Skip to main content

Today's Poll: Should there have been an indictment in the Eric Garner case?

By Howard B. Owens
Linda Knox

While I believe the video does show enough evidence of excessive force by the officer to indict, the video also shows the alleged victim's failure to comply with law enforcement's attempts to arrest him for his alleged crime. Did Mr. Garner's resistance to arrest contribute in some way to the sequence of events that followed? Classic example of two wrongs.........

Dec 4, 2014, 9:08am Permalink
Bob Harker

Raymond, I did not vote on this poll because I did not see all the evidence the Grand Jury did. I want to point out to you though that the use of a "choke hold" is NOT illegal in New York. Yes, it is a violation of NYPD policy, and most law enforcement agencies. The officer has been suspended due to his use of it, but violating an employer's policy is not a crime.

Dec 4, 2014, 9:54am Permalink
Scott Ogle

"but violating an employer's policy is not a crime."

Except, I think, where a policeman's violation of such policy results in a wrongful death , a homicide.

Dec 4, 2014, 10:09am Permalink
Howard B. Owens

A baseball bat isn't a deadly weapon until a person turns it into one.

A gun isn't a deadly weapon until a person turns it into one.

A chokehold isn't a deadly weapon until a person turns it into one.

Dec 4, 2014, 10:15am Permalink
Kyle Couchman

I've seen 2 videos on this particular incident. I have heard there are 3 but I have only seen 2. The second one was from the inside of the storefront he was choked in front of, that one shows more where the original cut off from, like the emt response and the lack of effort to even attempt a revival on the man.

Let me address these issues, I asked an officer about this loosie cigarette arrest and this is one of those arrests that is actually designed to be an appearance ticket. IMHO this particular incident falls under that different enforcement for different races issue. While he did not co-operate he wasn't violent until they put their hands on him. Which was done to intimidate him rather than deal with the situation.

As for what was seen on the video I have to agree with Scott. Chokeholds while not illegal are banned from use in NYC Police Dept. In defying that regulation this officer definately shifted culpability to himself and should have been indited based on the fact that going outside of NYPD regs in subduing a citizen he should be responsible. Manslaughter at least would be a reasonable charge.

As for the racial aspect of this and Brown, lets see how NYC protestor handle this. Ferguson's protestors overstepped and silenced the whole reason for their protest in getting carried away and using it as an excuse for comitting crimes in the name of injustice. This protest may be different. However we all know that Police can get carried away and the victims while they are a large part from minorities, still also victimize whites as well....

It just there is much much more focus on the white on black enforcement.

I found the link to the 7 min. after his losing conciousness. You be the judge of the actions taken ( or not taken as the case may be )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vT66U_Ftdng&feature=youtu.be

Dec 4, 2014, 12:40pm Permalink
Mike Weaver

It was a grand jury proceeding, not intended to find guilt. That there is any question at all as to whether the take down followed department policy, OR if reasonable care for the arrested was provided, tells me that there should have been a finding that results in a trial. The trial would have answered all these questions in a format that allows cross examination and evidence to be presented from both sides. That doesn't happen in a grand jury.

In my opinion it is a travesty of justice that these questions won't be answered in a criminal trial.

Dec 4, 2014, 1:28pm Permalink
Mike Weaver

And we should all be talking about whether it makes sense to make selling untaxed cigarettes a criminal offense. Civil penalty? Sure. Criminal? come on. Don't deny the state their tax money or you will have violence threatened against you.

Dec 4, 2014, 1:35pm Permalink
david spaulding

Without being with the grand jury, I couldn't vote either. However it is a sad day in America when a government agent can kill you because you were selling cigarettes on the street corner. Reminds me of the awful things I was taught about Russia when I was growing up.

Dec 4, 2014, 3:53pm Permalink
Kyle Couchman

Ok so one case with video resulted in a conviction does that balance out Gardiners case? John? You know a broken clock is still right twice a day. The system isn't something that is just supposed to work once in a while. Yet your comment seems to say that it's ok that it does work once in a while.

The case you cite has 2 major differences.... the person the cop beat is still alive, and he was already subdued and handcuffed when the officer attacked him. By the way he was only convicted of misdemenor violations of civil rights as well.

So tell me how well the system worked. Without that video proof we would never have known about either the cop or the victim. But it still would have happened. Is that how the system is supposed to work?

Dec 4, 2014, 6:38pm Permalink
Dave Meyer

In all these cases, the cops were just DOING THEIR JOBS.

If Michael Brown had gotten on the ground and not resisted, he'd still be alive.
If the kid in California hadn't modified the BB gun and hadn't raised it when he was told to put it down, he'd still be alive.
If the guy in NYC selling the cigarettes had simply turned around and put his hands behind his back and waited to be handcuffed, he'd still be alive.

But they didn't.

Cops have to make split second decisions and they hope that they make the right decision so that they can go home to their families at the end of their shift. I'm pretty sure that none of these guys started their shifts with the thought they were going to end a life that day.

Does it suck that these people died? You're goddam right it does, but they died because of their own decisions. Decisions that the police officers involved had to react to in a split second.

I think that most of the people reading this would agree that having a police force is necessary for a stable society. If that's true, why are there so many who are so quick to judge the officers involved in these cases. The ONLY people who know what REALLY went down in each of these cases are the cops involved and the people who died. No one else really knows.

So I'd just say to those who are so quick to condemn the cops in these cases to remember the words of Jack Nicholson in 'A Few Good Men'; "Son, we live in a world that has walls and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it??......."

Answer - the police officers in our cities and towns do it every day and we should be thankful there are people that want to do that job.

Dec 4, 2014, 7:11pm Permalink
Kyle Couchman

Really and what was the justification for the Buffalo officer who beat his suspect while he was face down on ground handcuffed?

Sorry Dave I don't think anyone here disputes that Police are necessary, but they have rules to follow too, and they have their share that are of that cowboy mentality that think they can do what the want behind that badge,

Just as there are racial issues and legitimate reasons to protest the Brown, Gardner and other cases. But rioters under the guise of protesting are eclipsing the issues. Just as the Blue Line protects those that do wrong on duty.

The NYPD cop was violating his JOB by using a choke hold forbidden by NYPD regs. Is that "Doing his job" statement cover that as well?

Since you mentioned "A Few Good Men" lets take the context that Nicolson's character said that in. He made a good speech and a point at that. BUT.... He was covering up a situation that led to his own court martial, several others as well as the two good soldiers following orders as they should. As well as the death of two people, the victim, and his Executive Officer. All because Nicholson's character thought he was above the code of conduct he swore an oath to defend.

Not the best of examples to use for your argument.

Dec 4, 2014, 7:45pm Permalink
Scott Ogle

"In all these cases, the cops were just DOING THEIR JOBS."

And in each case they did their jobs poorly, with fatal results. I don't think that calls for commendations. It sure doesn't in the civilian world.

Dec 4, 2014, 7:48pm Permalink
Dave Meyer

You a cop Scott?
Ever been one?
The point is that these men and women have a difficult job that most people don't want to do.
At a MINIMUM they deserve the benefit of a doubt rather than having their decisions second guessed by people the majority of which know nothing about the job they do

Dec 4, 2014, 8:05pm Permalink
Dave Meyer

Kyle...you a movie critic?
I'm well aware of the nature of Nicholson's character. The point the character made was valid however.
Let's not overthink this.

Dec 4, 2014, 8:11pm Permalink
Scott Ogle

"You a cop Scott? Ever been one?"

Not that it's relevant , but no, God knows I don't have the temperament for it. I've known some fine ones though, who put in twenty honorable years at a difficult profession, and who then retired with honor . It's a difficult job that not just anyone can do. But that doesn't exempt them from second guessing, as you put it, or earn them any special benefit of the doubt. They serve the public trust, and that trust must be earned every day . When that trust is lost, the result is today's headlines.

Dec 4, 2014, 8:37pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

Kyle wrote, "The system isn't something that is just supposed to work once in a while."

You think the system should be right 100 percent of the time? Really?

News flash: People are not perfect.

"They system" was designed by people, modified by people, peopled by people and carried out by people.

If people aren't perfect, how can the system be perfect?

The great thing about our system is there are checks and balances. So these guys didn't get indicted. They're not out of the woods yet. The feds could still weigh in. There's also potential civil suits.

All of the irrefutable evidence in the world couldn't convict O.J. Simpson in a criminal court, but it held up just fine in civil court.

One of the moral failure of modern America is this false belief in perfection, that everything must be perfect and mistakes are not allowed, ever, and if something or someone isn't perfect, destruction is in order, if not in fact, at least verbally. That's a sad state of affairs.

As for being a cop, Scott: It's highly relevant.

Cops are not above criticism or second guessing, but too much of what I read and see criticizing cops comes from a very uninformed and willfully uninformed positions.

There are basically four kinds of cops: Good cops that never get in trouble; good cops who make one mistake and then get publicly tarred and feathered; bad cops who never get caught; and bad cops who give everybody else a bad name. Change "cops" to "bakers" or "bank tellers" and you would get the same classes of individuals. Why? Because people are people no matter where you go.

The vast majority of police officers are outstanding and exemplary individuals and don't deserve the scorn society is heaping upon them these days.

If military veterans were held out to ridicule the way police officers are these days, there would be a national outcry. Why are police treated as second class citizens when what they do for our society is every bit as vital as those who serve in the military?

Dec 4, 2014, 9:24pm Permalink
Scott Ogle

"If military veterans were held out to ridicule the way police officers are these days,"

I don't see the police being ridiculed, Howard. Criticized, yes. And we don't experience our military in the same intimate way we experience our police, day to day.

And as far as the relevance of first-person eeperience, do I need a medical degree to be wary of a surgeon with shakey hands?

Dec 4, 2014, 9:45pm Permalink
Kyle Couchman

Also you make a great leap from my comment that the system should work more than once in a while. You assumed I said it should be perfect. Nowhere did I make such implication.

However I do expect a reasonable amount of accuracy, I do believe that in Ferguson there was enough evidence to allow a Grand Jury to not go foreward with a court case.

In NYC's Staten Island incident however there is too much against the officer to for a Grand jury to not indite the Officer,

1) They were on scene because the victim supposedly broke up a fight, and the officer was going to arrest him for the cigarette charge which is basically an offense that gets someone an appeareance ticket type arrest not a subdue and handcuff arrest.

2) The officer violated NYPD Regulations and used a choke hold that is clearly a violation of their regs and code of conduct. Not a crime but definately a professional violation that has had repercussions and should have been considered.

3) The videos clearly show this incident was incited by officer conduct and in the second video the behavior shows awareness that something that could be trouble for the NYPD happened and they begin to act to cover it up. @ 4.39 in the second video the officer tells the emt something about breathing and that there is no pulse. The other thing very unusual is anytime someone has a fall or is on the ground I have never seen a victim moved onto a stretcher without a cervical collar and a backboard. No cpr when theres no pulse? Very suspicious indeed and all are very easily reasons to have a court case started to investigate facts further.

Unless of course politics are brought to bear...

But your assumption that I expect perfection is a very broad assumption. But I do expect to have the system work better that once in a while and I don't think it's too much to ask for.

Dec 4, 2014, 10:04pm Permalink
Kyle Couchman

Sorry Dave but being a movie critic is a nice deflection frfom the point I tried to make. But the point is still there. It doesn't need overthinking but lets just go the other direction and oversimplify.

Do you think it's ok for police (or marines) to do what they feel is right despite the rules and code of conduct they swear to follow, and that they shouldn't be held accountable because if the job they do?

Dec 4, 2014, 10:08pm Permalink
david spaulding

You can argue and point fingers all you want, the bottom line is a man was selling cigarettes on a street corner and he died doing it....
The message I came away with from the grand jury's decision is if you resist arrest, government agents can now legally kill you.
America has become a third world country.

Dec 4, 2014, 10:13pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

Kyle, sorry if I misunderstood you, but that's how I read your statement. I can't put the genie back in the bottle. That's how I read it with no leap in it and I said what I said.

Scott, I see the police being ridiculed every time a protester walks down the street, or takes the field, with hands up.

Dec 4, 2014, 10:38pm Permalink
Scott Ogle

"I see the police being ridiculed every time a protester walks down the street, or takes the field, with hands up."

We'll have to agree to disagree on this, Howard. I simply don't see protest as a form of ridicule. I did intend to voice my agreement with what you said about the absurd expectations of perfection. As well I second your assertion that most police are exemplary . But as they say, we must not let perfection be the enemy of the good.

Dec 4, 2014, 11:12pm Permalink
Lisa Woltz

I've just come from watching a wonderful news broadcast. CNN. They were talking about a high speed chase. Seems 1 car. 2 occupants. 62 police cars. 143 bullets and a policeman who decided to jump on the hood of the car because, and I quote, "I feared for me and my partner's safety. So I shot." It was the same race issue. HOWEVER... They shot first, and then decided to take the unarmed suspects down. - Cleveland, OH

Just had to put in my two cents. I know it may cost a quarter.

Dec 4, 2014, 11:55pm Permalink
Lisa Woltz

Yes. My family are mostly law enforcement and military. We have a few bad apples. I've seen a few incidents I've really questioned since I've been here in the north since 1996. However, moving here has been a feeling of being back in my hometown. I feel law enforcement is fine. We are just like any other town with our bad seeds. No one is perfect. We all can't have heaven. But, I sure don't want to see Batavia heading to hell for someone else's glory either.

Dec 5, 2014, 1:01am Permalink
Howard B. Owens

A reader e-mailed this to me. I thought I'd share.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/12/what-if-eric-garner…

From The Atlantic:

Imagine that Eric Garner had been white. Imagine that he’d been living in Idaho. Imagine that the law-enforcement officers who killed him had been federal agents.

His death would be a Tea Party crusade.

Think about it. The police hassled Garner because he had a history of selling untaxed cigarettes. It’s the kind of big-government intrusion that drives Tea Partiers nuts. One of the events that helped launch the Tea Party, in fact, came in January 2009, when activists from Young Americans for Liberty donned American Indian garb to protest the soda taxes proposed by then-New York Governor David Patterson.

Garner responded to being hassled with a statement of “don’t tread on me” anti-government defiance: “I was just minding my own business. Every time you see me you want to mess with me. I’m tired of it. It stops today!”

A tussle ensued. The police put Garner in a chokehold, and he died.

Dec 5, 2014, 10:51am Permalink
Raymond Richardson

Bob, since the NYS Penal law has both strangulation and criminal obstruction of breathing contained in it, that would mean the means of strangling or obstructing one's breathing by means of any type of choke hold, makes the choke hold illegal.

Dec 5, 2014, 4:41pm Permalink
Frank Bartholomew

If you think about all the arrests police forces around the country make each day,
you can see what a small % end like those being sensationalized today. just sayin..

Dec 5, 2014, 4:51pm Permalink
david spaulding

Raymond, you are absolutely right, when the government agent gets the badge and firearm, they become above the law. Laws are made for the common folk, the people who make the laws and the people in law enforcement do not have to obey such. It's no wonder to me why so many people of all races lack respect for authority figures.

Dec 5, 2014, 10:09pm Permalink
Scott Ogle

". . .they become above the law."

No, they don't. Maybe for the short term, like Nixon, Agnew, and Mitchell. And they were not of the "common folk" when they fell. A free society will suffer their rogues, for a time, and then deposit them in the proper dustbin, when found worthy.

Watergate. Now those were the days!

Dec 6, 2014, 1:19am Permalink
mathew pribek

I can't see how the criticism of the cops in this case isn't universal. There is no way to say honestly that this was all done properly or that it was an innocent mistake. It was niether. It was a lethal attack on person who did not obey and did not submit after systematic and repeated harassment. I like law and order generally and public safety and I recognize that the cops are the means of providing these. But they are not above criticism or oversight by the public they serve.

So sick of hearing how hard police work is as if that is a sufficient alabi for killing innocent people. I remember ruby ridge. Some cops deserve prison.

Dec 6, 2014, 10:01am Permalink
Frank Bartholomew

David, I would hope that none of my family members would be stupid enough to resist arrest, and that is the issue.People who break the law should shut their mouths and take their lumps.
By the way, I never said "it ain't that bad", just said a very low percentage of arrests
turn into incidents like the ones the media have chosen to exploit.
Matthew, do you have to worry about being killed while you earn a living?

Dec 6, 2014, 10:39am Permalink
mathew pribek

There have been people killed doing what I do. Same is true for farmers and lumberjacks and carpenters too. Is it your position that the more dangerous a person's job is the less scrutiny and oversight should they should be under? Absurd. Good cops make bad days for bad guys. Bad cops fail to distingiush between the two.

Dec 6, 2014, 12:59pm Permalink
Frank Bartholomew

Matthew, in many occupations there are inherent dangers, but with a little common sense and the ability to follow safety procedures, the risk factor drops significantly.
With police work the dangers are not that easily identified.
At no time did I say that the risk of being killed in the line of duty excuses wrongdoing
by the police.
In all these instances, the people who ended up dead could be alive now, had they just simply followed the orders given by the police. And yes, one who is placed under arrest lost the right to challenge the police. The place to challenge is the courtroom.

Dec 7, 2014, 9:28am Permalink

Authentically Local