NYPD Cop in Chokehold Death Loses Gun, Badge

uh... so.... why is he not fired from NYPD? :roll:
Don't you see.. a city doesn't fire a cop but it can demote him/her, the city pays for a settlement instead? It's a common knowledge. I read that NYC paid for A LOT of settlements in which NYPD was at fault. This time it will pay again.
 
Don't you see.. a city doesn't fire a cop but it can demote him/her, the city pays for a settlement instead? It's a common knowledge.
a common knowledge? more like a flawed understanding.

I read that NYC paid for A LOT of settlements in which NYPD was at fault. This time it will pay again.
you are mistaken.... very mistaken. in majority of settlements - NYPD was NOT at fault and admitted NOTHING. everybody walks away. that's the whole point of settlement.

very simple - if you believe they are at fault and want them held liable, then don't accept the money.
 
NYPD Abuse Increases Settlements Costing City $735 Million - Bloomberg
Fay Leoussis, the Law Department’s torts division chief, said the city has several issues to consider before agreeing to a settlement.

“In the vast number of cases, our police officers did the right thing, but from a risk-management point of view we want to settle meritorious claims, reviewing the venue, the sympathy factor, the injury,” Leoussis said. “We’re very concerned about our police officers’ morale and we believe that what they do is on the right side of the law for the most part.”
 
a common knowledge? more like a flawed understanding.


you are mistaken.... very mistaken. in majority of settlements - NYPD was NOT at fault and admitted NOTHING. everybody walks away. that's the whole point of settlement.

very simple - if you believe they are at fault and want them held liable, then don't accept the money.
If the city makes a settlement with someone who sues it for police abuse, does the city fire a cop who abused him/her? I don't think so but the city pays because it agrees that the cop is at fault and it doesn't want to go to court. In other words, if the city finds that the cop did nothing wrong, it will go to court to challenge the lawsuit.

In this case, the guy was alive before the cops restrained him so the city must pay and it will.
 
If the city makes a settlement with someone who sues it for police abuse, does the city fire a cop who abused him/her? I don't think so but the city pays because it agrees that the cop is at fault and it doesn't want to go to court. In other words, if the city finds that the cop did nothing wrong, it will go to court to challenge the lawsuit.

In this case, the guy was alive before the cops restrained him so the city must pay and it will.
that would be an incorrect assumption. why are we doing this tiring cycle again?

no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. you need to learn how to read. reposting it again in larger print and adding bold print.

Fay Leoussis, the Law Department’s torts division chief, said the city has several issues to consider before agreeing to a settlement.

“In the vast number of cases, our police officers did the right thing, but from a risk-management point of view we want to settle meritorious claims, reviewing the venue, the sympathy factor, the injury,” Leoussis said. “We’re very concerned about our police officers’ morale and we believe that what they do is on the right side of the law for the most part.”

do you not understand that if the cop is at fault... he would either be fired or jailed? you are talking about 2 different things. a criminal proceeding and civil proceeding.
 
that would be an incorrect assumption. why are we doing this tiring cycle again?

no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. you need to learn how to read. reposting it again in larger print and adding bold print.

It's up to you to believe the bullshit it's saying. I don't. Period! NYPD is bad from what I heard. Period!

The city will pay, even though the cop is not at fault? PFFFFT!
 
It's up to you to believe the bullshit it's saying. I don't. Period! NYPD is bad from what I heard. Period!
from what you heard? who? lemme guess... you heard that Harlem is a dangerous place, right? :roll:

The city will pay, even though the cop is not at fault? PFFFFT!
yes unfortunately. and also many times - a lot of cases get dismissed on lack of merit and there is a chance that a lawsuit filed by victim's family can be dismissed too (assuming that there's no wrongdoing in cop's action).

I added this from previous post - do you not understand that if the cop is at fault... he would either be fired or jailed? you are talking about 2 different things. a criminal proceeding and civil proceeding.
 
from what you heard? who? lemme guess... you heard that Harlem is a dangerous place, right? :roll:


yes unfortunately. and also many times - a lot of cases get dismissed on lack of merit and there is a chance that a lawsuit filed by victim's family can be dismissed too (assuming that there's no wrongdoing in cop's action).

I added this from previous post - do you not understand that if the cop is at fault... he would either be fired or jailed? you are talking about 2 different things. a criminal proceeding and civil proceeding.

Harlem is dangerous? LOL!!! THAT'S 80s!!!
 
How minor crime questioning led to chokehold death

New York police officers questioning Eric Garner about an alleged minor crime – selling cigarettes on the street – subdued Mr. Garner using a chokehold banned more than 20 years ago. Seconds later he was dead.

Eric Garner, a New York man allegedly selling illegal “loosies” – single cigarettes – outside a Staten Island store, died Thursday after police used an unauthorized street fighting move known as a “chokehold” to subdue the 350-pound man.

The stark contrast between a minor street crime – one which Mr. Garner had been arrested for many times – and the tragic consequence of leaving a widow with six kids has forced New Yorkers to revisit some of the darker chapters for the city’s elite but oft-chastised police force, and to rehash what many thought were long-settled issues.

According to Police commissioner William Bratton, chokeholds used by at least two police officers to subdue Garner came after the man pleaded with a gaggle of officers to leave him alone as he was “minding his own business.”

Recommended: 'Stop and frisk': 7 questions about New York's controversial policing tactic

“Every time you see me, you want to mess with me,” Garner can be heard saying. “I'm tired of it. It stops today. I'm minding my business please just leave me alone."

The encounter escalated to the point of a faceoff, whereupon one officer wraps his arm around his neck even as Garner, now on the ground, pleads that he can’t breathe. A few minutes later Garner loses consciousness as the officer mashed his face into the sidewalk – the victim of a fatal heart attack.

Enough of the ordeal was captured by an amateur photographer’s camera for Mayor Bill de Blasio to rule the death “a terrible tragedy.” A bigger question remained: Why did two veteran officers feel free to employ a tactic banned in 1993, especially given that a civil conversation may have deescalated the ordeal.

It was all the way back in 1983 when the department, following several asphyxiation deaths, banned the practice except in cases of imminent danger to the police officer. In 1994, a year after the city banned the tactic altogether, NYPD Officer Francis Livoti killed Bronx resident Anthony Baez with a chokehold after Mr. Livoti’s cruiser was hit by a football being thrown around by friends. Livoti was found not guilty of negligent homicide, but later served seven years in prison after a federal court found he violated Baez’ civil rights.

"Chokeholds are prohibited by the New York City Police Department and most departments," Commissioner Bratton said at a news conference Friday. Mr. Bratton also noted that "Mr. Garner repeatedly complained of difficulty breathing as the officers wrestled him to the ground."

Policing experts say that it’s fine to ask officers to be more careful with aggressive subjects, but that once an incident escalates into a street fight that all bets are essentially off.
"The hard truth about street policing is there's a tremendous amount of improvisation," Eugene O'Donnell, a former cop and now a criminologist at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice told the New York Daily News. "[Officers] get some very generalized guidance, typically, which is not very valuable once you have to make the decision to use force."

The fact that at least two officers utilized it has been enough to spark an inquest and investigation into Garner’s death.

The Rev. Al Sharpton held a vigil for Garner amid calls for justice as the widow, Esaw Garner, clung to Sharpton in tears.

The New York Police Department and mayors have fought for controversial tactics that focus on low-level crimes, arguing tactics like the controversial “stop-and-frisks” are not only constitutional but effective in curbing local crime rates. Some courts have disagreed with at least the first notion, forcing the city to largely abandon the policy.

Other major US police departments, including in Atlanta, are putting less emphasis on penny-ante arrests because of the wedge they tend to drive between tougher neighborhoods and the police officers that serve them.

How minor crime questioning led to chokehold death of Eric Garner
 
If the guy didnt do anything wrong, just put your hands behind your back and go peacefully and straighten it out at the Meat Palace.
the police were acting on "resisting arrest mode" so the dad was wrong all around. The choke hold is justified being the dad is a monster compared to them, but yes it was uncalled for at this time with no hostile reactions from the dad. Maybe, Just Maybe a TAZER would have been a better choice of action, right?
 
If the guy didnt do anything wrong, just put your hands behind your back and go peacefully and straighten it out at the Meat Palace.
the police were acting on "resisting arrest mode" so the dad was wrong all around. The choke hold is justified being the dad is a monster compared to them, but yes it was uncalled for at this time with no hostile reactions from the dad. Maybe, Just Maybe a TAZER would have been a better choice of action, right?

Maybe. I've heard that these things don't stop heavier people, but then again, I :dunno: if that's actually true.
 
Seems it was a very minor crime....couldn't the Officers just give him a ticket and notice to appear in court?...Viewed the video over and over...and don't feel the choke hold was warranted at all.

Tasers could be deadly to those who had heart problems, even those with breathing problems..and while on the cement, he was saying "I can't breathe"...so the Officer should have loosened the choke hold....the man is overweight, on the ground, and was having a hard time getting his other arm around so they could cuff him....
 
Seems it was a very minor crime....couldn't the Officers just give him a ticket and notice to appear in court?...Viewed the video over and over...and don't feel the choke hold was warranted at all.
That's right. It doesn't make sense to me.
 
That's right. It doesn't make sense to me.

you still haven't answered my question before.

what were officers supposed to do to a person like him refusing to comply and resisting arrest?
 
Seems it was a very minor crime....couldn't the Officers just give him a ticket and notice to appear in court?...Viewed the video over and over...and don't feel the choke hold was warranted at all.

Tasers could be deadly to those who had heart problems, even those with breathing problems..and while on the cement, he was saying "I can't breathe"...so the Officer should have loosened the choke hold....the man is overweight, on the ground, and was having a hard time getting his other arm around so they could cuff him....

lesson of life? crime... it's not worth it. he was a criminal.. repeated offender.
 
Back
Top