Asthmatic Man Who Sold Untaxed Cigarettes Dies During Arrest

Sure it matters. You keep saying homicide like the cops wanted to kill him. They didn't. They dealt with the situation he escalated. Each time he refused to comply with lawful orders, he escalated the situation, ultimately to the point that it required physical force. Even then, it was not deadly force. If he'd been fit and healthy, he'd still be alive.

 

Garners death was homicide meaning there was another person that led to the death. It would be no different than say a Democrat breaking into Ted Nugents house or some physical trainer making 600lb mom do p90x. Certain things have a foreseeable outcome.

You certainly seems to want to grab hold of one item and cling to it as if it was the only truth. The fact is the big picture is the truth.

Here are the facts:
1 the autopsy results have not been released and everything being discussed is based on hand picked tidbits which the media chooses and uses in a context of their choosing.
2. Eric Garner died of a heart attack in an ambulance on the way to the hospital.
3. Eric Garner had chronic AND acute bronchial asthma.
4. Eric Garner had heart disease.
5. Eric Garner had SEVERE obstructive sleep apnea.

I know it is easy to take one piece of sensationalism and run with it but take a second to think about it. Starting with the "chokehold", in order for the chokehold to be the cause of death one of two things would need to happen in a healthy individual: there would need to be sufficient trauma to the neck so that the Carotid Arteries could not flow blood to the brain such that an anoxic brain injury were to occur, of course you have redundancy in the Circle of Willis so that is unlikely, or you would need to have sufficient damage to the trachea or larynx such that they could not breathe. My understanding is that there was no tracheal or laryngeal trauma to Garner. Which leads me to conclude that Garners airway obstruction was probably due to his asthma and also his poor airway to begin with (obstructive apnea).
Then there is the chest compression; which if you look at the guy the simple answer is gravity. I didn't see anywhere in that video where he was smothered and in fact he was conscious and breathing after everyone was off him. So short of a flail segment he (if he was normal size) should have returned to normal breathing after everyone was off of him.
So here is my opinion on the events:
Garner gets taken down be a neck/shoulder throw suffering soft tissue trauma of the neck, none of it would be significant in a normal healthy adult. He is taken down and restrained by the officers and handcuffed. Officers use their weight to counter his resisting. Garner has a severe asthma attack due to the physical exertion leading to a complete obstruction of his airway. Due to his size, emergency responders are unable to establish an airway leading to hypoxia followed by cardiac arrest. If I had to guess, I would suspect the grand jury found the same which is why no charges were brought and Paniolo still has a job.
YMMV.

 

OK, I assume you know by now the definition of homicide. We both defined it the same way so I sure hope so.

You are reading things I never said. And without getting too insulting you're starting to make some stupid statements too so just stop and think before you follow Rob down that rabbit hole.

He claimed that Garner would be alive if he hadn't been obese. The Medical Examiner said it was a homicide- a death at the hands of others. Yes, his health issues were contributing factors but the bottom line is the cops killed him. Accident, justifiable, or whatever. They killed him.

So please stop now with the " If he'd been fit and healthy, he'd still be alive" bullshit. If the cops hadn't grabbed him, right or wrong, he'd still be alive. Or at least he wouldn't have died at their hands.

 

I'm curious now. Did Dungbeetle start some sort of apprentice program? Just how many posts do you have to make defending a stupid statement before you graduate to full Dungbeetle?

 

There wasn't anything stupid about it. Garner had enough severe medical conditions that he was a ticking time bomb with regards to his health. You act like young obese people never die. Garners' state of health was a greater causation in his death than any of the trauma inflicted by the police.

 

Keep going Dung Jr, you'll get there.:up:

You say his state of health was a greater causation than the trauma inflicted by the cops, the ME says it was a homicide- death caused by cops.

No offense there sparky but you don't know shit, I believe the ME.

 

Homicide is the act of a human being causing the death of another human being.[1] There are both unintentional and intentional homicides, and many different types of homicides are generally treated very differently in human societies; such classes of homicide can include murder, manslaughter, euthanasia, execution, and (according to some sources) abortion.

Bullshit. If the stupid fuck had just obeyed the law and listened to the cops, who were doing their job, he'd still be alive. And that's what it comes down to. Of all the people involved here, all were justified in or obligated to their actions except Garner. He had a choice to comply or to fight. He CHOSE to fight, which led to his death. So the FAULT here lies with Garner and solely with Garner.

As for the settlement, it has nothing to do with right or wrong, just politics.

 

Wabbit season.

 

I think everyone is saying the same shit, just misunderstanding motive. Let me ask this.

Would you charge the police officers with a crime?

 

I understand the cop attitude toward this and all that. I understand the opinion that it's his fault. What I don't understand is how someone, anyone, can read the ME report that it was a homicide and still claim it wasn't a homicide.

Opinions are one thing, arguing against facts that have been available for quite a while now is just plain stupid. Dungbeetle territory stupid.

 

I haven't even gotten into motive or blame, I've just been talking about the facts. Someone claiming to know more about the cause of death, even though he never even saw the body, than the ME who performed the autopsy is pretty stupid. Someone who keeps claiming to know the real cause of death after being confronted with the facts is a Dungbeetle in training.

 

So what is your point? Are you saying the cops should be held responsible for his death?

 

Just curious, if the order came down to carry a stick with a nail to pick up litter while they patrolled, would those cops say '"hey, if that's what they want me to do, no problem"? After all, gotta follow orders, so I'm sure they'd have the streets looking spiffy in no time. We could even make it a law passed by the legislature.
Somehow, I'm betting that law wouldn't be enforced or obeyed.

And, of course, you still miss the whole point, because you're so wrapped up in making Eric Garner responsible for his own death that you can't see the bigger issues. Say whatever you like, the public perception is against the cops here, and that's all that matters at the end of the day.
To continue down the road of providing the opportunities for injury or death while enforcing petty and unpopular laws would not be a logical path to follow.
Do you want to serve the public or act as muscle for the tax man? Which one do you want the public to view you as?

 

Really, and you read this where? Coroner's report? It hasn't been released. You are speculating.

"The preliminary autopsy showed no damage to Garner’s windpipe or neck bones."

"It appears that the so-called chokehold was instrumental in triggering Garner’s pre-existing health problems and causing his death, but Garner was not choked to death, as the media seems to maintain. According to Garner’s friends, he “had several health issues: diabetes, sleep apnea, and asthma so severe that he had to quit his job as a horticulturist for the city’s parks department. He wheezed when he talked and could not walk a block without resting, they said.”

"Unfortunately, in situations like the Garner case, our gut tends to overwhelm our assessment of the facts. We are sickened, as we should be, by the idea that a man died over sale of loose cigarettes – which is an indictment of the law, rather than of the police. We are sickened by the fact that a man died while warning officers he could not breathe – but we must assess whether that death was caused by the officers, or intervening medical conditions"

"Lynch added that Baden's comments indicated that the damage to Garner's neck "was consistent with techniques an emergency room person would use." Lynch told reporters that the PBA and its attorneys have yet to see the autopsy report. But he said Garner's neck and chest injuries were like those he could have suffered as emergency medical technicians tried to bring him back from cardiac arrest in the ambulance and in the hospital emergency room."

Specifically that would be Crichoid pressure for intubation, and chest compressions during CPR which 1. would have been done by the largest person there, due to his size and is always traumatic (you always break bones).

BTW, I spent 13 years working trauma...

 

I suppose then the first fault is believing the ME report.

 

You are hung up on the word homicide. Other people were there, there was physical contact it IS going to be ruled a homicide. It doesnt mean they murdered him, the struggle precipitated an exarcerbation of a PRE_EXISTING medical condition. The Struggle with the cops was the catalyst, that is what YOU need to understand.

AND you keep claiming to have read the ME's report which hasnt been released. Post up a link or quit lying.

 

Surely can't be that dense, I've only stated my point about 20 times now.

 

Did you perform the autopsy on Eric Garner?

 

I read the condensed version which everyone else has by now, even you.

Bottom line was that it was ruled a homicide caused by neck and chest compression, contributing factors included asthma, etc.

If you've read anything other than that, by the ME not your Marcus Welby MD video, post it up.

 

The first fault is trying to convince a Dungbeetle in training to deal with facts and not his uninformed opinion.