I Can't Breathe..I Can't Breathe..I Can't Breathe..I Can't Breathe..

[Hazydat620]

The 4th amendment doesn't say you can't be arrested without an investigation or a warrant. All cops need to arrest you is PROBABLE CAUSE. A cop would have probable cause if he saw you selling loose cigs, or was informed by a plain clothes cop that someone was selling loose cigs.

If the cops wrongly arrested you, they will let you go, from there it is up to you to get a lawyer and make a case against them for the false arrest. The cops sure aren't going to help you.

I agree that cops need to be looking at real crimes, not penny ante tax on cigarettes.

Stupid fuk , the 4th is in place so that they don't wrongfully arrest you have to let you go. You are innocent until proven guilty. Your saying it is up to me as a citizen to prove my innocence after being arrested? You are seriously retarded and have no business living in America.

 

[UncleBuck]

In this case the victim was a suspect in a crime and was resisting arrest. I am sure that your law experience would tell you that there are certain protections from liability that the police enjoy as long as they were properly executing their job.

People say this guy died because he was selling cigarettes and that is not the case.

There is a consistant effort to reject the circumstances around these cases. Nobody wanted to talk about Michael Brown's strong arm robbery or the actions he took up to the shooting. Nobody here wants to acknowledge what the real issue was.

Until we do that there will be no progress.

It was ruled a homicide you racist retard.

 

[UncleBuck]

Try reading the 4 amendment. Did they do a proper investigation and have a warrant for his arrest before they tried to apprehend him? I wouldn't expect you to understand. Where do you live again?

He lives in the undisputed racist white trash capital of the southwest.

 

[londonfog]

He lives in the undisputed racist white trash capital of the southwest.

I thought Modrama lived in Illinois

 

[UncleBuck]

Stupid fuk , the 4th is in place so that they don't wrongfully arrest you have to let you go. You are innocent until proven guilty. Your saying it is up to me as a citizen to prove my innocence after being arrested? You are seriously retarded and have no business living in America.

No drama is a meth head tweaker.

 

[UncleBuck]

I thought Modrama lived in Illinois

I have no idea where that tweaker lives, I am talking about ANALEXCESS.

 

[NoDrama]

[

Stupid fuk , the 4th is in place so that they don't wrongfully arrest you have to let you go. You are innocent until proven guilty. Your saying it is up to me as a citizen to prove my innocence after being arrested? You are seriously retarded and have no business living in America.

You should get a hold of a lawyer and have them explain how wrong you are about everything you just posted.
If you think a cop who just saw you commit a crime needs a warrant and an investigation beforehand, you are obviously in serious need of further High School education.

The ONLY thing a cop needs to arrest you for ANYTHING is Probable Cause. You can argue against this fact all you want, but you will still be wrong.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/when-police-can-make-arrest-probable-cause.html
http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/probable-cause.html
http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/when-is-an-arrest-a-legal-arrest.html


The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution authorizes police to make an arrest as long as they have "probable cause". The Fourth Amendment states:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The idea behind probable cause is to prevent the sort of police states that exist in other countries, where officials can simply round up people they don't like as "undesirables" or "threats" without any justification. This standard is deliberately vague, but over time the interpretation of what constitutes probable cause has become fairly solidified:

• Probable cause is established through factual evidence, and not just suspicions or hunches.
• Probable cause can be established through observation alone (sight, smell, sound, etc), and includes observations that create suspicion based on a familiar pattern of criminal activity, such as when an officer sees a car circling around an area repeatedly or when someone is flashing their headlights.
• Probable cause can be based on information derived from witnesses, victims and informants.
• Probable cause can be based on police expertise, such as recognition of gang signs, detection of tools appropriate for committing certain crimes, or knowledge of movements and gestures that indicate criminal activity.
• Probable cause can be based on circumstantial evidence that only indirectly indicates that a crime has occurred, such as a broken window.

http://www.flexyourrights.org/faqs/probable-cause/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion
http://nationalparalegal.edu/conLawCrimProc_Public/ProtectionFromSearches&Seizures/ExToWarrantReq.asp

A search incident to lawful arrest does not require issuance of a warrant.


Good luck to you in any future LEO encounters. You are going to need it as your education on the subject is going to lead to problems when you try to assert that the cops can't arrest you without a investigation and warrant first.

 

[Hazydat620]

[

You should get a hold of a lawyer and have them explain how wrong you are about everything you just posted.
If you think a cop who just saw you commit a crime needs a warrant and an investigation beforehand, you are obviously in serious need of further High School education.

The ONLY thing a cop needs to arrest you for ANYTHING is Probable Cause. You can argue against this fact all you want, but you will still be wrong.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/when-police-can-make-arrest-probable-cause.html
http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/probable-cause.html
http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/when-is-an-arrest-a-legal-arrest.html


The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution authorizes police to make an arrest as long as they have "probable cause". The Fourth Amendment states:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The idea behind probable cause is to prevent the sort of police states that exist in other countries, where officials can simply round up people they don't like as "undesirables" or "threats" without any justification. This standard is deliberately vague, but over time the interpretation of what constitutes probable cause has become fairly solidified:

• Probable cause is established through factual evidence, and not just suspicions or hunches.
• Probable cause can be established through observation alone (sight, smell, sound, etc), and includes observations that create suspicion based on a familiar pattern of criminal activity, such as when an officer sees a car circling around an area repeatedly or when someone is flashing their headlights.
• Probable cause can be based on information derived from witnesses, victims and informants.
• Probable cause can be based on police expertise, such as recognition of gang signs, detection of tools appropriate for committing certain crimes, or knowledge of movements and gestures that indicate criminal activity.
• Probable cause can be based on circumstantial evidence that only indirectly indicates that a crime has occurred, such as a broken window.

http://www.flexyourrights.org/faqs/probable-cause/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion
http://nationalparalegal.edu/conLawCrimProc_Public/ProtectionFromSearches&Seizures/ExToWarrantReq.asp

A search incident to lawful arrest does not require issuance of a warrant.


Good luck to you in any future LEO encounters. You are going to need it as your education on the subject is going to lead to problems when you try to assert that the cops can't arrest you without a investigation and warrant first.

LOL, so what was the probable cause? I have had many, many, many encounters with the law and have had no problems usually. I carried a gun for a while and was stopped many times, usually the first encounter was always very smooth, but I'm white with a shaved head, toothbrush mustache, usually wearing suspenders and red laced combat boots, and naturally felt me to be no threat to them.

Hey stupid did you forget to read a little bit further down or did you just stop when you thought you made your point. Look at the first bullet point in the post you made dummy.

 

[NoDrama]

Hey stupid did you forget to read a little bit further down or did you just stop when you thought you made your point. Look at the first bullet point in the post you made dummy.

What are you talking about? Are you saying the police didn't see anything and were just guessing the guy sold loose cigarettes? Guess what? In a court of law that won't even matter anymore, the law works in weird ways, but the cops don't even need reasonable cause anymore. They can say anything they want now, the only person who can give any contrary testimony is DEAD. The police can lie ( and will) and just manufacture the testimony now. Who is to say otherwise? Its a unfortunate incident, i feel really bad for Mr Garner and his family, he was fed up with the harassment. Also unfortunate was the way he handled the situation.
If the cops are telling you that you are under arrest, even if they are 100% wrong, you don't fight it, EVER!!!! In a court of law, if you resist arrest, the original reason why the cops put you under arrest doesn't even matter anymore, the cops don't even have to charge you with the other offense, they got resisting. You understand?

How to handle an arrest: Be cordial and pleasant and cooperate in all ways, do not verbally resist the arrest, do not physically resist the arrest. DO NOT SAY ANYTHING to them either, tell them you are using your right to silence. Then ask for your lawyer. When they arraign you then you can protest to the judge, and by you I mean your Lawyer. If the cops find out they screwed up and have nothing to charge you with they will let you go, but have the option to hold you for up to 48-72 hrs depending on the state. so be prepared. Your lawyer can work the magic, you cannot. Enjoy your stay, play cards, watching TV, sit around and be lazy.

oh, and one more thing. Driving down the road and a cop turns on his lights? If you keep going for an unreasonably long distance ( determined by the cop, not you) or you all of a sudden accelerate? That's probable cause, and if you further proceed its also resisting.
Be careful out there, and never carry cash.

 

[SmokeyDan]

First of all the cops intention was to bring the man into compliance, not intended to do harm. Second of all that particular choke hold isn't illegal at all, just against department policy.

Asthma killed him, and being really obese didn't help at all.

Could the cops have handled things differently? Certainly, but hindsight is always 20/20.

Saying asthma killed this guy is like stabbing a guy on blood thinners and saying the medication killed him.

That could have killed a normal person, which is why it's against policy to do, it's harmful.

He stepped out of bounds.

 

[whitebb2727]

In my state there is an average of 4 guns per house.

Watch cop shows in states that are gun heavy, the cops know damn better than to do that shit.

 

[SmokeyDan]

+rep



nice to know all those law courses really paid off!

Forgot to thank you for the kind words and the +rep.

No law courses, just constitution classes in undergrad.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Stupid fuk , the 4th is in place so that they don't wrongfully arrest you have to let you go. You are innocent until proven guilty. Your saying it is up to me as a citizen to prove my innocence after being arrested? You are seriously retarded and have no business living in America.

you are cracked.

the 4th protects against searches and seizures of property, and has no bearing on an arrest for probable cause, or as a result of witnessing a crime.

the actual amendment:
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


the "crime" of selling loose cigarettes without submitting the tax as a retailer is ridiculous, but the actions of the deceased were the proximal cause of his death.

a known felon with a history of convictions for everything from aggravated assault to unlicensed street vending should be well aware of the results of resisting arrest.

his extensive personal experience with gettin busted should have informed his decisions, and he should have simply accepted that he was pinched.

resisting the cops was his choice.

 

[UncleBuck]

the actions of the deceased were the proximal cause of his death.

you retarded racists will defend a cop using an illegal choke maneuver any day of the week so long as the victim is black.

seriously, go back to whatever racist shithole you crawled out of.

 

[greenlikemoney]

You should get a hold of a lawyer and have them explain

There are no lawyers in Loserville, only the Mayor and his minions.

 

[desert dude]

unfortunately, many of our rules and regs are because society deemed necessary because of systemic abuse.

the fact that there was no indictment on this case..this clear cut case, is more than disturbing.

Fewer rules. Fewer regulations. Then there will be fewer tragedies like this. There will never be no tragedies. Anytime you interact with the police, there is potential to lose your life.

As long as there is a law against selling "loosies" (individual cigarettes) the cops will arrest you for it. Anytime you are arrested, you risk great bodily harm. This guy was a victim of the nanny state.

 

[sheskunk]

So thats all a cop has to say to get away with murder? What a bunch of cunt's.

You do exactly what the officer asks of you and you live to see tomorrow. Pretty simple if you ask me.

 

[schuylaar]

Irrelevant. All that stuff is not pertinent because they used a choke hold that had been barred, presumably because of risk of harm.

Keep in mind, had these guys not been cops, they would all be charged with 2nd degree murder. Even the ones standing by would be named so as part of a group. Accessories to the crime.

He was not violently resisting, he just wasn't cooperating.

No grounds for excessive force.

All the cops should be fired. And I'd say they all belong in jail and the one applying the choke should be guilty of 2nd degree or manslaughter.

Mike brown killed himself. You want to talk about his robbing the store as if that somehow justifies him being shot? It's irrelevant other than giving wilson the right to attempt arrest. The cops killed this guy.

like death?

+rep again, nice!

Being Obese and out of shape exacerbates chronic asthma like Garner had. It was the asthma that killed him, but the POS cop used an illegal choke hold on the man in order to subdue him because Garner was resisting arrest. Its obvious Garner was resisting, he tried to slap officers hands out of the way. When will people learn that you CANNOT talk your way out of an arrest, trying to do is futile and only brings more trouble and possibly more charges. Even if you VERBALLY resist arrest, its still resisting.

Of course the Cop can't be found guilty, when will people learn that? If you start finding cops guilty of crimes for carrying out their duties, then most cops would resign and we would have a whole lotta trouble in the streets.

i gotta call bullshit on some of this, farm boy.

garner had a medical condition because of which he succumb to by a man who used known deadly techniques, that can EASILY cause a healthy persons death, was illegal.."known" that's key here..the choke illegal..what happened "to protect and serve"? murder 2 qualifies.

verbally resisting? married to a cop i've never heard of that term EVER and i think if i called him to ask, he would laugh me off the phone.

you can and they do find cops guilty, i can remember several getting the boot for shit they did.

it comes down to the PD and who runs it.

 

[schuylaar]

Fewer rules. Fewer regulations. Then there will be fewer tragedies like this. There will never be no tragedies. Anytime you interact with the police, there is potential to lose your life.

As long as there is a law against selling "loosies" (individual cigarettes) the cops will arrest you for it. Anytime you are arrested, you risk great bodily harm. This guy was a victim of the nanny state.

ugh! i just KNEW someone was gonna say that.

how uninspiring and rote.

 

[schuylaar]

First of all the cops intention was to bring the man into compliance, not intended to do harm. Second of all that particular choke hold isn't illegal at all, just against department policy.

Asthma killed him, and being really obese didn't help at all.

Could the cops have handled things differently? Certainly, but hindsight is always 20/20.

against department policy = illegal

it's the professional way of saying it.