# Why wasn't the police officer who killed Eric Garner indicted? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 4, 2014, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271 "2014-12-04T00:06:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/281 "2014-12-05T20:42:54Z")
When did conservatives become a bunch of spineless wimps. “Oh noes! We must never resist the police! The police are our FRIENDS! We must always obey and respect and worship them, lest they turn their uncontrollable wrath on us!” Bullshit. The police are agents of the state. An oppressive government uses its police force to oppress its citzenry. When citizens take an oath to never resist the government, they give away the little power they have. If police were arresting citizens for exercising their 2nd right amendment, you better believe conservatives would be singing a different tune about resistence. No, I don’t think resisting arrest is always wise or justified. But I didn’t see a guy resisting arrest in that video. I see a guy who is angry that he’s being swarmed by a small army just because someone suspected him of selling loose cigarettes…while on a regular basis, thieves in business suits are given the privilege of turning themselves in when they are accused of stealing millions. They knew where the guy lived. Why couldn’t they have just sent him a court summons and avoided the whole situation? This is what real government intrusion looks like. Not Michelle Obama’s social engineering of the school lunch program. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/282 "2014-12-05T20:43:23Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Are you suggesting that the officer intended to kill Garner? To repeat: I’m not going to build a legal case here, since there’s no actual legal evidence, but I see negligent manslaughter in that video. I certainly see probable cause for a trial on charges of it. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/283 "2014-12-05T20:48:42Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > No, I don’t think resisting arrest is always wise or justified. But I didn’t see a guy resisting arrest in that video. I see a guy who is angry that he’s being swarmed by a small army just because someone suspected him of selling loose cigarettes…while on a regular basis, thieves in business suits are given the privilege of turning themselves in when they are accused of stealing millions. They knew where the guy lived. Why couldn’t they have just sent him a court summons and avoided the whole situation? What does any of that have to do with the price of tea in China? How is “a different person in a completely different set of circumstances is being handled differently by law enforcement, therefore you have no right to arrest me for selling loosies” in any way, shape, or form a coherent argument? ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/284 "2014-12-05T20:58:42Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > But if there was video showing as clear as day what really happened, we wouldn’t have any disputed eyewitness accounts. Objective evidence wins out over liars and exaggerators. People stories’ would more than likely match up with the video, because they wouldn’t have just their memories to go off on. Sorry, I misunderstood what you were saying. Agreed. _Some_ people’s stories would match up, others would be discredited; they are not all reconcilable. > [@](#): > > Which is 1) still disputed and 2) has nothing to do with whether his death was justified. > > The more that I think about Brown, the more I see the similarities to Garner. What was Brown accused of stealing? Cigars. What did Garner’s purported offense involve? Cigarettes. Tobacco products, yall! Even if we accept as true that both men had done something unlawful, these crimes do not merit capital punishment and are not synonymous with violent thuggery. > > There very well could be evidence…that doesn’t change whether his death was unjustified. Like I said before, thinking otherwise gives cops permission to treat petty criminals and other “undesirables” like wild game. It’s the stuff of dystopias. We weren’t talking about “justified,” we were talking about “sympathetic.” Dispute all you want, but most people think the store video shows Brown robbing the store, and most people think robbing a store is a morally wrong thing to do. We do not have video of Garner doing anything most people regard as morally wrong. This has nothing to do with either’s legal culpability, merely how people feel about the events. And please do not make the jump from “Wilson should not have been indicted” to “the shooting was justified” to “Brown merited capital punishment.” Those are three different things. I, for one, agree with the first, but regard the third as repulsive. ---
**Author:** ![aag3981](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aag3981](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aag3981)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/285 "2014-12-05T21:06:35Z")
> [@treis](#): > > I think he’s only that if you ignore him breaking the law and resisting arrest. There is an assumption that he was breaking the law. This has not been confirmed, but lets assume so. Resisting arrest does not, in and of itself mean that anyone’s life is being threatened. I have had people resist arrest by attempting to pull their hands away and tuck them close to their body so I couldn’t handcuff them. This sort of passive resistance does not justify deadly force. At least not to my department. And choke holds are considered deadly force. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/286 "2014-12-05T21:07:04Z")
> [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > **Some was killed as a result of the act.** _Garner’s dead_. Check. > > **The act was inherently dangerous**. _Banned by NYPD because it was too dangerous._ Check. > \*\* > The defendant knew or should have known… \*\*_Officer knows or is supposed to know what techniques are specifically banned and why._ Check. > > To this layman, it seems pretty cut and dried case of involuntary manslaughter. Garner’s resisting arrest need not even enter the discussion. But if we must, then we add the obvious that he was resisting arrest on a penny ante misdemeanor and that many other less-dangerous techniques were available to the officers. Accepting the above as true, allow me to quote myself: > [@treis](#): > > Let me make up some numbers. The NYPD is going to arrest 1,000,000 suspects next year. 1% are going to resist. That leaves us 10,000. In 1% of those, a cop is going to screw up and violate procedure. So that’s 100 incidents. In 1% of those the suspect is going to be in poor health and die. Why are we throwing that cop in jail? He just happened to be the one that “won” the 1/1,000,000 lottery. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/287 "2014-12-05T21:07:06Z")
An [article echoing](http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/12/05/dont-support-laws-you-are-not-willing-to-kill-to-enforce/)what **furt** has been saying.: > [@](#): > > As Carter notes, “activists on the right and the left tend to believe that all of their causes are of great importance. Whatever they want to ban or require, they seem unalterably persuaded that the use of state power is appropriate.” But we should always remember that “[e]very new law requires enforcement; every act of enforcement includes the possibility of violence.” If we really want to curb police abuses, we should think carefully about whether all the laws we have on the books are really worth killing for. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/288 "2014-12-05T21:11:11Z")
> [@aag3981](#): > > And choke holds are considered deadly force. According to whom and by what definition of deadly force? ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/289 "2014-12-05T21:12:47Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > An [article echoing](http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/12/05/dont-support-laws-you-are-not-willing-to-kill-to-enforce/)what **furt** has been saying.: Seems a stretch. The real reason to oppose proliferation of laws and regulations is not that the police are thereby more likely to kill you. 😕 ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/290 "2014-12-05T21:14:25Z")
> [@furt](#): > > And please do not make the jump from “Wilson should not have been indicted” to “the shooting was justified” to “Brown merited capital punishment.” Those are three different things. I, for one, agree with the first, but regard the third as repulsive. I don’t see how you can entertain the opinion that Wilson shouldn’t have been indicted while finding the latter opinion _repulsive_. The math does not add up. An indictment is not a conviction of guilt. It simply allows an issue to be tried in court because there is probable cause a crime occurred. The very fact that several witnesses contradicted the self-serving claims made by Wilson support the existence of probable cause. You don’t have to believe Brown’s death was actually unjustified to at least acknowledge the evidence that it wasn’t justified. That is all that is required for an indictment, and that is why it is appalling that not even Garner’s death merited that. To say that Wilson shouldn’t have even been indicted suggests that you believe Brown _did_ deserve capital punishment. Bringing up the things about the cigars–which happened prior to the shooting–also supports–not challenges–that belief. ---
**Author:** ![aag3981](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aag3981](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aag3981)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/291 "2014-12-05T21:15:39Z")
> [@treis](#): > > So why exactly are we punishing the enforcer? The elected officials of New York are the ones that choose to criminalize petty behaviors and place emphasis on enforcing lifestyle/broken windows crimes. It’s simple math. If there are X people are caught selling looses, Y% of them are going to resist, Q% are going to be in poor health, and in Z% of them the cop is going to screw up. Why are we supposed to throw that unlucky cop into jail? > > We certainly don’t in analogous situations. I know for certain that in 2015 a doctor will screw up and kill a patient. An industrial worker will not follow proper procedures and kill a coworker. A member of the military will kill an ally in a friendly fire incident. A software defect will cause equipment to malfunction and kill someone. In none of these cases will a doctor, worker, soldier, or programmer be arrested and sent to jail. Why should we treat the cop differently? Apparently the officer was using a method of force that is banned by his department. When you go against the approved policies and practices of the department, then you lose what ever protections your position provides. However, given the fact that there are thousands of such choke holds yearly and even in this case, none of the officers involved indicated a choke hold was used, then the department could be held liable for not enforcing it’s policy. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/292 "2014-12-05T21:17:34Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Seems a stretch. The real reason to oppose proliferation of laws and regulations is not that the police are thereby more likely to kill you. 😕 Not the only reason for sure. It is one reason, and a logical consequence of the increase in number of laws. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/293 "2014-12-05T21:21:45Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > If police were arresting citizens for exercising their 2nd right amendment, you better believe conservatives would be singing a different tune about resistence. They’d need to start arresting white citizens for this outrage to occur. Because if Rice’s death has taught us anything, it’s that any black male carrying a gun–open or closed–is an imminent threat to society and necessitates enemy action. ---
**Author:** ![aag3981](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aag3981](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aag3981)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/294 "2014-12-05T21:22:27Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > I think I gave one already. IME, a whole lot of people think they know what their rights are and they are wrong. If the law said that you can resist arrest with impunity in the case when the arrest is illegal, we would end up with a whole lot more cases of people resisting arrest and a lot more physical altercations with police. In a whole bunch of those cases, probably the vast majority, John Q. Public will end up being wrong about what does and doesn’t make an arrest illegal. The assumption that most people don’t know when their rights are violated not a sufficient reason to not allow unlawful arrest. All arrests are is a detainment for the purpose of charging someone of violating the law. If you are charged, you fight the charges. If the arrest is illegal, you pursue that through the justice system. People not understanding their rights is not a reason to resist arrest. There are other **legal** ways outlined to handle these allegations and that is the correct method to pursue it for a peaceful society. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/295 "2014-12-05T21:24:30Z")
> [@aag3981](#): > > Apparently the officer was using a method of force that is banned by his department. When you go against the approved policies and practices of the department, then you lose what ever protections your position provides. No, you don’t. At least, that’s not the standard we apply to soldiers in friendly fire incidents or doctors in malpractice. In order, for example, a doctor to be arrested they either have to do something egregiously negligent or willfully harm someone. If they violate policy and harm someone, they are administratively punished, not arrested. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/296 "2014-12-05T21:24:32Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > To say that Wilson shouldn’t have even been indicted suggests that you believe Brown _did_ deserve capital punishment. A police shooting in self-defense is not “capital punishment” and you do your argument no favors by insisting on such dysphemisms. ---
**Author:** ![aag3981](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aag3981](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aag3981)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/297 "2014-12-05T21:25:14Z")
> [@treis](#): > > According to whom and by what definition of deadly force? My department classifies it as deadly force as well as every department I’m familiar with. My department doesn’t ban it but you have to justify it’s use. The deaths that resulted from using is why big cities like NY and LA banned their use outright. Is there anyone that doesn’t? ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/298 "2014-12-05T21:33:20Z")
> [@aag3981](#): > > If you are charged, you fight the charges. If the arrest is illegal, you pursue that through the justice system. If the justice system is under the same corrupt influence that encourages cops to make unlawful arrests, this solution holds little promise. Case in point, Garner. What relief would he have had if he hadn’t been killed and tried to fight his arrest in front of a judge? We have every reason to believe he’d get no relief, even if his arrest was unlawful. ---
**Author:** ![aag3981](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aag3981](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aag3981)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/299 "2014-12-05T21:36:27Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > But if there was video showing as clear as day what really happened, we wouldn’t have any disputed eyewitness accounts. Objective evidence wins out over liars and exaggerators. People stories’ would more than likely match up with the video, because they wouldn’t have just their memories to go off on. > > Which is 1) still disputed and 2) has nothing to do with whether his death was justified. > > The more that I think about Brown, the more I see the similarities to Garner. What was Brown accused of stealing? Cigars. What did Garner’s purported offense involve? Cigarettes. Tobacco products, yall! Even if we accept as true that both men had done something unlawful, these crimes do not merit capital punishment and are not synonymous with violent thuggery. > > There very well could be evidence…that doesn’t change whether his death was unjustified. Like I said before, thinking otherwise gives cops permission to treat petty criminals and other “undesirables” like wild game. It’s the stuff of dystopias. I don’t believe anyone disputes that Brown assualted the store clerk and stole the cigars. His friend Johnson has always contended that it happened. There was a question of rather Wilson knew when could raise his level of awareness and percieved risk of Brown. However, police have changed their reports on rather or not Wilson knew if Brown was a suspect in that. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2014, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271/300 "2014-12-05T21:42:26Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > I think I gave one already. IME, a whole lot of people think they know what their rights are and they are wrong. If the law said that you can resist arrest with impunity in the case when the arrest is illegal, we would end up with a whole lot more cases of people resisting arrest and a lot more physical altercations with police. In a whole bunch of those cases, probably the vast majority, John Q. Public will end up being wrong about what does and doesn’t make an arrest illegal. When a person is wrong, he is charged with battery on a police officer. That is a serious enough charge to discourage most people from playing arm-chair lawyer on the street corner. I don’t think that is enough of a justification to tell people in a free society that they must submit to an intrusion upon their liberty that is clearly unlawful. > [@treis](#): > > I would say that except in the case of the programmer, each of those individuals is directly causing the death. Some soldier is going to shoot a friendly. Some worker is going to open a valve that releases something that kills a coworker. Some doctor is going to nick an artery. > > Either way, that’s missing the point. Let me make up some numbers. The NYPD is going to arrest 1,000,000 suspects next year. 1% are going to resist. That leaves us 10,000. In 1% of those, a cop is going to screw up and violate procedure. So that’s 100 incidents. In 1% of those the suspect is going to be in poor health and die. Why are we throwing that cop in jail? He just happened to be the one that “won” the 1/1,000,000 lottery. I think you lose me when you say “screw up and violate procedure.” This isn’t putting in an incorrect line of code or snipping the wrong artery. When you have your arm around someone’s neck and cutting off the oxygen to their brain, to the point where they are gasping and telling you they can’t breathe, you are put on notice that you are in a life or death situation. Failing to heed that plea for help is a different ball of wax from the types of dumbassery that most of us experience from time to time. [QUOTE=snippet of Bricker’s cite above] Our modern judicial processes have been reformed so that arrestees enjoy the right to reasonable bail, the right to counsel at critical stages of the trial, and the right to a prompt judicial determination of probable cause. State v. Thomas, 262 N.W.2d 607, 611 (Iowa, 1978). [/QUOTE] That statement from the court seems brilliantly dense. Yes, all of those are provided by law after arrest. But an unlawful arrest is by definition unlawful. How can a person be assured that the official violating the law during an arrest will make sure that he then does an about face and follows the law by promptly presenting him to a magistrate for determination of reasonable bail without first subjecting him to a good, stiff beating or “losing” his paperwork before staying in jail for a week? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wasnt-the-police-officer-who-killed-eric-garner-indicted/706271.md?page=16)