Indict a Ham sandwich but not a cop

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by jms62

As a country we suffer from Mass lack of empathy

As a country we suffer from mass lack of personal and individual responsibility. That and a complete lack of reality either by choice or DNA.

Gerber, though obnoxious, is painfully correct.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

As a country we suffer from mass lack of personal and individual responsibility. That and a complete lack of reality either by choice or DNA.

Gerber, though obnoxious, is painfully correct.

I would have to agree

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Cardus

To the nearest zero, of the people who have commented on this death, how many have seen the grand jury testimony?

It's on video. The cop uses a choke hold for 6 seconds max to take him down and then kneels on his head. When the man is repeatedly heard on tape stating he can't breath he is no longer in a choke hold but likely having an asthma attack.

The cop's choke, take-down likely caused the asthma attack but the guy's refusal to cooperate caused the takedown. Wasn't like the cop was playing the knockout game looking for a vulnerable, innocent victim.

[Danzig]

[quote=Cardus;1007986]

Originally Posted by Danzig

imo, this case is a lot less about race, and a lot more about police using excessive force. this guy died because of a cop opting to use a banned chokehold to take down someone possibly selling 'loosies'. sounds like overzealousness to me. did he pose an imminent threat? no. was he running, resisting arrest? no. did the policeman follow procedure? no.

after years of being allowed to do as they wish, it's no surprise that cops have an overall attitude of 'we can do whatever the hell we wish, when we wish, and you all just deal with it'.[/QUOTE]

This is foolish.

no, it's not.
the lack of indictment against this guy is exactly what i'm talking about. cops are supposed to keep the law, not break it and have no consequences.

[Danzig]

[quote=Cardus;1008011]

Originally Posted by Danzig

What you are "talking about" is that cops have an "overall attitude" that they can do whatever they want.

This notion is just plain wrong.

except it's not.
i lived with a cop, my dad. and knew a lot of his fellow cops, and i know several here. yes, they think their badge means 'omnipotence'. grand juries won't indict, their superiors do nothing.
crime is down significantly, while swat raids have increased from 3k a year to about 50k a year-mostly drug raids. then there's the militarization of the police forces, with even the la school district getting rpg's. rpgs?!?! yes, that's a fact-they got them along with their mraps. it's absurd.

[dellinger63]

[quote=Danzig;1008008]

Originally Posted by Cardus

no, it's not.
the lack of indictment against this guy is exactly what i'm talking about. cops are supposed to keep the law, not break it and have no consequences.

Excuse her as she is unable to decipher the difference between policy and law much less separate the two.

She's one of those, who were so eloquently defined, by Gruber.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Excuse her as she is unable to decipher the difference between policy and law much less separate the two.

She's one of those, who were so eloquently defined, by Gruber.

One of "those" that looks at things objectively and takes a position rather than blindly, predictably, incessantly always taking the same position. Give me more of "those".

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Cardus

And give me less of people who title a thread "Indict a Ham sandwich but not a cop" without knowing what a grand jury heard and saw.

It escapes me why people make conclusions about legal matters without knowing or understanding the evidence and applicable laws.

I didn't reply to your comment cause it was beyond absurd. When is it necessary to have to read a grand jury testimony before you comment on current events based upon what is in the public domain.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cardus

Some of these posts were the same ones made in the immediate aftermath of the Trayvon (sp?) Martin matter, and in the Michael Brown matter, and so on and so on...

i didn't criticize the cops regarding browns shooting, but i did criticize the extreme reaction to the protests. and then, of course, when i defended protests, that meant i was somehow defending looters....
at any rate, i said at the time of the shooting that the story sounded...off...because no cop reaches out his window to try to grab someone and 'drag them inside'. to me, from the get go, it sounded like someone trying to explain why brown was struggling with the cop in his car, while making it seem it wasn't brown who was the instigator.
now, this one tho with the chokehold-whole 'nother ball game. the cop broke the dept rules, and a man is dead.
the police are important, obviously. but they shouldn't be above the laws they're supposed to uphold. and with this latest case, you have to wonder-who is holding them accountable?


and no sooner do i leave here and go to my homepage, than i see this:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/...ent/ar-BBgkVkB


People who investigate use-of-force claims admitted they conducted probes with the goal of portraying officers as favorably as possible and some said they used an improperly high, beyond-reasonable-doubt standard, the report said.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cardus

A few points:

If only the video mattered, then the grand jury wasted nine weeks while interviewing numerous witnesses, no?

NYPD has not classified the officer's action as a chokehold. This matters.

of course they're trying to say that the chokehold wasn't a chokehold, else he violated their rules and procedures. the medical examiner rules it a homicide, citing 'compression of the neck'.
as for the cop who did the chokehold, pantaleo...he already cost ny money on another lawsuit, and has another pending.

[jms62]

This won't sell any papers so we barely hear of it

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...oting-27362718

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by jms62

This won't sell any papers so we barely hear of it

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...oting-27362718

Those stories are all over the paper, not because they sell papers, but because the mainstream media loves those storries. They don't like reporting black on white violence because it's not PC to talk about those cases. This story of black teens with hammers murdering a Bosnian man in St. Louis a couple of days ago and now today attacking a Bosnian woman and beating her will not get much press coverage.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/m...1ffbe56f3.html

[Rupert Pupkin]

Al Sharpton and all the race baiters are like the boy who cried wolf. They lost almost all their credibility by making a big deal of the Ferguson case and other cases that have no merit. Now there is finally this case in New York that may have some merit but the majority of the population probably won't pay much attention because Sharpton has no credibility left. When a guy cries racism and/or police brutality every two seconds, even when there is none, who is going to pay attention to him when there is finally a legitimate case? Everyone will just assume he is full of it like usual.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Al Sharpton and all the race baiters are like the boy who cried wolf. They lost almost all their credibility by making a big deal of the Ferguson case and other cases that have no merit. Now there is finally this case in New York that may have some merit but the majority of the population probably won't pay much attention because Sharpton has no credibility left. When a guy cries racism and/or police brutality every two seconds, even when there is none, who is going to pay attention to him when there is finally a legitimate case? Everyone will just assume he is full of it like usual.

Sharpton lost any credability 27 years ago.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by jms62

Sharpton lost any credability 27 years ago.

There still is hope....

But Gurley’s relatives told Sharpton to stay away rather than turn the somber ceremonies into a spectacle.

“It’s been a nightmare,” Gurley’s aunt, Hertencia Petersen, told The Post. “He just wants to take credit for this when he’s never even contacted my sister [Gurley’s mother].

“Who made you the spokesperson of our family? We just want to bury our nephew with dignity and respect.”

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...ms_family.html

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

There still is hope....





http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...ms_family.html

Glad someone thinks so

[Crown@club]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/i...rence-27411871

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Crown@club

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/i...rence-27411871

too uncommon.
i really hope one of the things that comes out of these stories is the DOJ requiring info on all police shootings-who polices the police?

[Danzig]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...ck_on_job.html

just saw this on slate.


It was with significantly less fanfare on Nov. 24 that the mayor of Hammond announced he'd reinstated the officers to regular duty because they'd been "cleared" by an FBI investigation—only for the FBI to respond that it had done no such thing. From NWI.com:


"The matter is still under investigation," said Bob Ramsey, FBI Supervisory Special Agent with the Merrillville office of the law enforcement agency. He declined to put a timeline on the completion of the examination.


also:

One of the Hammond officers involved, Patrick Vicari, has previously been named as a defendent in five other lawsuits alleging inappropriate behavior. One was dismissed, one is pending, and the three others were settled out of court for a total of $181,850.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Crown@club

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/i...rence-27411871

What is the answer to this? In our criminal justice system, you are presumed innocent unless there is strong evidence that shows you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

When a police officer kills someone and the officer says that he feared for his life, and there is no evidence disputing the officer's testimony, how can you find him guilty? How can you even find probable cause to put him on trial?