Saddened by NY Grand Jury Decision To NOT Indict

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by n david

I never said the ME or forensics said that, did I? Absolutely not. I had a theory, which per your source was incorrect.

I haven't seen anywhere where Dr Baden has said the preexisting conditions played any part. I did see, and even mentioned, the autopsy stated those were contributing factors. Again, that doesn't change the primary cause. Had he not had any of those, he still would have died from the primary cause.

It's why the call it the primary cause.

Compression of the neck and chest doesn't kill people.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Police ALL across America subdue people resisting arrest. SOMETIMES those people had a preexisting condition that lead to their death'.

Are you talking about Garner here? If so, that's not true. What led to his death was the compression of the neck, causing hemorrhaging in his neck, eye and tongue, and compression of the chest, which kept his lungs from fully expanding. He did not die from an asthma attack.

Go ahead and call me dishonest or a liar, I don't care. If that statement was about Garner, it was wrong. Sorry that upsets you.

[n david]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Compression of the neck and chest doesn't kill people.

So the ME lied. Okay.

smh

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by n david

So the ME lied. Okay.

smh

think about the meaning of the words you are saying, just saying.

ME didn't lie. But ME reports have different meaning than what those words and phrases do in common usage. A little common sense goes a long way.

Using common language, People don't die because of neck and chest compression. Just like this wasn't a homicide as we think of homicide in common language, even though it was a homicide in ME technical jargon.

[n david]

Originally Posted by jfrog

think about the meaning of the words you are saying, just saying.

ME didn't lie. But ME reports have different meaning than what those words and phrases do in common usage. A little common sense goes a long way.

Using common language, People don't die because of neck and chest compression. Just like this wasn't a homicide as we think of homicide in common language, even though it was a homicide in ME technical jargon.

Then please enlighten me. When the primary cause of death is listed as compression of the neck and chest, it doesn't really mean that was the cause of death?

Talk about common sense...

I suppose the compression of the neck didn't cause the hemorrhaging in the victim's neck, eye and tongue. I bet it was the asthma which did that.

[Praxeas]

We need the Pathologists report. I'm reading he died from a heart attack not asphyxiation ..lot of confusion out there and Biden did not help imo

[Praxeas]

Lots of people have had those sorts of compressions and not died. Again they contributed.

BTW how does something go from contributed to primary from one moment to the next???

[jfrog]

Heart attacks kill people. Asphixiation kills people. Neck and chest compressions do not kill people. Neck and Chest compressions may lead to asphixiation but Garner didn't die because he couldn't breathe. Garner died from a heart attack.

What many people don't realize is that if a person is having trouble breathing the heart will usually start working harder to pump blood faster to supply the needed oxygen to the body. If neck and chest compressions limited the amount of oxygen Garner could get (which they likely did) then the heart works harder to supply the needed oxygen and under stress a heart attack occurs.

So neck and chest compressions made the heart try to pump harder. The physical altercation also made the heart pump harder. These things exasperated his pre-existing conditions and caused a heart attack.

I think we can rule out murder, there was no intent.

The closest law the cop may have broken could have been criminally negligent homicide. That charge had some potential. But after reading the NY definition of criminally negligent:

4. "Criminal negligence." A person acts with criminal negligence with
respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining
an offense when he fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable
risk that such result will occur or that such circumstance exists. The
risk must be of such nature and degree that the failure to perceive it
constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a
reasonable person would observe in the situation.

I can easily see how the grand jury may have felt that the chokehold cops actions wouldn't have been a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in that situation.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Heart attacks kill people. Asphixiation kills people. Neck and chest compressions do not kill people. Neck and Chest compressions may lead to asphixiation but Garner didn't die because he couldn't breathe. Garner died from a heart attack.

What many people don't realize is that if a person is having trouble breathing the heart will usually start working harder to pump blood faster to supply the needed oxygen to the body. If neck and chest compressions limited the amount of oxygen Garner could get (which they likely did) then the heart works harder to supply the needed oxygen and under stress a heart attack occurs.

So neck and chest compressions made the heart try to pump harder. The physical altercation also made the heart pump harder. These things exasperated his pre-existing conditions and caused a heart attack.

I think we can rule out murder, there was no intent.

The closest law the cop may have broken could have been criminally negligent homicide. That charge had some potential. But after reading the NY definition of criminally negligent:

4. "Criminal negligence." A person acts with criminal negligence with
respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining
an offense when he fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable
risk that such result will occur or that such circumstance exists. The
risk must be of such nature and degree that the failure to perceive it
constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a
reasonable person would observe in the situation.

I can easily see how the grand jury may have felt that the chokehold cops actions wouldn't have been a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in that situation.

Exactly what I have been saying.

[Praxeas]

BTW I suppose this won't matter to you but the guys in the video are Gracie brothers. Their family are the ones that developed Brazilian Ju Jitsu..which for the most part MMA submissions are based on