Finally, liberals and conservatives agree that the lack of an indictment of the police officer whose chokehold resulted in the death of Eric Garner is outrageous.
Liberal Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said: "The decision by a grand jury not to indict in the death of Eric
Garner is a miscarriage of justice, it's an outrage, it's a disgrace,
it's a blow to our democracy and it should shock the conscience of every
single American who cares about justice and fair play. . . . What more does
America need to see to understand that we've got a problem in this
country as it relates to the relationship between the police and
communities of color?"
At the other end of the spectrum, Fox News senior judicial analyst, Judge Andrew Napolitano said he was shocked by the decision. He described Garner's death as "criminally negligent homicide. . . . This is not somebody
wrestling for your gun, this is not where you shoot or be shot at. This
is choking to death a mentally impaired, grossly obese person whose
only crime was selling cigarettes without collecting taxes on them. This
does not call for deadly force by any stretch of the imagination." (It
was not clear why Napolitano described Garner as "mentally impaired.")
And from an article by Sean Davis on the website, The Federalist, a conservative blog: "The grand jury’s decision not to bring any charges against the
officer who killed Garner is inexplicable. It defies reason. It makes no
sense. Unlike the Michael Brown case, we don’t have to rely on shaky
and unreliable testimony . . . . All we have to do is watch the
video and believe our own eyes. . . .
"[T]he police officer who killed Garner
certainly appears to be guilty of second degree manslaughter at the very least . . . . [which] requires only two factors: 1) the person charged must have caused
the death of the victim, and 2) the perpetrator must have caused the
death of the victim via reckless means. . . .
"As the video shows, the officer clearly caused the death of Eric
Garner, who was alive until the officer put him in a chokehold, a move
which is banned by the NYPD for good reason [it was banned in 1993 because of "deaths of suspects here and around the nation"] . . . .
"I have to stress that the entire incident was caught on tape.
The evidence is unequivocal. And yet, no indictment. Why, it’s almost as if the grand jury system is just a convenient
means for prosecutors to get the outcome they want wrapped in a veneer
of due process."
Even Bill O'Reilly said that Garner "didn't deserve that."
Enough? Yes, but see the upcoming blog on "Why It's Impossible to Indict a Cop."
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well, there has to be one I suppose -- some politician who says something outrageous so he gets noticed by the media.
ReplyDeleteRep. Peter King (R-NY) -- conservative but usually not one of the crazies -- praised the grand jury decision not to indict. He blamed the victim for his own death: if he had not been obese, if he had not had a heart condition, if he had not had asthma, he would not have died when police put him in a choke hold. He further doubted that he couldn't breathe, saying that when you can't breathe you can't talk either. So saying I can't breathe, proves he was breathing.
Come on, Peter King. That's really dumb, to say nothing of grossly insensitive. Are you really so insecure and narcissistic that you can't even observe a common decency at this time?
Even Ted Cruz and that Gomert guy have been pretty silent about all this.