what bothers me isn't the choke hold, its the man telling them he can't breathe - like 9 times?
at what point do, you know, actually care that the guy might be in distress and its more important that he live than it is to keep your knee on his neck?
if there was video of me - not as a cop but as a man, lets say Garner was threatening me - not life threatening but general mouthing off and I made the decision to take him down, I had him subdued - and he told me 9 times he couldn't breathe - my ass would be in jail.
and throw in on top of it, there is a police policy against a choke hold or attempting to use a choke hold.
I think this cop needs to go to trial. I didn't think that about Wilson or George Zimmerman
also, I don't claim to be an expert on grand jury's but I can tell you that if you don't have a strong willed foreman on the jury or a group of people willing to confront authority, then they are mostly a rubber stamp for whatever the D.A. is pitching - innocent or guilty.
I agree with this. Not in whole but in general.
When the man uttered "I can't breathe" nine times (I heard 11 times on the Kelly File last night) that's where I have a problem.
When LE decides to arrest, subdue, and restrain a person they take away all rights to self defense. When you take that right away you then take responsibility for the person's welfare.
There is and should be the obligation of an arresting officer(s) to insure that no harm comes to someone once they are subdued and restrained. They should have cuffed him and then sat him up so he could breathe.
If the cops would have made an effort to render aid, help the man breath, and he still died ... I wouldn't have a problem with it.
