• You must be logged in to see or use the Shoutbox. Besides, if you haven't registered, you really should. It's quick and it will make your life a little better. Trust me. So just register and make yourself at home with like-minded individuals who share either your morbid curiousity or sense of gallows humor.
@Buffettgirl ... its a lot of work to become soverign
For someone who has been in legal trouble before, you have a frightening lack of knowledge about how law actually works. Think what you want, but maybe drop by your attorney's office, lay a hundred bucks them and ask their opinion before you try this crap on a cop or judge.


I'm not a sovereign citizen ... but if I was and my rights were violated ... I'd definitely see an attorney.

I'm a criminal ... I've never had a bad arrest ... never been assaulted by the police. I have some idea how the law works.

I don't need a lesson from you ... you dig ?
 
Again Lith, that's a half-truth. The whole whole truth would be "I don't need a lesson from you, I need a lesson from someone with far more patience than you... You dig?".


No man ... I just don't need a lesson from you ... from a person with more patience than you (fucking soft) or anyone really.

Get the fuck away from me ...
 
@Buffettgirl ... its a lot of work to become soverign



I'm not a sovereign citizen ... but if I was and my rights were violated ... I'd definitely see an attorney.

I'm a criminal ... I've never had a bad arrest ... never been assaulted by the police. I have some idea how the law works.

I don't need a lesson from you ... you dig ?
You go girl, show those non sovereign pigs who’s boss
 
I think ends up being a lot of work to let the government know that you're going to be a giant pain in the ass... I can't find where it's legal.


It is a lot of work ... I have a friend who is sovereign. He doesn't pay car insurance, doesn't pay for tags ... doesn't pay taxes at all.

Doesn't pay for utilities ... has land which he purchased cheap. He's a doctor ... totally established, mostly sound.
 
You go girl, show those non sovereign pigs who’s boss

Watch your mouth man ... at no time did I say I was anti -police or that people who were non-sovereign were pigs.

Those are your words and I resent that you would even try to attach them to me ...
 
I think ends up being a lot of work to let the government know that you're going to be a giant pain in the ass... I can't find where it's legal.

It's conspiracy theory, based in extreme right-wing politics and anti-authoritarianism. The argument sums up as "The government of 'X' country is illegitimate therefore I don't have to obey their laws". This crap even has a foot-hold down under and in NZ. I wasn't exaggerating when I said it was as retarded as the Illuminati lizard-people NWO.
 
The laugh was for "mostly sound". Maybe it's different in Canada? I'm not looking there.


Well you're right ... We're Canadian, but 38 million says sovereign citizens exist in the USA and pretty much everywhere.

Its a process ... you can't just declare that you're sovereign and expect the police to back off ... but if you whip out your documents that prove it

... then that's different. Then they should simply wave you through ... wish you a nice day like they would if you weren't and they

just handed you a fist full of tickets. Ms.I will kill you if you don't leave my house now ... had documents.
 
Last edited:
A

Like I said, I think it's a process to prove how much of a dick someone is going to be, and which 911 calls they can ignore. 'cause on my watch, you wanna opt out, you get none of the perks...

These people don't want the perks ... that's the point.
 
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The New York City medical examiner who conducted an autopsy on an unarmed black man who died during an attempted arrest in 2014 told a hearing that the policeman who subdued the suspect used a chokehold that triggered the “lethal cascade” that killed him.
[....]
The New York Police Department, which is conducting a hearing for Pantaleo that could lead to his dismissal, nearly five years after Garner’s death, has banned its officers from using chokeholds for decades, saying the maneuver is too risky.

“In my opinion, that’s a chokehold,” Floriana Persechino, the medical examiner who wrote the autopsy report told the hearing, referring to cellphone video footage of the encounter. She said the chokehold triggered “a lethal cascade of events” that led to Garner’s death.

Using a green laser pointer, she pointed to autopsy photographs showing ruptured blood vessels in Garner’s neck, saying they were caused by the chokehold.
[....]
In hearings this week at the New York Police Department’s headquarters in Manhattan, Pantaleo’s lawyers have argued that he did not use a chokehold in restraining Garner while arresting him and that the officer did not cause Garner’s death.

A summary of the autopsy shared with reporters in 2014 ruled that the cause of death was: “Compression of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police.”

It also said that Garner’s asthma, obesity and high blood pressure were “contributing conditions.” Garner was 43 when he died.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...SKCN1SL12V?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews
 
NEW YORK (AP) — After Eric Garner’s death following a confrontation with New York City police five years ago, one officer involved in the struggle wrote up paperwork that exaggerated the seriousness of the dead man’s suspected crime, that officer testified Tuesday.

Officer Justin Damico said that after riding in an ambulance with the dying Garner, he filled out arrest papers listing a felony tax charge that would have required prosecutors to prove Garner, a small-time street hustler, had sold 10,000 untaxed cigarettes.

Damico was questioned about the posthumous arrest papers while testifying at the disciplinary trial of Officer Daniel Pantaleo, a one-time partner accused of restraining Garner with a banned chokehold as they tried to arrest him for selling loose, untaxed cigarettes on Staten Island in July 2014.
[....]
Damico acknowledged that the felony charge was incorrect because Garner actually had with him five packs of Newports that contained a total of less than 100 cigarettes. The cigarettes were marked for sale in Virginia, a sign they were being resold illegally in New York.

Garner was ultimately posthumously charged with two misdemeanors, which alleged he resisted arrest and sold untaxed cigarettes. The case was not prosecuted because Garner is dead.
[....]
Speaking for more than an hour in a nearly full hearing room at police headquarters, Damico recounted how he’d given an agitated Garner a warning two weeks earlier, instead of arresting him, for selling loose cigarettes because he felt that approach was “the right thing to do.”

Once Pantaleo grabbed Garner and pulled him to the ground, Damico said he just assumed that Garner was faking unresponsiveness — “playing possum” — to get out of being arrested. An officer who arrived as Garner was being restrained testified that he had the same thought.
[....]
Damico testified he saw Pantaleo’s arm around Garner’s neck as the two men struggled — but he didn’t say if he thought the move was a chokehold.
[....]
Damico, then in charge of combatting graffiti and quality of life issues in a neighborhood near the Staten Island Ferry terminal, said he was paired with Pantaleo to watch for loose cigarette sales when he saw Garner completing such a transaction.

Damico, who hasn’t faced disciplinary action, testified that he and Pantaleo didn’t rush to arrest Garner because they were “trying to avoid a physical fight.” They stayed calm as Garner screamed for around 10 minutes about feeling targeted by police and swatted Damico’s hands away while refusing to be arrested, Damico said.

Pat Lynch, the president of the Police Benevolent Association officers’ union, said Damico and Pantaleo “utilized textbook de-escalation techniques to limit the use of force against a much larger and irate individual.”

“We are convinced that if the politics of the streets are removed from this process and the case is decided on a dispassionate hearing of the facts, that Police Officer Pantaleo will be exonerated,” he said.

The NYPD’s disciplinary process plays out like a trial in front of an administrative judge.

Normally the purpose is to determine whether an officer violated department rules, but that’s only if disciplinary charges are filed within 18 months of an incident.

Because Pantaleo’s case languished, the watchdog Civilian Complaint Review Board must show that his actions rose to the level of criminal conduct, even though he faces no criminal charges and is being tried in a department tribunal, not a criminal court.

The final decision on any punishment lies with the police commissioner. Penalties range from the loss of vacation days to firing.

The disciplinary hearing is scheduled to resume June 5.
[....]
 
The decision to not prosecute NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo in Eric Garner’s death was ultimately made by Attorney General William Barr himself — because of “insufficient evidence” in the case, Brooklyn’s top prosecutor announced Tuesday.
US Attorney Richard Donoghue said after an extensive five-year investigation, the Department of Justice couldn’t prove that Pantaleo “acted in willful violation of the law” — while noting that Garner was not in a chokehold when he repeatedly gasped, “I can’t breathe.”

The decision to not bring civil rights charges against Pantaleo comes the day before the statute of limitations in the case was to set to expire — and the fifth anniversary of Garner’s death on July 17, 2014.


 
Five years after Eric Garner died in police custody and ignited a national outcry, a police administrative judge recommended on Friday that the officer who placed him in a chokehold during the botched arrest should be fired, according to two people with knowledge of the decision.

The judge’s decision sets in motion the final stage of a long legal and political battle over the fate of the officer, Daniel Pantaleo, who has become for many critics of the department an emblem of what they see as overly aggressive policing in black and Hispanic neighborhoods
[....]
The New York police commissioner, James P. O’Neill, must now make a final decision on whether to allow Officer Pantaleo to remain on the force, and finds himself caught between elected leaders who have been calling for the officer to be fired and leaders of police unions, who have cast the officer as a scapegoat.

The Garner family called on Mr. O’Neill to dismiss the officer immediately. “This has been a long battle; five years too long,” Mr. Garner’s daughter, Emerald Snipes Garner, said at a news conference in Manhattan with the Rev. Al Sharpton. “And finally, somebody has said that there’s some information that this cop has done something wrong.”

A Police Department spokesman said Mr. O’Neill had yet to receive a copy of the judge’s report and would not make a decision until later this month, after lawyers for both sides have a chance to comment on the conclusions. Mr. O’Neill did suspend Officer Pantaleo on Friday.
[....]

 
The facts say: Do not fire Daniel Pantaleo

Garner’s death is a tragedy, as is any loss of life on the streets of New York City. The slow response by police and medical officers to Garner’s “I can’t breathe” was wrong. That’s why the city agreed to pay his family $5.9 million. But anti-cop activists and demagogic pols have distorted this case, inflaming it for their own purposes

.Clear-headed New Yorkers will understand that tragedies like this can’t always be avoided. Garner’s resistance to being arrested, his medical problems and mistakes by the cops and EMTs all helped bring about the worst possible outcome. Making a scapegoat of one police officer isn’t the answer.



 
NEW YORK -- A state appeals court on Thursday upheld the New York Police Department’s decision to fire an officer for the 2014 chokehold death of Eric Garner.

A five-judge panel of the state Supreme Court’s Appellate Division ruled that there was substantial evidence showing that Daniel Pantaleo acted recklessly and that firing him was an appropriate outcome.
[....]

 
NEW YORK -- A New York appeals court ruled Thursday that a judicial inquiry is warranted into the investigation of Eric Garner’s 2014 police chokehold death, denying the city’s push to cancel the proceeding.

In a unanimous decision, the appellate division of the state’s trial court found that Garner’s death is the “rare case in which allegations of significant violations of duty, coupled with a serious lack of substantial investigation and public explanation, warrant a summary inquiry to bring transparency to a matter of profound public importance: the death of an unarmed civilian during the course of an arrest.”
[....]
Garner’s mother and sister, joined by police reform advocates, have been seeking such an inquiry since 2019 under a provision of the city charter that allows the courts to act as a check on the actions of city government. They want the city to turn over troves of records and put city officials including Mayor Bill de Blasio and the police commissioner on the witness stand.

Garner’s mother, Gwen Carr, and sister, Ellisha Flagg Garner, allege that de Blasio and other city officials neglected their duties in their handling of Garner’s death.

“Today’s decision from the court affirms that I, other petitioners, and New Yorkers deserve answers about the neglect and violation of duties of the de Blasio administration related to the murder of my son, refusal to fire other officers responsible for misconduct, and the related cover-up,” Garner’s mother, Gwen Carr, said in a statement.

The judicial inquiry is scheduled to begin Oct. 25. The city said it is reviewing its legal options.

In a statement reacting to the ruling, the city’s law department reiterated its argument to the appeals court that Garner’s death has already been thoroughly examined, including in media reports and the NYPD’s 2019 disciplinary trial that resulted in the firing of the officer who used the chokehold, Daniel Pantaleo.

A sergeant who responded to the scene agreed to forfeit 20 days of vacation time to resolve her disciplinary case. No other police personnel involved in Garner’s death have been fired.
[....]
Under the city charter, a summary judicial inquiry allows city officials to be questioned under penalty of perjury about matters of alleged official misconduct. Afterward, transcripts of their testimony are made public.

 
(CNN)Eric Garner's mother and other police reform advocates have begun questioning New York Police Department officers in court as part of a judicial inquiry on issues surrounding her son's death, pressing them on topics ranging from erroneously charging Garner with felony cigarette tax evasion to texting a colleague shortly after Garner's death that, "It's not a big deal."
[....]
In the more than seven years since her son's death, Gwen Carr has pushed to find out the identities of other NYPD members who played a role in his death or made decisions surrounding his case, and if they were investigated or disciplined by the police department or the city.

On Monday, Carr and other petitioners began their summary judicial inquiry -- a seldom used legal process for members of the public to look into alleged neglect of duty by public officials in New York City, attorney Alvin Bragg said in his opening remarks on behalf of Carr and other petitioners. Bragg is an attorney with Communities United for Police Reform and a professor at New York Law School's Racial Justice Project.

"The petitioners have alleged that the investigations and discipline were totally insufficient, inadequate and shrouded in secrecy and did not result in appropriate accountability and we'll be exploring that throughout the hearing," Bragg said.

New York Supreme Court Judge Erika Edwards reiterated that she will not be making decisions about charging anyone at the end of the inquiry, and that questioning will focus on the stop, the arrest and use of force against Garner by officers other than Pantaleo; the filing of official documents around his arrest; the leaking of his arrest history and medical conditions to journalists; as well as allegations Garner did not receive adequate medical care at the scene.

"Nobody will be charged or found liable in any way -- not what this proceeding is about -- it's about transparency, it's about creating a record, it's about getting to the bottom of it, it's about getting to the truth, it's about letting the public better understand what happened and didn't happen seven years ago and beyond that during the process for the investigations that were conducted," Edwards said.

The first witness, NYPD Lt. Christopher Bannon, testified that he met with officials at NYPD headquarters in Manhattan to address "quality of life issues" four months before Garner was killed in his precinct.

An attorney for petitioners pulled up text messages between Bannon and an officer who was on scene when Garner was killed.

"He's most likely doa (dead on arrival). I'm just waiting for them to pronounce him. He has no pulse," one text to Bannon read.

"Ok, keep me posted, I'm still here," Bannon wrote in one text. "Not a big deal, we were effecting a lawf(ul) arrest."

Bannon testified that he feels any death is tragic and that he sent the text to the NYPD officer to put his "mind at ease."

"I've seen way too many people injure themselves, so this was more of a mindset to me, a common sense mindset to me, as far as trying to prevent them from going down that road and potentially injuring themselves," he said.

Carr said she had seen the text message exchange at the NYPD disciplinary trial for Pantaleo in 2019.

"That was a real slap in the face. For you to say that there is not a big deal and my son laid dead on the ground," Carr said during a news conference Monday.
[....]
NYPD Officer Justin D'Amico, who was on scene when Garner was killed, testified that he made the decision to arrest Garner, and that in the hours after his death, he filled out an arrest form where he charged Garner with charges including felony cigarette tax evasion.

The state law D'Amico cited in his report would require someone to possess at least 10,000 cigarettes for the purpose of selling them. But, in his report, D'Amico wrote Garner had been in possession of "5 packs" of cigarettes.

"If you knew that this was incorrect and it was wrong then why did you continue to write down this charge on your paperwork as a felony?" Edwards, the judge, asked.

"That I wrote down. It could just be a mistake," D'Amico said, adding later, "I never meant to misinform the reader by any means."

D'Amico will continue to be questioned on Tuesday.

One of the petitioners, Joo-Hyun Kang, who leads Communities United for Police Reform, said she hopes the inquiry helps get more information about "corruption at the highest levels of New York."

"The bigger question is why didn't the mayor, in seven plus years, intervene at any point to say that, 'you know what, it is unacceptable that there is so much misconduct surrounding this case of the killing of Eric Garner and I want every rock turned over, I want transparency on all of this and I want ever officer held accountable,'" Kang said at a news conference.
[....]

 

Latest posts

Back
Top