By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
DrDoomz on 07 December 2014
Edit Thread
KLAMarine said:
DrDoomz said:

1. We don't need you to explain how he died, the coroner did that already. You just need to stop trying to rewrite the narrative by trying to deflect blame to Garner's health instead of the police's overly brutal reaction.

I am not deflecting blame: I am correcting the omission you are making. You are quoting a PORTION of what the coroner has to say. You OMIT the following:

"Garner's acute and chronic bronchial asthma, obesity and hypertensive cardiovascular disease were contributing factors, the medical examiner determined."

You do this in one of your previous posts, the very post in which you provided the link containing the coroner's opinion:

DrDoomz said:
"The city medical examiner has ruled the death of Eric Garner, the 43-year-old father whose death in police custody sparked national outrage, a homicide, saying a chokehold killed him.

The medical examiner said compression of the neck and chest, along with Garner's positioning on the ground while being restrained by police during the July 17 stop on Staten Island, caused his death."

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Eric-Garner-Chokehold-Police-Custody-Cause-of-Death-Staten-Island-Medical-Examiner-269396151.html#

Why such an omission? Have you not the confidence to quote the ENTIRETY of what the coroner had to say about Garner's death? It would seem to me that you are the one rewriting the narrative of what occurred July 17, 2014. You are rewriting what the coroner had to say.

DrDoomz said:

2. And the house's vulnerability to burning would have absolutely no relevance on the assignment of fault on the deaths of whoever was in the house. Just as Garner's health has absolutely no relevance on the assignment of fault when someone used a known potentially lethal move on him.

Here's what it looks like when I assign fault: "The fault ultimately falls on...", "So-and-so is responsible for...", "Mr. John Doe is guilty of..."

I do not believe I have assigned any fault on anyone for Eric Garner's death. Or rather, I have not blamed either Pantaleo nor Garner.

DrDoomz said:

5. It takes a special kind of stupid to not know obese people would have heart problems. Unless you're implying that the NY police force are all absolute morons, I'd have to just disregard this comment of yours....

Police aren't doctors. Perhaps they are indeed morons but on second thought, assuming medical conditions based solely on the appearance of obesity would be similarly foolish. I'd much rather the task of medical assessments be left to experienced doctors, police are best left in charge of taking in suspects.

DrDoomz said:

7. And I'm not saying the he intended to kill Garner but that his poor handling of the situation combined with him gambling with someone's life using a banned move just to make his job easier caused someone to lose his life. And in this, Pantaleo is absolutely responsible for the man's death. Intentional or not.

So manslaughter?


1. Try not to rewrite the narrative of the debate pls. My initial response to you was due to this question that you asked:

KLAMarine said:

So which was more responsible for Garner's death? The chokehold, the pile up, or Garner's pre-existing health problems?

Which is essentially asking what the primary cause was. So please let's not play the "you omitted" BS game here. That's just bad debating form.

And yes, you WERE attempting to deflect blame from the cop to Garner's health. As this statement proves:

KLAMarine said:

The choke hold aggravated Garner's medical conditions (ailments unknown to police) which ultimately lead to a heart attack as he was transported to the hospital. Let us aim for specificity, not ambiguity.

You were insinuating that garner was already suffering from the very condition that killed him and the choke hold only made it worse, like he was having a heart/asthma attack BEFORE they decided to choke him out then smother him.

2. Because contributory =/= causal. You asked what was "more responsible" for his death aka. the primary cause, I emphasized the portion of the report where the medical examiner pointed it out.

3. Orrr you can say "X only made Y worse, but Y is what ultimately lead to Z". Which would make Y the culprit and X the unwitting accomplice don't you think? Sound familiar?

Pantaleo cannot escape blame without transfering blame to Garner. It's not as if he accidentally choked him out, smothered him and left him to die. You either blame the cop's methods or the victim's actions/conditions.

4. Which would mean we'd have to go back to my old man example. You'd be blaming the 80 year old man for being old if the cops wrestled him down and broke his neck, right? "The police merely aggravated his oldness!". Yeahhhhhhhhhh......

Apparently you think absolute stupidity is fine for public servants who carry guns and make life and death decisions....

5. Manslaughter at best, murder 2 at worst. Tho I will agree that manslaughter would have been the easiest to prove and i would prolly be happy if he went away for that...