that. If only because it seems such a definitive statement.

I'll see what I can find. It was from a US history course I took a few years ago. I was a little surprised when it came up, but even without a source, it is pretty sound logic. Back in the 1700's, how would a few white men be able to establish themselves to be able to capture many thousands slaves themselves? If it had happened we would have heard about it, as it would have been taught as part of the slavery curriculum.

[Kragar]

You're the one defending him (and answering for him too), not me. Why can't you cowards answer a simple question as to why he isn't upset that the cops are kicking out his Oath Keeper friends?

It should be clear to many (based on various posts), including the esteemed OP, that Ambien has him blocked and possibly hasn't read the Oath Keeper story.

For myself, I remember starting to read the Oath Keeper story, but it didn't attract my full attention, so I never commented on it. I had never heard of them before, so didn't bother to read further.

Maybe it's a bigger issue than I thought, although I haven't heard anything about it anywhere else. But why does it matter to you that he gets upset over the story? Or anyone else for that matter? You are among the many complaining about police action in various threads. Do you think if any of your political opponents here also start complaining about the cops on something, you will have won us over to your side?

And why do you expect one of us "cowards" to try to answer your seemingly pointless question on his behalf? For something specific like that, there could be hundreds of reasons, so speculation would be pretty pointless (perhaps even including my reason described above).

Your stance on getting a response here seems pretty hypocritical, considering your history of failing to provide a straight answer to most questions posed to you.

[Mr. Ambien]

Giuliani spot on, for once:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkwWuf4cbM8

[Buddhas Hand]

One not-so-minor misstatement above. "Whites" did not do the stealing. They purchased slaves from other Africans. It was the various warring tribes (for lack of a better word) that took slaves from opposing tribes and sold them to white slave traders.

This doesn't diminish what the traders did, nor those that bought from them. But it was another black man that initially put each black African slave into bondage, and sold him/her as property.

Really ? I believe the act of loading them onto the boat and taking them to america against their will could be described as stealing them from their families and homes.

Do you really want to quibble about the whites treatment of blacks ?

[Kragar]

Really ? I believe the act of loading them onto the boat and taking them to america against their will could be described as stealing them from their families and homes.

Do you really want to quibble about the whites treatment of blacks ?

I don't believe i am quibbling here.

Based on what was covered in the history class I referred to in an earlier post, every slave in question was put into slavery by another African. This was happening before any whites were part of the slave trade. Presumably, increased demand by whites made it more profitable, but the concept and practice of slavery was not introduced by whites.

This slavery was a result of fighting among themselves, just like it did in most other areas people were enslaved.

My point here is that blacks were directly involved in enslaving blacks that eventually made it to the New World. While each imported slave was a victim of this horrible concept, it was not a white person who put the person into slavery, and the white slave traders and slave owners are not the only ones with significant fault in that huge travesty. I'm not claiming the blacks involved were worse, just that it should not be overlooked.

[Buddhas Hand]

I don't believe i am quibbling here.

Based on what was covered in the history class I referred to in an earlier post, every slave in question was put into slavery by another African. This was happening before any whites were part of the slave trade. Presumably, increased demand by whites made it more profitable, but the concept and practice of slavery was not introduced by whites.

This slavery was a result of fighting among themselves, just like it did in most other areas people were enslaved.

My point here is that blacks were directly involved in enslaving blacks that eventually made it to the New World. While each imported slave was a victim of this horrible concept, it was not a white person who put the person into slavery, and the white slave traders and slave owners are not the only ones with significant fault in that huge travesty. I'm not claiming the blacks involved were worse, just that it should not be overlooked.

The slavery was not a result of fighting amongst themselves it's because their leaders wanted the consumer goods the whites and the muslims before them were offering , they were trading/selling their people for goods.

From 869 muslim traders were selling goods to western african kingdoms who were paying for those goods with their own people, the whites continued this and also committed a lot of attrocities while in africa.

None of this changes the fact that whites have persecuted blacks for centuries and the United states took that persecution to another level -KKK as one example.

We hold these truths to be self evident , that all men are created equal , what a fracking joke

[Mr. Ambien]

The slavery was not a result of fighting amongst themselves it's because their leaders wanted the consumer goods the whites and the muslims before them were offering , they were trading/selling their people for goods.

From 869 muslim traders were selling goods to western african kingdoms who were paying for those goods with their own people, the whites continued this and also committed a lot of attrocities while in africa.

None of this changes the fact that whites have persecuted blacks for centuries and the United states took that persecution to another level -KKK as one example.

We hold these truths to be self evident , that all men are created equal , what a fracking joke

Out of interest for where this thread sideshow is going, I bit.. and Buddha's Hand didn't disappoint in plagiarizing again:

https://www.google.ca/search?q=From+869+muslim+traders+were+selling+goods+to+western+african+kingdoms+who+were+paying+for+those+goods+with+their+own+people&oq=From+869+muslim+traders+were+selling+goods+to+western+african+kingdoms+who+were+paying+for+those+goods+with+their+own+people

I guess he doesn't mind "quibbling" with people when he can just steal others' knowledge and research and pass it off as his own.

How phony.

[Buddhas Hand]

Out of interest for where this thread sideshow is going, I bit.. and Buddha's Hand didn't disappoint in plagiarizing again:

https://www.google.ca/search?q=From+869+muslim+traders+were+selling+goods+to+western+african+kingdoms+who+were+paying+for+those+goods+with+their+own+people&oq=From+869+muslim+traders+were+selling+goods+to+western+african+kingdoms+who+were+paying+for+those+goods+with+their+own+people

I guess he doesn't mind "quibbling" with people when he can just steal others' knowledge and research and pass it off as his own.

How phony.

Again you attack me not what i am stating.

WTF is your problem is your life so pathetic you have to attack me ?