From Dire:
It means that I didn't expect some forum residents to believe that a white police officer would be held accountable for shooting a black person and I wasn't surprised.
------------------------
After watching the New York police kill that man because he might have been selling individual cigarettes, and walking scot free, I didn't know a white officer could be found guilty of any misconduct.
Note, please! I did not author either of the above two sentences despite JT's statement "From Dire."
+
From Contendah:
"On August 1, Garner's death was found by the New York City Medical Examiner's Office to be a result of "compression of neck (chokehold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police." Asthma, heart disease, and obesity were cited as contributing factors. There was no damage to the windpipe or neckbones.[ On August 1, the medical examiner's spokesperson, Julie Bolcer, announced that Garner's death has been ruled a homicide.
JT, you did not watch a member of NYPD kill anybody. Here you have situation where forensic science disproves what you thought you saw. And why all evidence, not just individual parts, is the answer,
Same with Mr. Scott. Apparently the some of the results of the forensic scientific analysis [preliminary autopsy results] have been released. It indicates a wound to the back of the left ear, three shots to the back upper torso, and one shot to right rear buttocks. Without video of any kind, no one could argue Mr. Scott was shot from any other position than the rear. And given the totality of the circumstances, which is my guiding rule, it was a bad shoot.
Neither Brown's nor Martins autopsy came to any such conclusions. 'Hands Up Don't' shoot was proven by forensic science not only to be highly improbable, but a straight out dam lie.
Cameras, like DNA, and tool marks are all part of much larger picture called forensic science. Justice will only prevail when all protocol is followed.
I can understand why you feel the way you do. It's new and confusing as does phases of the moon when I'm digging a post hole. I'll bet when I brought up positional asphyxia in an earlier post regarding Garder's unfortunate homicide, not one person in one hundred had any idea of what I was talking about. But for someone claiming to be a scientist to place his personal agenda ahead of his scientific training ... what is the word I'm looking for ,,,? Absurd. Naw, that's not it.
One of several pieces of best advice was ever given me when I was a rookie was not given my by some wizen ole sergeant, but a feminist ...
Ms. Gloria Steinem.
"The truth will set you free," she wrote, "But first it will pizz you off."
I wanted the truth.
And I learned pdq that as an officer, investigator, despite what my gut hunch or bias might be was, to be patient until all the facts came in. But to gather the facts quickly.
Everybody is in such a rush to judgment these days based on the least facts but at least the facts they think they comprehend. I honestly have to refrain myself from sliding off into this same rut. In the Scott case, there is much talk about the Taser and whether it was moved. So for, no mention of where the shell casings were in relation to where the body lay. From what I saw of physical evidence left behind, I could recreate that crime scene for a blind man.
And the second officer on the scene, he'd better get his story correct ... What Slager dropped by the body, no physical or video evidence of CPR. Stuff like that.
As an afterthought, NBC interviewed the guy who did the videotape. My hunch he hasn't been contaminated because he described the scene before the shooting as one of mutual combat. Wressin' around and such. Lets see if 'handlers' get to him before his appearance on the Today Show.
Contendah's contribution can be summed up thusly. A murder is a homicide, but a homicide ain't necessarily murder.
attempting to make of this? You need to stop foaming at the mouth and actually READ what is presented, and try to digest and understand it. Before you went completely boinkers I posted an article with a bit more information/comments from authorities about the case. That was ALL. I didn't comment. You went completely nuts and started ranting and raving about something the investigators are saying. Rant at the man's family, their lawyers, and investigators. They are the ones being interviewed and stating they can only speculate right now, about why he ran and what happened between the normal, non-confrontational stop, and the shooting.