Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Calling John Yoo . . .
And anyone else who thinks Eric Garner was choked to death by the police. I have a new piece up at PJ Media in which I again address Mr. Garner’s fatal enounter with the NYPD. In it, I take on the uninformed commentary I’ve heard on the matter, including some from Ricochet’s own John Yoo. Mr. Yoo is in good company with Charles Krauthammer and George Will, but they’re all wrong. A sample from the piece:
As I’ve followed the aftermath of Mr. Garner’s death, I’ve been struck by the ignorance displayed by so many ordinarily sensible people offering commentary on the matter. I use the term “ignorance” not as an insult but rather in the benign sense that they are simply uninformed on the facts of the case. Charles Krauthammer, for example, called the Staten Island grand jury’s decision not to indict the NYPD officer implicated in Garner’s death as “totally inexplicable.” George Will took things a qualified adjective further when he labeled the decision as “inexplicable and probably inexcusable.” And Berkeley law professor and former U.S. deputy attorney general John Yoo, discussing the incident on a recent Ricochet podcast (relevant portion at about 57:00), revealed himself as no more informed on the issue than the two columnists. “Looking at the video of what happened,” said Mr. Yoo, “I don’t see any reason why force was required there. With the guy selling loose cigarettes, I don’t see the need to use deadly force to restrain him.”
I have nothing but admiration for Dr. Krauthammer and Messrs. Will and Yoo, but I don’t think I’m going too far out on a limb here in speculating that none of these men, for all their accomplishments, has ever had the experience of trying to arrest a 350-lb. man who has made it clear he does not wish to be arrested. I have, and I offer here a few lessons gleaned from that experience.
As is most often the case, the comments over there have turned into something of a cesspool, but I’m always grateful to hear input from my fellow Ricochetti.
Published in General
Mendel, reading back my comments, it sounds harsh to me. I don’t mean it to be. Stark, yes, but harsh, no. I know you’re taking a reasonable approach.
No offense taken, Ed.
Here’s the dilemma: as several commentators (and Jack Dunphy himself) have pointed out in this thread, people without experience in law enforcement or subduing 300-pound men cannot speak with authority on this situation.
And I agree: there are certainly numerous factors I am ignorant of, and therefore it would be useless for me to try to decide wrong and right in this individual case based on the details (and frankly, this sentiment pertains to 90% of the people in this thread commenting on the specifics).
Taking it a step further, even outside experts are unable to pass full judgement on cases like this, because there are always subtle but important details which even videotape cannot tell us: did Garner’s eyes portend upcoming violence? Was his writhing after being tackled normal, weak, or strong enough to make the cops fear he might overpower them? Were there any sounds or physical signs he was making which clearly showed he was a frail man about to go into cardiac arrest? None of us – not me, you, Jack Dunphy or John Yoo – know these answers.
(cont)
But that raises the question: how should a normal citizen react to this type of situation? Obviously, trying to micromanage their job is unwise; but does that mean we should simply shut up and have full faith in all cops? Of course not.
The best compromise I see non-experts like me is to act like a member of the board of directors (which is what taxpayers are, in a sense) and express the overarching principles I think police should adhere to.
And one of my principles is that somebody who did not commit a violent crime, who did not violently resist arrest, and who is outnumbered, should not die while being arrested.
I’m perfectly willing to accept that this case was a fluke, in which the methods used were perfectly safe and Garner’s death was entirely due to the bad luck of his health, which the cops could not have known about. But there have been several responses here and elsewhere insinuating that Garner forfeited his right to live merely by pulling his hands away from the police officers, and I disagree with that sentiment.
Agreed, to an extent. There are many statements on both sides that are stronger and more certain than they probably should be considering the incomplete facts and inherent uncertainty involved, even with video.
“Perfectly safe”. Much of the disagreement turns on this and also on “deadly force”. No method of physical restraint is perfectly safe. The best we can say is that some methods are more safe than others judging by the nature of the methods themselves and also by the actual experience we have with them in practice.
Point taken. Let’s call it “safe enough for government work”.
Well, try this. I’m a former EMT, and was a medic in the Army reserves. I’ve also taken human anatomy, been a peace officer and fire fighter, etc. etc. Any time a person says to me, “I can’t breathe,” I know instantly that he can breathe. It may be painful for some reason, very often the problem is actually hyperventilation, etc. But if he can say “I can’t breathe,” he’s breathing, at least enough to sustain life. I haven’t followed the Garner incident closely – I have enough emergencies of my own to keep me busy. One thing I can say: Mr. Garner was not choked to death.
Sadly, that’s not true. COPD patients will have serious attacks, where they are unable to speak long sentences, but can say short things. “I can’t breathe” is well within those possibilities.
Furthermore, respiratory distress is a cause of severe agitation. So if he was having respiratory difficulties, it wasn’t “resisting arrest” but respiratory distress driving that.
Can severe agitation also be a cause of respiratory distress, especially in people with asthma?
True, Devereaux, and yes, Basil. And hyperventilation can have the same effect. But at least as far as anybody outside the grand jury knows, he did not have COPD. And if he did, it would be a major contributor to his death, or even the primary cause, and I find it hard to believe that, if he had COPD, it would not be widely known by now (which brings up an interesting question – is his death certificate available?). What’s more, I didn’t say that he didn’t choke to death, only that he wasn’t choked to death. I can’t even say that the cause of death wasn’t what I call a “carotid hold,” referenced above, improperly applied. But once again, that would be a very different thing than what anybody is claiming.
What I know is that I lived in New York City for almost a decade and not once was I stopped by the police. Mr Garner had been arrested 30 times. Mr Garner was not the subject of harassment. Mr. Garner broke the law repeatedly.