- Joined
- Feb 20, 2012
- Messages
- 104,071
- Reaction score
- 84,041
- Location
- Biden's 'Murica
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Oh, right. DP is the authoritative site for the ME's quote. :roll:
No, dude, I'm not making anything up. This quote is all over the media.
BBC News - Eric Garner: No charges in NY chokehold case
NYPD officer who killed Eric Garner in chokehold won't face criminal charges - Vox
Eric Garner 'chokehold' death: Attorney General to launch civil rights probe - Americas - World - The Independent
Death of Eric Garner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Actual Facts of The Eric Garner Case
Just do yourself a favor, and recognize that you're wrong on this point.
Obama likes it when Mayors like de Blasio imply his police force is racist and untrustworthy in a nationally covered speech. Obama later called and praised de Blasio for his words.
Obama likes it when Mayors like de Blasio imply his police force is racist and untrustworthy in a nationally covered speech. Obama later called and praised de Blasio for his words.
Where is the autopsy report in any of those links?
Obama is granting his attention to Al Sharpton and calling him in to the WH for meetings. Obama's actions have been repulsive.
No, you just didn't read what I wrote.Incorrect definition. You inserted a word in there that isn't always the case - "intentional".
It's a fool that listens to the sensationalism through media, who wasn't there, and has very limited privy to the evidence/testimony the Grand Jury was given.
But there are a great number of you that feel that way. How someone can come to such a conclusion without all the facts is beyond me, but there are a lot of folks like you. Many of them are laying on the ground over bridges, stopping traffic, and not allowing EMT workers to answer calls for help. Same with the police. Not to mention the disruption they are placing on the lives of many people. These "organized" protests by special interest groups are keeping cops off their beat just to maintain order. So many other folks are put at risk of the really bad people out there.
Today I heard of a protest going on in Denver over this case, where a police officer on a bicycle was there to aid in students protests to insure order, only to have a car rev up his engine and run him down dragging him for several feet. He is in critical condition after going through several surgeries. And the group mostly black he was assisting, cheered and shouted, "run over him again"!
I only hope there is a special place in Hell for those who have instigated this rush to justice, over race baiters and a media out of control.
No, you just didn't read what I wrote.
I explicitly said that the ME's ruling did not mean or prove that the officers intended to kill him. It means that the deliberate actions of the officers resulted in Garner's death.
Read some of them. They're quoting the ME's report. If you have a better source, feel free to provide the AP with a copy.Where is the autopsy report in any of those links?
Don't waste your time. I gave those links a look and none of them quote the autopsy, most don't even quoted directly the ME.
Oh, right. DP is the authoritative site for the ME's quote. :roll:
No, dude, I'm not making anything up. This quote is all over the media.
BBC News - Eric Garner: No charges in NY chokehold case
NYPD officer who killed Eric Garner in chokehold won't face criminal charges - Vox
Eric Garner 'chokehold' death: Attorney General to launch civil rights probe - Americas - World - The Independent
Death of Eric Garner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Actual Facts of The Eric Garner Case
Just do yourself a favor, and recognize that you're wrong on this point.
Read some of them. They're quoting the ME's report. If you have a better source, feel free to provide the AP with a copy.
None of those links quote the Medical Examiner.
"the compression of his chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police," said medical examiner spokeswoman Julie Bolcer.
Julie Bolcer is Director of Public Affairs at NYC Office of Chief Medical Examiner. She is NOT the Medical Examiner.
No, you just didn't read what I wrote.
I explicitly said that the ME's ruling did not mean or prove that the officers intended to kill him. It means that the deliberate actions of the officers resulted in Garner's death.
Read some of them. They're quoting the ME's report. If you have a better source, feel free to provide the AP with a copy.
So the person hired to relate the medical examiner's findings... is not to be trusted as an accurate source of information?
That's been reported for some time and proved by WH visitor records. And most recently Al Sharpton was a member of those invited to the pow wow on Monday of this week with Obama Eric Holder and others where it resulted in what police officers need to change but nothing to do address the reasons for the level of criminals that live in black communities that require so many cops in the area.Obama is granting his attention to Al Sharpton and calling him in to the WH for meetings. Obama's actions have been repulsive.
So the person hired to relate the medical examiner's findings... is not to be trusted as an accurate source of information?
I read what you wrote. I quoted what you wrote, too. You said it was by definition "intentional actions", and I corrected you. "Intentional" is not in the official definition of the word "homicide".
The quote is not from the Medical Examiner, much as people are repeating that lie.
Link the autopsy so we can see where the ME used those words.
And no, a PR person can't always be trusted as an "accurate source of information", although that isn't the topic here. Did you fully trust all of George W. Bush's press secretaries? How about the PR Departments for the Wall Street firms that caused the financial meltdown?
Until I see the autopsy report itself, there's nothing to see. Julie Bolcer is a PR person and is not a medical expert.
So a wholly unattributed quote is authoritative... lolSee Joko's post #2041
It's not publicly released... and it's not like Joko has it either. Meanwhile, the version I quoted has been consistently cited by a wide variety of sources, whereas you have... nothing.Yes you are. Most of those links don't quote the autopsy of the ME. The one that purports to doesn't quote the ME directly. To prove me wrong, you're going to need at least a direct quote from the ME or the autopsy. Something you have not thus far managed.
Homicide—‘‘occurs when death results from...’’ an injury or poisoning or from ‘‘...a volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm, or death. Intent to cause death is a common element but is not required for classification as homicide.’’ (emphasis added)
Straight out of the Medical Examiner's Guide, published by the CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/hb_me.pdf
And for the 2nd time: I explicitly stated that the ME's judgment does not mean or prove that the officers intended to kill Garner. It means they chose a course of action that killed Garner.
Homicide—‘‘occurs when death results from...’’ an injury or poisoning or from ‘‘...a volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm, or death. Intent to cause death is a common element but is not required for classification as homicide.’’
The quote is not from the Medical Examiner, much as people are repeating that lie.
Link the autopsy so we can see where the ME used those words.
And no, a PR person can't always be trusted as an "accurate source of information", although that isn't the topic here. Did you fully trust all of George W. Bush's press secretaries? How about the PR Departments for the Wall Street firms that caused the financial meltdown?
Until I see the autopsy report itself, there's nothing to see. Julie Bolcer is a PR person and is not a medical expert.
My statement is accurate. Again, from the ME's handbook http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/hb_me.pdfYou'd be accurate with that statement if you removed the "deliberate", but you apparently just can't help yourself.
Homicide—‘‘occurs when death results from...’’ an injury or poisoning or from ‘‘...a volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm, or death. Intent to cause death is a common element but is not required for classification as homicide.’’ (emphasis added)
Straight out of the Medical Examiner's Guide, published by the CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/hb_me.pdf
And for the 2nd time: I explicitly stated that the ME's judgment does not mean or prove that the officers intended to kill Garner. It means they chose a course of action that killed Garner.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?