Protesters in Chicago

[ken jackson]

On my way home from work this evening I was delayed by protesters walking down Congress Parkway, downtown Chicago.

Ken

http://youtu.be/f2JpUfUw468

[murankar]

Need to keep my mouth shut, need to keep my mouth shut!!!!!!

[pvolcko]

Me too.

[cml001]

Me three... Better yet I wont... #~*•'n idiots!

[Tony]

Wow

[Marius]

Whats that all about? I couldnt make out what they were chnting.

[ken jackson]

"Hands Up Don't shoot" In reference to a man who was allegedly giving up but was shot by police. The grand jury did not indict and the officer is not being charged of wrong doing. There was another incident in New York that a man died after being put in a choke hold. Police officer was also not charged with any crime. I've been too busy to follow either case but this is simply free speech being exercised, but it is happening all across the US mainly based on 2 seperete cases.

Ken

[danhampson]

From what I've been reading the guy who died in the Newyork was put put in chokehold ( Use of the chokehold has been prohibited by New York City Police Department policy since 1993.) by an officer and pushed to the ground he told the officers that he couldn't breath but the took no notice of him.
here are a couple of links to the incident in Newyork.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Eric_Garner
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/vide ... eath-video
http://youtu.be/IYSnp1UGVGc

[murankar]

The other guy was a previously convicted criminal. He robbed a small store for some black and milds (cigarette style cigar). When the cops showed up he basically resisted arrest and "made an attempt to grab the officers gun". In protecting himself he shot the criminal a number of times.

the so called eye witnesses that were called in the dead guys defense were people who heard the story from other sources.

The backlash of all this is a bunch of folks protesting. The Minnesota case is what is driving this demonstration. Supposedly the dead guy tried to surrender even though evidence does not support said claim. Now a lot of people believe the unsubstantiated story and are using it to protest. As for the New york case a grand jury of 23 people did not have the required 12 votes to indict the officer. Which means that most of the jury believe the cop was acting in accordance of the law. This is also the same thing in the Minnesota case.

I am not going to state my feelings on this topic; although a lot of this stuff is being driven by what the media is putting out as news. I feel the media is in sighting a lot of this.

[pvolcko]

Missouri, not Minnesota. Ferguson was the city for the Brown shooting.

In New York, the case in over a year old I believe. Repeat offender for selling cigarettes illegally was confronted by cops and was told he was being placed under arrest. The guy resisted initially. The problem comes up later when he was apparently complying but the cops were still using a great deal of force in effecting the arrest. Choke hold. Knee on the head pinning to the ground, etc. The suspect was unhealthy, having weight and asthma issues. Ended up dying as a result of heart attack, brought on by the event and the application of force during the arrest.

In my mind the NY case is a far more suspect ruling by the grand jury. As mentioned, the use of choke holds was barred some time ago. That said, this was a big guy they were trying to arrest and sometimes things don't always go to training. The bigger issue for me is that they continued to apply what I think was an inordinate amount of force after the suspect was already subdued and not resisting. If he was struggling it was due to his panic and inability (real or perceived) to not be able to breathe. They were arresting him for a low level crime. He had no weapons and posed no threat to the cops or society at large, even if he were to be completely released. The amount and duration of force brought to bear were out of step with the larger picture of what was going on. Should the cops have been held criminally responsible for the death, perhaps not, but they certainly should have been punished and put through a good deal of remedial training. If they were following procedure, then the procedure needs to be readdressed.

The Ferguson/Brown shooting is another matter. There was a violent crime committed in the immediate lead up. The suspect attacked and attempted to get control of the officer's gun (while the officer was still in the car!). And the suspect finally made some kind of unwarranted move (described as a run like you'd see in football (american football!)) toward the officer which prompted the use of deadly force against him. That case seemed to be by the book and reasonable. Deeply unfortunate, but procedure was followed and the procedure itself was reasonable from what I can see.

[Graham Lawrie]

The NY one i agree with Paul, training issues. That said, in the video it was 4.18 before they checked for a pulse. Again a training issue. As a bystander in the UK and a trained EMT i would have made myself known to the Police and offered to check for breathing. It is a sad world we live in and incidents like this are never clear cut.
We see this on the news in the UK of people resisting in America when confronted. If you have nothing to fear you go quietly.

Body language, he is open palmed when confronted, a well known sign of non-violent confrontation. Made me feel very sad this:(

[ken jackson]

If i'm not mistaken regarding the New York incident the officer has/had a history of depression and reprimands for behaviour. I agree Paul this case should have been prosecuted. At the very least the officer should be sued in civil court if that didn't happen already. Yes very sad...

[cml001]

Yeah the NY case has some merit... The other has none!

[murankar]

Both cases are tragic. In the Jackson case I feel criminals get what they deserve, carma I guess.
The NY case I didn't even know that happenend until a few days ago. I won't say the right thing was done but for some strange reason the grand jury voted the way they did. The offices have to deal with what they did. Carma works in strange ways.

[cml001]

It's the choke hold that should have trumpt'd it... Even tho I don't think he was being choked.. The guy was talking.. But none the less it's not to be used per NY law.. Other hand.. Dude was starting to get loud and moving his arms a lot.. While being told he was under arrest.... Bad on both sides I suppose... Bottom line is if an officer of the law says stop.. U should stop... U may not agree at that moment but that's what the court is for....

[murankar]

One thing is the guy should have stated that he had breathing issues, maybe he did I dont know I did not watch the video and dont have any intentions on doing so. Not big on the violence stuff anymore. There seems like a lot of shoulda woulda coulda stuff in the NY case.

[pvolcko]

He was protesting that he couldn't breathe, but as said, if you're able to talk then you aren't truly being choked. And complaining of breathing problems is a good way to make cops hesitate and either attempt escape or attack.

So I can see both sides on this one. At the very least the cop should be disciplined for using a banned hold in effecting the arrest. I don't know if he should have been charged, but it sounds like the case was one where it could reasonably have been left to a jury to decide due to valid evidence on both sides of the matter.