By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
DrDoomz on 05 December 2014
Edit Thread
KLAMarine said:
DrDoomz said:

Some things to think about:

1)You don't need to die from asphyxation to be choked go death.

I think you meant it the other way around: you don't need to be choked to death to die from asphyxiation.

DrDoomz said:

A lack of oxygen in the blood stream during a highly stressful situation can cause you to get a heart attack which would lead to cardiac arrest, especially when you're burning thru it during stressful situations... Which is what looks like what happened here.

Let us not affirm the consequent.

Being agitated and stressed out can also cause a heart attack. Garner was agitated and stressed out as evidenced by the video, even more so when they wrestled him down. There are a multitude of things that can cause a heart attack beyond the one you mentioned (http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/guide/heart-attack-causes-treatments). So which triggered Garner's heart attack?

DrDoomz said:

2) He wasn't exactly given time to "hold his breath" and as soon as they got him down they dogpiled on him, possibly smothering his breath (longer than the 20 seconda you're going on about) enough to prevent him from getting sufficient oxygen as til he passed out.

There's also the possibility that Garner was suffering an asthma attack at that moment hence why he yelled that he couldn't breathe. I cannot tell how much pressure was being applied during the confrontation solely from the video. I don't think it's possible to tell from the video or how much pressure would have to be applied to deny Garner oxygen.

DrDoomz said:

The fact that he was laying there unresponsive for over 7 minutes while no one was assisting him after he passed out trying to make it known that he couldn't breath puts the blame squarely on the officers.

I agree with you that response time was terribly slow. In that regard, who takes responsibility among the officers at the scene? I for one don't know, I'm not well acquainted enough with NY law or with the department.

DrDoomz said:

He was vulnerable to their particular assault (the chokehold) but the very reason the chokehold was banned by the NYPD is because it is KNOWN to cause death in people. He rolled the dice using a banned move known to cause death. And Garner paid the price with his life.

It can cause death IF held long enough. You have to deny oxygen to the brain longer than 20 seconds to cause death. It can also cause damage to the windpipe but according to the autopsy, there was no damage found in Garner's throat. http://nypost.com/2014/07/19/man-in-chokehold-death-had-no-throat-damage-autopsy/

DrDoomz said:

They didn't "aggravate his condition". You need to get that BS out of your head. You're making it sound like Garner was already suffering from a heart/asthmat attack and the chokehold+dogpile just made it worse. Yes, His condition made him particularly vulnerable to their attack. But he wasn't suffering from a heart or asthma attack until the cop decided to choke him.

Would you rather I say Garner had a vulnerability?

DrDoomz said:

4) Like someone already stated. Murder is any bodily harm that results in death. A banned move known to cause death being used on a person causing that person to die sure sounds like that to me. 

If you accidentally cause someone else their death, that's not murder. It's not as simple as the way you put it: manslaughter is the term for when you accidentally cause someone else's death, when there existed no intent. What was Pantaleo's intent when he engaged a choke hold? Was it to end Garner's life or was it to subdue and arrest? A choke hold when done right will render a person unconscious, when done wrong will apply pressure on the neck as opposed to the neck veins it's supposed to block. How do we decipher intent? The best way would be to read Pantaleo's mind but we can't.

1. No, getting choked can cause complications that lead to death besides hypoxia/asphyxation.

2. What caused his heart attack? Coroner seems to think it was due to being choked. How do you keep glossing over that fact? Edit. Technically, a combination of getting choked then smothered if you wanna be specific about it.

3. That in itself should have been grounds for an indictment for criminal negligence leading to death.

4. It wasn't just the chokehold. It was the fact that as soon as he was choked down, they smotherered him by dogpiling on top of him. And it took much more than 20 seconds once you add in the smothering, they were on top of him until he lost consciousness. The combination of the choke and getting smothered and the lack of medical aid as he lay unconscious lead to him slowly deteriorating until he died of cardiac arrest on the way to the hospital.

5. Yes, it would be far better to say that the obese (which are about 55-60% of adult american black males btw) are more vulnerable to heart disease (when put under stress). Just as saying old people are more vulnerable to having their bones broken. I guess once we see a cop wrestling an 80 year old to the ground and breaking his neck, we'd blame old guy for being old, too. Can't you see the absurdity of your logic?

6. Yes, murder (unlike manslaughter) requires malice. However, malice in second degree murder may be implied from a death due to the reckless lack of concern for the life of others. Kinda like using a banned choke hold (due to the risks associated to it) and smothering someone who was already indicating that he was in a life threating situation.

But I will agree, the best case to be made here would have been involuntary manslaughter due to criminal negligence (from point of choke hold to just watching him die slowly on the sidewalk). This should have been at the very least one of the charges brought to the grand jury and should have easily made trial. However, were it anyone else but a cop, Murder 2 would have been easily brought up. FYW, accidentally killing someong by punching them in the face is Murder 2.