A New York grand jury decided not to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo for the apparent chokehold death of Eric Garner. The incident, which occurred in July, was caught on camera by multiple witnesses.
Do you agree with the grand jury’s decision? This is how some members of the msnbc.com community responded.
Related: No indictment for cop in death of Eric Garner
Anthony in Toronto: Police can do whatever they want whenever without penalty. A sick and sad state of affairs.
jbaker8935: I’d really like to understand how they got to this conclusion.
GabsDad: Come on. Did anyone honestly think there would be an indictment? There won’t be one in the Cleveland shooting either.
SplendidBaffle: I’m a bit surprised by this one. I thought the grand jury would have gone for some relatively lesser charge of excessive force or accidental homicide/manslaughter (I admittedly don’t know the legal classifications). I’m guessing the officer’s testimony to the grand jury was compelling. I’m wondering whether if the officer had done the same thing on someone that didn’t have the weight/heart/physical conditions that Eric Garner had, they would have been okay and that was a factor with the grand jury. No telling. This case though, like the Michael Brown case … this isn’t about race. There’s no evidence of racism. So don’t make it about race.
tnss: Agree or disagree, there is no way you could prove beyond a reasonable doubt during a trial that this cop wanted to kill this guy. How about you just put your hands behind your back and go to jail, get processed, and go home.
Scott-1727758: I’ve withheld judgment on the Ferguson case because I wasn’t there and only the grand jury had the facts. But I watched the cops kill this guy and how. You’re telling me NY law allows what we saw on that video? I’m reluctant to visit any city where cops need not fear publicly killing unarmed non-resistant civilians on camera.
SheriCu51: They are policemen, not Gods. The police also have a responsibility to treat people like human beings. They are police – they do not have the right or obligation to try, convict, and punish those suspected of crimes. They also do not have the right to kill someone for resisting arrest. In 1985, the Supreme Court ruled on the case of Tennessee v. Garner, a 15-year-old boy who was shot in the back of the head by a police officer as he attempted to flee after a robbery. The ruling meant that cops could no longer legally kill someone only for attempting to escape; the officer must now have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a dangerous threat to someone or had committed a violent felony.








