The ambushed cops: So, it's all Obama's fault now?

[ElvisL1ves]

@Smapti

The grand jury called it no true bill. Guess whose opinion matters?

I wish I could say you know better.

[DrDeth]

@Whack-a-Mole

Would you then suggest that ideally ALL court cases should be like this? Forget the grand juries. No judges. No lawyers (except the one who collected all the evidence). Just empanel a group of citizens, dump every bit of evidence on them and then they will come to the correct conclusion.

The GJ is a important step. They only decide if there is enough evidence to start a trial. Then the DA and the defence argue their case before another jury.

[ElvisL1ves]

@Smapti

It’s the fault of the individual that he decided to pick a fight with the cops.

Do yourself a huge favor and watch the video. :rolleyes:

[DrDeth]

@ElvisL1ves

I wish I could say you know better.

You can have a homicide and still have no true bill.

[BobLibDem]

@Smapti

I would suggest that the answer isn’t “let’s make sure the jury is only allowed to hear evidence that makes the defendant look guilty, is told by the representative of the state what decision to make, and then does as Big Brother has told them to do”.

That’s basically how grand juries traditionally work. There is a place for the defense to make its case. It’s called a trial.

[DrDeth]

@ElvisL1ves

Do yourself a huge favor and watch the video. :rolleyes:

Yeah, instead of a week or so of sworn evidence- a edited video is all the proof you need. :dubious::rolleyes:

[ElvisL1ves]

@DrDeth

You can have a homicide and still have no true bill.

I know. **Smapti’**s statement that Garner happened to stop breathing due to his own poor health, just coincidentally while Pantaleo was pressing on his neck, with no connection between the facts, is asinine beyond belief.

[ElvisL1ves]

@DrDeth

Yeah, instead of a week or so of sworn evidence- a edited video is all the proof you need. :dubious::rolleyes:

And that would not be sworn evidence? With a credibility far beyond whatever eyewitnesses might say?

Your position is conclusion-driven, not fact-driven.

[andros]

@DrDeth

Yeah, instead of a week or so of sworn evidence- a edited video is all the proof you need. :dubious::rolleyes:

That there is reasonable doubt that Garner “decided to pick a fight with the cops?” Yes, that video is all that’s required.

[jayjay]

I see certain people are still in “Ja wohl! I see you wear a uniform! Allow me to bend over and spread 'em for you, sir!” mode…

[elucidator]

@DrDeth

… a edited video is all the proof you need. …

“Edited” by whom, and to what effect?

[ElvisL1ves]

The part where the fat, breathless, unarmed guy picked a fight with the cops isn’t in there. So it *had *to have been edited.

[DrDeth]

@elucidator

“Edited” by whom, and to what effect?

Did you see the entireity of it?

Anyway a short vid- is that better evidence that the entire video, plus forensics evidence, plus sworn testimony for dozens of witnesses and experts?

Dont you think that ALL the evidence is better than just a tiny bit?

[jayjay]

The lengths some people will go to defend their Just World delusion are shocking…

[akwally1]

@DrDeth

That means- there’s not enough evidence to indict.

According to fivethirtyeight.com, it’s incredibly rare for a grand jury to not indict, unless it’s against police, so maybe it’s not all just about lack of evidence.

Of course, it could have been in these particular cases that there really wasn’t enough evidence to convict, but just the disparity in numbers should justify questioning the process.

[The_Second_Stone]

These are the same bozos who rightly complained about the other bozos who blamed 9/11 on the US.

[ElvisL1ves]

@DrDeth

Dont you think that ALL the evidence is better than just a tiny bit?

At trial, yes. Not at a grand jury proceeding.

Now, about that editing claim of yours - what was edited out and why? :dubious: And what is your reason for thinking it was even done?

[doorhinge]

@ElvisL1ves

I know. **Smapti’**s statement that Garner happened to stop breathing due to his own poor health, just coincidentally while Pantaleo was pressing on his neck, with no connection between the facts, is asinine beyond belief.

If Garner had actually stopped breathing, Garner would not have been able to repeatedly say, “I can’t breathe”. Especially not eleven (11) times.

It’s important for the protesters, arsonists, looters, rock-throwers, molotov cocktail-throwers, and Obama/Holder to gruberize the public by ignoring the fact that Garner actually could breathe. Otherwise it could hurt protest T-shirt sales.

[DrDeth]

@ElvisL1ves

Now, about that editing claim of yours - what was edited out and why? :dubious:

Never made such a claim.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

@doorhinge

If Garner had actually stopped breathing, Garner would not have been able to repeatedly say, “I can’t breathe”. Especially not eleven (11) times.

It’s important for the protesters, arsonists, looters, rock-throwers, molotov cocktail-throwers, and Obama/Holder to gruberize the public by ignoring the fact that Garner actually could breathe. Otherwise it could hurt protest T-shirt sales.

God, not this asinine argument again. How about if I press on your throat until your breathing is being restricted, while you’re choking out “I can’t breathe” over and over in desperation, I’ll keep doing it since obviously you’re ok. And then when you stop saying “I can’t breathe”, I’ll know to stop.