At the August rally protesting Eric Garner’s death in Staten Island, one of his cousins expressed relief that there existed video footage of the incident in which Garner was killed, when the 43-year-old was approached by a plainclothes police officer on suspicion of selling bootleg cigarettes and subsequently placed in a chokehold. “For the first time in history, we got proof on tape that the police were doing us dirty,” he told the crowd.
Garner’s cousin believed, as did many others, that the taping would be the proof required to charge a New York City police officer in connection with the death of a black citizen, providing an all-too-rare moment of accountability.
But that has turned out not to be the case; a 23-person grand jury in Staten Island, with 14 white members, voted not to bring criminal charges against the officer in question, Daniel Pantaleo. Protests are expected tonight and continuing into the weekend.
To be sure, there was other evidence against the officer in question. Garner’s death was ruled a “homicide” by the New York City Medical Examiner’s office. And it’s not in dispute that the NYPD banned chokeholds for their own police force more than 20 years ago. But none of that, apparently, was sufficient to bring charges against Pantaleo — just as extensive eyewitness testimony in the Ferguson, Mo. killing of Michael Brown proved insufficient to bring a grand jury indictment against a police officer there just last month.
The miniaturization of video cameras to fit into mobile phones and “wearable” electronic gear has helped video recordings emerge as a widely-touted panacea against police misbehavior. The thinking has been that video provides indisputable evidence. But today’s ruling, to say nothing of acquittals more than two decades ago of officers involved in the videotaped beating of motorist Rodney King, show that not to be the case.
And now the video has been censored from YouTube using the broken DMCA request system. How typical. Does anyone have a mirror?
Hello all –
I guess this is probably the best thread to post my link in. More poetry, protest-style;
http://observergal.blogspot.com/2014/12/protest-poem.html
In the early 20th century lynch mobs posed for pictures and took ears and fingers etc. as souvenirs.
Cameras changed nothing, only made bragging easier.
Another case. So deja vu, so sad:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/12/05/368746903/killing-of-unarmed-black-man-by-white-officer-sparks-protests-in-Arizona
While the thought of a belief in God Himself is a good idea in the face of absolute stupidity of an unrepresentative law enforcement community in and of itself toward the black community, it might be a good idea to tap that button your phone (because it all gets stored in the phone). If they serve you an investigation, yeah. That will be helpful to people with a conscience. Don’t worry, We won’t be laughing at them. Yeah, well we won’t be laughing with them, but let’s act like the other communities were going to do a great job of representing a collective interest. Common sense always wins. Embarrassment is amusing. Moses. So be it.
Although as demonstrated by the no true bill in the Garner case, cameras are not a panacea for the ills of police brutality, it should be noted that placing body cameras on police will serve another purpose. Ramsey Orta, who filmed the Garner incident, and his wife, who was not present at the incident, were arrested the day after the release of the coroner’s report. The details of the arrest and subsequent indictment are available if you want to find them, but it’s pretty likely the police retaliated for Orta’s filming. Ubiquity of video will prevent this kind of retaliation in the future.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/04/1349421/-Missouri-AG-Confirms-Michael-Brown-Grand-Jury-Misled-by-St-Louis-DA?detail=email
Thanks, avelna2001 –
That was a VERY enlightening discussion.
“Cameras Aren’t a Miracle Cure…….”
What then is the cure? Here are a few suggestions.
1. People need to open their eyes and realize that our American economy is way worse than the corporate media and Wall Street are letting on. So how is this related? The population of the USA is intentionally being DISTRACTED by all this hype and BS about a “possible race war”. When dictators get in trouble they look for a DISTRACTION, a reason to divert attention from the real problems. The repub-o-demo-puppets are just pathetic slaves, of a global elite, who do there bidding for money and power, but some are actually mind controlled or black mailed.
2. Many of these recent deadly events are staged, or some call them FALSE FLAGS ( right out of the days of the pirates), for the above needed DISTRACTION. Crisis Actors, infiltrators, and pure media fiction combine to create a ‘Believable” media event for TV. People have no real trusted source of information so they are stuck with what they get on TV and the papers.
3. Look how they, global elites, have thrown Bill Cosby under the bus. Not that what he has done is not true, but it is being used as another DISTRACTION from worse problems and psychopathic purposes. Since the “elites” own the media don’t you think they could in minute kill any story or promote any story. This is intentional and with a more diabolical purpose in mind. The fear of a “possible race war” will do the trick.
If you believe what you see and hear on your TV and read in most corporate newspapers you are being >>>HERDED>>> in a particular direction for a particular purpose that can not be any good, have any truth or provide any beauty to our progressively ugly world; provided @ all costs, by the global financial elites who pull all the strings. INHUMANE $ICKO$!
Do police suffer from “excited delirium”? Is that why they act this way?
http://sainthoward.blogspot.com/2014/12/do-cops-suffer-from-excited-delirium.html
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/buchanan/racist-cops-or-liberal-slander/
This reflexive rush to judgment happens again and again.
We were told Trayvon Martin was shot to death by a white vigilante for “walking while black,” and learned that Trayvon, when shot, had been beating a neighborhood watch guy nearly unconscious, “martial arts style,” while sitting on top of him.
We were told that Ferguson cop Darren Wilson gunned down an unarmed black teenager for walking in the street, and learned that Michael Brown just robbed a convenience store, attacked Wilson in his patrol car, and was shot trying to wrestle away the officer’s gun.
Liberals are imprisoned by a great myth—that America is a land where black boys and men are stalked by racist white cops, and alert and brave liberals must prevent even more police atrocities.
They live in a world of the mind.
The reality: As of 2007, black-on-white violent crime was nearly 40 times as common as the reverse. But liberals can’t give up their myth, for it sustains their pretensions to moral superiority. It defines who they are.
Another person who needs to spend some time here:
https://twitter.com/hashtag/CrimingWhileWhite?src=tren
We found out that Trayvon Martin, while walking home minding his own business, was stalked by a racist lunatic named George Zimmerman who called Martin a “fucking coon” (as heard on the 911 tapes) and proceeded to stalk Martin even after the police told him NOT to. Once Zimmerman approached Martin and began to harass him, Martin fought back. Zimmerman, being the gutless coward that we now know him to be, shot Martin when Martin began winning the fight that Zimmerman started. Then, the not-at-all-racist police sent Zimmerman on his way without arresting him. Finally, adding insult to fatal injury, the police tested the dead of Trayvon Martin for traces of drugs – but NOT the murderer George Zimmerman.
Officer Darren Wilson drove up to Michael Brown who was walking in the road and told him to, “get the fuck out of the road”. The exact facts of what actually happened at that point were denied a court hearing, so all we have is the fictional tory concocted by Wilson, despite being caught in numerous lies already (such as Brown punching him 3 times in the face yet Wilson had no bruises), said he felt “threatened for his life”. Even though Brown, unlike Wilson, was unarmed, Wilson shot Brown not ONCE but TWICE in the HEAD. Not leg – HEAD – killing him instantly! As we’ve since learned, Brown was 148 feet away from Wilson, so for Wilson to “fear for his life” is either 100% BS or Wilson was such a pathetic coward he should have never been given an adult position of authority.
Now, with incontrovertible filmed evidence of police illegally putting Eric Garner in chokehold, even though he posed no threat whatsoever and was allegedly selling lose cigarettes (despite Garner denying he was doing that and none being present in the video) the police then proceeded to publicly murder him as he pleaded for his life. The killing was ruled a “homicide” – murder – by the police’s own coroner. Once again, the rightwing in this country stood firmly behind the murderers because the murderers were white and the blacks (or “thugs” as rightwingers call them) were the victims.
According to a ProPublica study, in the United States you are 21 times more like to be killed by the police if you are a young black male than if you are a young white male. Which, to rightwingers, justifies their contempt for blacks because they are all “thugs”, “hulks”, “demons”, and “monsters”.
When you live in FOX/Limbaugh echo chamber; facts are “liberal”, being virulently racist is “accepting reality”, and “I Want My Country Back” means a return to the days where white privilege was never challenged, and blacks who don’t do as they are told are murdered without anyone being arrested.
I think this is biased way too far towards the opposing point of view (I mean, complaining about sitting in holiday traffic as a dire consequence when people are talking about serious issues like racism in the US strikes me as extremely whiny. I was dismayed at the Ferguson riots because that hurts no on but the citizens of Ferguson, but some blocked traffic is hardly on par.)
That said, I think there is an important point to consider here – that being, when progressives cannot offer an alternative, vague, angry condemnations of ‘the system’ might logically (to my mind at least) perpetuate the very system they dislike. In a smoothly running world, I think it’s generally the job of conservatives to be ‘good at’ maintaining the status quo, which results in a lot of practical knowledge, and progressives to advance new ideas about how things ‘could be’, which results in more philosophical knowledge. If there is little to no point of connection between the two, then you get a sort of worship of convention for the sake of convention on one side and lofty ideas unattached to practical realities on the other. If you think society is over-policed, you can basically: 1) Propose alternate methods of mitigating crime 2) Assume that if you have a less aggressive police force, crime will go up but people will be happy with the general trade-off 3) Assume that if you have a less aggressive police force, crime will go up and people will knee-jerk freak out and demand even more security. At the moment my money is on ‘3’, but Americans being known for their innovation I’m hopeful we can see this and move more towards ‘1’.
“when progressives cannot offer an alternative..”
Here’s a wild and outlandish concept. I’m just spit-balling here, but… apply the law equally, even to the POLICE when they kill unarmed people without any justification, and make racial profiling a crime since it’s unconstitutional… Is that too “lofty” or “unattached to practical realities”?
I’m not sure where you’re hearing “progressives” or anyone else stymied by this issue.
The criminal justice system is broken and it’s completely illegitimate.
The police have carte blanch to target, torture, and murder minorities with impunity.
There are not even show trials any more, like the Abner Louima case where police beat and sodomized Louima with a plunger up his rectum only to acquit the cops because… cops. But now they don’t even want to be bothered with the court time involved in show trials. The police feel confident they can flagrantly flout the laws and no one will do anything about it. Hence, the nationwide protests currently happening.
Good god, really? Maybe I’m becoming a conspiracy theorist myself, because I’m starting to believe that, at a sort of subconscious level, some (some, not all, by any means) progressives are actually behaving in ways that are aggressively, proactively ineffectual. The above script of hyperbole and unsupported accusations, tied up in a neat little bow of expectation that I should agree with your hysterical moralizing illustrates that pretty well for me.
Apologies, that was probably rude. I am an Extremist Centrist Moderate though, and I get pretty strident about how moderate I want views to be. My disagreement with you, again, is that you propose a false problem (The police kill unarmed people without justification; have carte blanch to target, torture, and murder minorities with impunity – where is your data for that? You could probably find data to support far less extreme premises, like “minorities are arrested for crimes at greater rates than whites with less evidence”, but that’s not how you chose to present your argument.) and provide a false solution (“End all the unprovoked murders that I assume in my head are happening!”). I don’t find that helpful in a big picture way except, again, in perpetuating existing cycles.
UN rights chief concerned over ‘disproportionate’ killings of African-Americans by US police.
I don’t need any camera’s, I already know what the problem is.
I wonder if 5-eyes would orchestrate another civil war to avert another revolutionary war.
The news is leaving out that “A Grand Jury Did Indict One Person Involved In Eric Garner’s Killing — The Man Who Filmed It”
Read the article here http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6264746?utm_hp_ref=tw
Thanks, Eve –
We also need to follow this case.
Some solutions:
Enlarge the pool of grand jury members to a size that is capable of statistically representing the population.
Let the decision to indict be made by a computer.
Decrease the percentage of people in a grand jury who must agree to indict. Right now, a grand jury must unanimously agree or have 2/3 or 3/4 agreement to bring an indictment. One hundred percent, 75%, or 66% fails to represent the low bar of “enough evidence” or “probable cause”, nor does it or can it compensate for the invisible and unpredictable influence of racial bias. Racist fools can still get into a grand jury; stupid (Forrest Gump definition) people can still get into a grand jury.
If the case is between two races, fill your grand jury with people of other races.
Incorporate some kind of penalty to members of grand juries who do not do as they’re instructed. Hefty fines, at least.
What we’ve seen in Ferguson and now here–fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Time to make some real changes that takes a long hard look at racism and doesn’t give it a chance to play ANY role in justice.
Radley Balko, who has researched and written about police militarization and brutality for some time had some comments on this issue in the following piece:
Some thoughts on Eric Garner
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/12/04/some-thoughts-on-eric-garner/
Thanks, Pedinska –
That was an awesome read.
Any competent attorney can prosecute a criminal case. The reason wealthy people pay to get their friends elected prosecutor or DA is because the real job of a prosecutor is to protect his friends from prosecution.
Police cameras can help but we need to end the secret criminal grand jury system and we also need to make prosecutors criminally liable for failure to prosecute.
And we need to be on our guard against any attempts to end the civil grand jury system – a completely different mechanism which investigates corrupt governments.
WHY WAIT FOR CHAOS?
What should responsible Citizens in the future do to voice their suspicion of Police Deadly Force Policy?
Beyond the Protest on the street take your demand for police accountability to the President and the Congress .
Enough is enough. Multiple instances of publicly felt Excessive Police Use of Deadly Force has created a firestorm of protest , debate and symbolism .
Now is the time to act .
The police receive Federal funds and can be compelled to submit to new accountability Federal legislation .
When the Police Kill we need Federal legislation to do the following :
1. Local prosecutors will not make the decision to charge a police officer who kills any citizen, a US attorney does .
2. State courts will no longer hear these cases a Federal panel will.
3. Department of Justice investigation are required with short deadline in all police use of deadly force cases.
4. A National Ombudsman is appointed to review and report to Congress on Federal compliance with these requirements .
Later to create local change take the issue to the City Council Chambers ( or it’s equivalent depending on the police force.)
1. Demand that there be a written policy statement on the use of deadly force for each local police department.
2. Demand to know what it is.
3. Demand that the policy is used with a factually specific report to the legislative body overseeing the department whenever police kill a citizen.
4. Demand an annual public hearing on that policy.
What can a Police Department do to assure Citizens that it has an effective policy and training on proper Use of Deadly Force that it enforces?
Draft 12/2/14 10 pm.
WHY WAIT?
Here is what you can do now.
ASK what are your local #police use of deadly force policies .
Petition your elected officials to publicly review those policies and working with the police change them where necessary. Then demand they are followed?
Note, I am not prejudging the police. Here I am looking at future Police Killing of our Citizens. I presume there are situations when Police use of deadly force is justified. Do you know what those situations are?
In Flint our New Flint City Charter could have a requirement of an annual review of the Flint Police Department promulgated policy on Use Of Deady Force.
Every jurisdiction should have this requirement.
As a former #Flint Municipal Ombudsman who investigated Police Brutality Claims I recommend the above and the following as one of many approaches to citizen review of police use of deadly force .
Let’s start a national discussion on police use of deadly force by demanding that every political jurisdiction with a police force examine it’s own policy.
Go to your next City Council or similar meeting and ask what the policy is?
You desire that a Ferguson Missouri
like event ,if it happens in your locality , has a well written policy on Use of Deadly Force that you can measure police action by.
Go to the next meeting of your city council, county commission and legislative body that funds police departments and demand a review of deadly force policy.
What would happen in # Flint Michigan or anywhere else in America if a Darren Wilson like shooting of Michael Brown in #Ferguson Missouri happened here ?
How do we keep our streets from smoldering the next day whether the shooting was found justified or not?
It would be logical now for elected, appointed or anointed local leaders like City Councils (Municipal Police), County Commissioners ( Sheriffs Departments) or State Legislators
( State Police), that care, to answer that question.
Just what is the Police Use of Deadly Force Policy?
Locally how are these Killings handled?
What should each community expect?
YOU Should ask what are the policies for police use of deadly force in your political jurisdiction?
How to do that?
I suggest that a broad coalition in each jurisdiction be formed to evaluate those policies and make recommendations for change if needed.
This same body would be at the ready for a non judicial review for the communities served of ANY police killing of one of its Citizens.
Why wait for the protests?
Why not act now!
The US, as a society, has decided that selling loose cigarettes or jay walking are heinous crimes, while starting wars under false pretexts or causing the financial system to crash are just high spirited hijinks. The level of police brutality is proportional to the seriousness of the crime. This may seem harsh, but it will ultimately lead to more people choosing to commit more socially acceptable crimes.
Trickle down justice across the bay: You can sell loose toxic mortgages by the billion$ and get a bail out … or sell loose cigs and get strangled to death.
*btw when I rode the ferry kids sold loose joints (i.e. swag) and the cops didn’t bat an eye … but this was before circa ‘law and order’ was established.
^^ would be a nice idea if ”on suspicion of selling bootleg cigarettes” was a true statement of the situation. My understanding is that a fight was going on and Mr. Garner was a peacemaker there. By the time police arrived to sort out the fight, the combatants had left.
Only after EG had died was there any talk of bootleg cigarettes.
All the folks squawking about the protests and riots that have started nation-wide and which will continue, had better hope that is all that happens. When a criminal justice system ceases to be perceived as legitimate by a large swathe of the population, vigilantism occurs: “If you won’t punish them, we will.”
These grand juries and the machiavellian prosecutors are destroying civilized living under the rule of law.
They are destroying it by design. When you lose faith in rule of law, anarchy creeps in presenting those in our government with a perfect reason to take away the last scraps of rights and replace them with SECURITY. And of course, we the populace should be thankful to our saviors for ‘fixing’ the problem….
they are destroying it purposely. When a populace loses faith in the rule of law, anarchy creeps in, giving those in the government the reason they need to get rid of the last scraps of rights, all in the name of SECURITY, thereby ‘fixing’ the problem.
The cameras work as intended, and cynically, one might say the same of the grand juries. What the cameras expose is that the grand jury system, once a real mechanism to defend people’s rights, has been subverted with so many loopholes and tricks that it often is worse than useless. See http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Grand-jury-system-s-a-bad-joke-on-justice-1776656.php for such commentary. Half the states don’t even use them any more. The problem is that they’re not really random, representative collections of citizens carefully evaluating the law, but something handpicked and partisan.
The tragedy is that we actually _need_ the protections a grand jury was meant to offer now more than ever — now that the proliferation of “alternatives to prison” has made it so that even if you are fortunate enough to have the money to avoid doing “time served” before their trial, you still can be electronically shackled, confined to your home most of the time, banned from speaking your case on the Internet and so forth, maybe for a year, or two, or three, simply based on an unproven accusation. But we need a set of fair, representative grand juries that do their job by the book, not … this.
the proposed police bodycameras present a set of serious privacy issues.
in general, this viewer is of the opinion that public officials should enjoy no privacy, having sought and obtained public office. in this regard i generally am thinking of presidents, congresspersons and cabinet officials, more than police officers; those elected and appointees. i like the idea of bill clinton never entering the shameful closet because he knew video of his behavior was being broadcast.
assuming that police are among those (and, in some of the cell camera cases authoritative courts have recognized that police officers engaged in the activities of their civil duty do not, themselves, enjoy a right to privacy sufficient to block the civilian with the camera; it is not clear that this is nationally uniform in application, so check your local rulings) public officials who do not enjoy a right to privacy, they nevertheless routinely interact with people – civilians, perps, witnesses, suspects, casual passers-by – who may be entitled to privacy. when the man comes to my home to ask questions about the crime i witnessed, his presence does not immediately transform my home into a public space; likewise if he is there with a warrant to search.
so what cameras? how deployed? saving data where? under whose control? subject to what oversight and security protocols?
how about a camera with enough lenses for 360 degree coverage that is switched on by the separation of tool (gun, taser, club, cuffs, bat-erang) from utility belt, and then streams the signal to . . . somewhere police oversight can view but not alter it, such as wikileaks and the Intercept. back in the land of the practical, this viewer is only aware of one organization with the data management proficiency and a set of ready made storage and minimization procedures who is in the process of building out a facility that might manage such volumes of video. and we at the Intercept know we don’t have to worry about that organization misusing the data, or exercising less than perfect control over it, don’t we?
that still transforms my living room (yes, although totally innocent of all charges — i was in phoenix at the time — i will have to be hit with the bat-erang and cuffed anyway) into a public forum. and i don’t want you all rifling through my bookshelves and making viral videos out of my knick-knacks.
this is not to say that i think the police, or much of anything else that rings in law and order or national security, aren’t in need of greater transparency, more effective oversight, and some damn punity. personal cameras seem promising, but are in fact another intrusion, another acquiescent step toward total information awareness.
The cameras are a solid step in the right direction. There are cameras in the vehicles, there should be cameras on the police as well now that it is technologically feasible and affordable.
Some cops might not like it, but there are probably a lot of other rules and regulations that cops don’t like. These cameras are there to protect the public. And the cops might just find that the cameras actually help them a lot more than they hurt them. If Officer Wilson in Fergusson had a camera and was in fact charged as he claimed, he might still have a job and people might not be as outraged if he had video proof showing that Brown didn’t have his hands up and wasn’t trying to surrender.
For the record, I am not saying that Brown didn’t have his hands up and was trying to surrender. I don’t know what happened. The jury didn’t know what happened. Maybe if cops have to wear the cameras both dirty cops and dirty criminals can be held accountable for their actions. This is actually surveillance that I don’t mind. If cops are up front about the fact that they are all wearing these cameras (the same way that everyone knows about in car dash cameras) then I have no problem with the cameras from a privacy perspective. But I think there should be policies in place that they have to delete the images after 90 days or something like that if the images are not relevant to a criminal investigation.
I am surprised that President Obama actually went for this. He has a history (at least with the intelligence agencies) of keeping his troops happy and not doing what is in the best interest of the public or obeying the US constitution.
Everyone needs to re-educate themselves with the Declaration of Independence. Its a contract we all (Americans) live under. Our government was established to secure our rights not destroy our rights.
There is no such thing as an unjustifiable killing when committed by law enforcement, no matter what.
The human experience in this country is un-american!!!!!!!!!!!! According to the Declaration of Independence we are obligated to run the political class out of office. We don’t have to wait to vote we should march on Washington and deny those bums access to Capitol Hill tomorrow. The Supreme Court Justices need to go aswell.
Its black letter law so what the fuck are we waiting for?
Can I love this country and be disgusted with it at the same time?
Pat Buchanan Was “No Angel”
By Heer Jeet
https://storify.com/JeetHeer1/pat-buchanan-was-no-angel
Thanks, Pedinska, for the memories. Funny how perspective and who your friends are changes everything. Our potential next president from the Bush dynasty, errr, family comes to mind.
@tomtomorrow on #CrimingWhileWhite
https://twitter.com/StephenFrug/status/540338852750458880
I’m struck by the White Houses response to repeated instances of local police killing unarmed Black men (and boys!).
1) Rather than de-escalate the Federal militarization of local police, Obama leaves untouched the hundreds of millions per year spigot – gushing for at least the past decade – to state & local police. Training and arming local police in Fulluja-style crowd pacification techniques, but with less Abu Graib (so far. Hooray!)
2) Obama then announces another Federal grant of several hundred million dollars, to pay for (undoubtably) special-use body cameras that (assuredly) can only be sourced from these many of these same mercenary contractors. Devices required due at least in some part from the prior practice.
3) These were the only responses by the White House. Shower taxpayer money on contractors to (at least partially) create situations, to be “fixed” by showering even more money using a different spigot, with no review (let alone cessation) of Federal efforts to militarize local police.
As Mr. Jones points out, Eric Garner was filmed while being suffocated to death by police. The NYC Grand Jury had essentially a Snuff Film as evidence documenting use of banned, illegal procedures inevitably resulting in a nicotine aficionado’s unnecessary death. This not only did not inhibit these officers’ behavior, it had NO impact regards the NYC Grand Jury result.
It seems as though the sole point of authorities is to keep the taxpayer-funded gravy train flowing to these mercenary, for-profit contractors, regardless of which calamities unfold.
How about we simply write blank checks to any registered military/intelligence contractor? A big, giant pool of hundreds – nay, billions – of dollars. Have their lobbyists name their figure.
In exchange, our unarmed African-American men (and boys!) might be murdered by Flack-jacketed, sniper-rifling, APC-driving local police a bit less. Or, perhaps investigate these frequent incidences with more rigor than ordering a ham sandwich.
Less tragic. More efficient. We can call it The Beleaguered Lobbyists Ordering Officers Down Money Act – The BLOOD Money Act.
Have your lobbyists call your Congresspeople, today!
Typical…even when its no doubt proof is undeniable… cuz its OK for them to break the laws they are sworn to uphold
Prosecutors work for “we the people” and their duty is to work diligently to achieve a prosecution.
When prosecutors are protecting cops from prosecution they are working against their clients’ interests.
They should all be permanently disbarred, and they should themselves be prosecuted for taking money (paychecks) for services not rendered.
I wonder if the prosecutor plans to release the evidence in this case as was done for the Brown/Wilson case. I simply cannot understand how a reasonable person can fail to indict this dirtbag cop on the facts as presented by the media.
I read that the prosecutor is petitioning the court for permission to release the record of the grand jury proceedings. The St. Louis county prosecutor determined that Missouri’s “sunshine law” precluded the need for judicial approval. Apparently the prosecutor in the Garner case has determined that he must secure a court order, and that he will seek one.
Quite literally, I cannot imagine any presentation of facts and law that, if sane and honest, would not have led to an indictment. Not in light of what we’ve all seen in the video. Can’t comprehend this result, at all.
This just keeps weighing on my heart and mind.
I saw some of the NYC Congresspeople on C-Span. At least they SEEM to get it (with Congressional folk ya never know). Rep. Jeffries was very good. I think it was he who said we have to look at a system where police are NOT held accountable for infractions. He also said that if the grand jury failure to indict with clear VIDEO evidence of illegal activity doesn’t wake up Americans, nothing will. And they pretty much echoed your headline, Mr. Jones.
I would add: I tend to watch those forensic/crime shows and I believe it said on one of them it takes *several* minutes to choke someone to death – this was part of the evidence used against a murderer. So I have to ask myself – WHY didn’t the “officer” STOP the hold – and what does the failure to do so say about the possibility of criminal activity?
Also – here’s a great piece by Stephen Thrasher:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/03/eric-garner-decision-more-protest-not-less
Any person watching the video and hearing this man plead for his life by saying “I can’t breathe” and returns a no true bill must not be able to feel. I’ve heard of such people but thought they were very rare. Apparently there’s enough of them to sit on quite a few grand juries these days. In order for these findings to make even a little sense it helps to know that the prosecutor is the one who decides what evidence to present, how to present that evidence, whether the “defendent” gets to testify. Knowing that these rulings aren’t that mysterious, are they?
It is time we realize “justice” and the “rule of law” in the post-911 United States means police have the right to use whatever force they deem appropriate, even deadly force, especially against people outside the ruling class. The United States is a lethal combination – a country controlled by fear, unlimited instruments of force, and citizens willing to fund destruction on a global scale.
https://twitter.com/hashtag/CrimingWhileWhite?src=hash
Excerpt:
“We trust that those unhappy with today’s grand jury decision will make their views known in the same peaceful, constructive way.” Mr. de Blasio said.
Otherwise they will be placed in a chokehold by officer Daniel Pantaleo in the same peaceful way that he strangled Eric Garner.
“I became a police officer to help people and to protect those who can’t protect themselves,Officer Pantaleo said.
Obviously Eric Garner had a lot of physical health issues , He was not a violent person and had no chance of protecting himself from the gruesome violence resulting in his death,his last words before he died was “I can’t breathe ” and it says a lot about what kind of help and protection officer Pantaleo provides for his victims.
“When anybody in this country is not being treated equally under the law, that is a problem, and it’s my job as president to help solve it,” Mr. Obama said
and he did it again.
No, Andrew, cameras are not a miracle cure for the deep and abiding wounds that are being inflicted. But people should still record and publish these recordings. As stunningly inconceivable as it is that a coroner would rule a death a homicide and that a grand jury would decline to indict the man who was explicitly seen to have committed that homicide, this result has been condemned across a much wider political spectrum than has been seen before. And that truly surprises me.
Conservatives Join Outrage Over Grand Jury Decision In Eric Garner’s Death
The images that came home to the US of the Vietnam war didn’t change public opinion overnight, but they did have an impact. As did the images of the civil rights struggle. The pictures of a little girl burned by napalm and of people whose courage brought them face to face with fire hoses and police dogs were gut blows that forced people to engage their empathy or admit that they had none. The fact that authorities – be they military (no pictures of caskets arriving) or civilian (no media in the air over Ferguson) – work hard to keep these images from the general public speaks to the truth and power they hold to generate impetus for real change. And authority is fighting a losing battle on this front. At least for the time being.
So keep recording. Keep pushing for cops to wear cameras. Keep putting those videos and images out there. Keep making people face their own inhumanity. Because that’s the only way that change can be forced to happen. And it. must. happen.
I was stunned to find that the NYC grand jury did not indict the officer in the Eric Garner case. I suppose it was to be expected – as dahoit pointed out.
I also totally concur with Nemo – what an injustice. And I too, hope all protests remain peaceful.
Thanks for that link, Lyra – I’ll have to check it out.
It is so sad that we are again confronting such a miscarriage of justice. It really makes me wonder “What in the WORLD were the jury members thinking/not thinking?” I just don’t know hoe, giving the evidence outlined here, they could do ANYTHING but indict. It’s clear our justice system is so broken it has lost its way.
Sad, sad day.
The problem lies in the Courthouse, not the police station. The DA can indict a ham sandwich. The DA can indict a cop. Judges and DAs are elected offices. Elected control over armed forces, same as the Federal government. If you are unhappy with salaried public servants, look to the elected bosses. Then take action to fix the problem in the courthouse. You’ll be amazed how quickly deportment improves.
Nobody is claiming that police cameras are a “miracle cure” for police brutality, but they at least add a level of transparency and accountability is well-needed.
It sure beats having 30 different testimonials of which half disagree.
This is another case that I have been watching.
Excellent point Mr. Jones.
Perhaps people would be well advised to examine the quality of life for citizens living in a Martial Law State under dictatorship rule.
Also….it appears that skin color is not a material concern or prerequisite for implementation of police brutality.
Consider this: “The American Delusion Distracted, Diverted and Insulated from the Grim Reality of the Police State”
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39576.htm
Another drug related death.(nicotine)Amazing the focus of city police on loose cigarette sales.How do they know they were tax free if they weren’t packaged?
I expected at least an involuntary homicide or manslaughter charge at least.Typical though,the police are now sancrosanct,as fear rules America.
This decision is a grave injustice. I am a white, former law enforcement officer who lived in the South during the 1950s and I am ashamed that such unjust racial divides continue today. Yes, I realize that I do not have the facts upon which the Grand Jury decided but this is a case that must go to trial to determine the facts, even if that requires the involvement of the federal judiciary.
However, any protests by citizens must remain peaceful, without any rioting or looting. I think most unbiased, reasonable Americans understand that this decision was a travesty of justice and they will support a review of the facts by whatever judicial means available.