BMaker11 said:
In the top part of your comment, you're wrong. It was a chokehold. You wouldn't say, multiple times "I can't breathe" if your blood, not oxygen, was being cut off. And the death was ruled a homicide by neck compressions, as jlmurph pointed out. And homicide isn't as simple as "death by another person". It is a legal term. Otherwise a "manslaughter" charge and a "homicide" charge would be the same thing. But obviously there is a difference. You could say that the officer committed involuntary manslaughter, which means "unintentional homicide by criminially negligent or reckless conduct"...but this death was ruled a straight up homicide/murder, something that's not limited to "malicious intent" (meaning, intent to kill isn't needed, so that's something that is not required). Many states define it as "intentionally inflicting bodily harm that subsequently results in the victim's death". What intent do you think the officer had when he came from behind and put him in a chokehold after they attempted to arrest him? Give him a massage? No, he meant to weaken him (aka harm him) in order to make subduing him easier. And that intentional harm caused his death. Example: if I punch you in the arm, I don't intend to kill you. But if that punch ruptures an artery and you die from internal bleeding, I've commited a murder. |
legally, it is not defined as a choke hold defined by the NYPD as “any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air.”.
the autopsy showed no damage to the wind pipe or neck bone, and the man did not die of asypyxiation.
he applied a submission hold, which is allowed.
and like i said homicide, in this context, it is not a legal term but a medical one, meaning death by the hand of another. dont confuse medical parlance with legal terms
