De Blasio says he would veto chokehold bill

[brooklynite]

Source: Crain's New York

Mayor Bill de Blasio says he would veto a proposed New York City Council bill that would make chokeholds illegal.

The mayor's spokesman said Tuesday that Mr. de Blasio believes the NYPD internal policy is the best way to regulate the practice. Chokeholds are banned by the NYPD.

The City Council took up the measure after Eric Garner, a Staten Island man, was placed in a chokehold by a police officer. He died a short time later. The incident was captured on video.

Police union leaders have opposed the bill, which has not yet gone to a vote. They have been in a feud with Mr. de Blasio. His decision to oppose the chokehold legislation could be viewed as an attempt to repair that relationship.

Read more: http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20150114/POLITICS/150119941

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. You're kidding me.

Somebody died as a result of a chokehold, and he still thinks its use or non-use should be a matter of 'policy' and not law?

That's the sort of 'small government' mindset I'd expect out of a Republican.

[brooklynite]

2. Consider that it is not "illegal" for a police officer to shoot someone...

...but there are Police Department guidelines about what circumstances permit a police office to use a weapon.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

3. It's not entirely illegal for one non-police citizen to shoot another either.

There are laws about under which circumstances that can take place too.

[Shemp Howard]

4. This is not 'small government' mindset

It's an 'I'd better not upset the police' mindset.

I'll bet you a dollar that de Blasio would have signed this bill had it been presented to him right after Garner was murdered.

de Blasio is folding to NYPD pressure here, pure and simple.

[JimDandy]

5. The NY City Council has overridden vetos

in the past that regulate the NYPD, ie their recent NYPD oversight measures, one of which got exactly the minimum 34 votes to override.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/08/22/city-council-to-vote-on-overriding-veto-of-new-nypd-oversight/


The mayor may be counting on an override veto in this case to give him political cover.

[A Simple Game]

6. Doesn't matter what the city does, New York State say

obstruction of breathing or blood circulation or strangulation are illegal.

http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article121.htm

In my thinking if a choke hold ends up killing someone that is solid evidence of at least obstruction of breathing or blood circulation. Doesn't New York City have to follow New York State laws?

[branford]

7. The criminal code you cite are specific intent crimes,

and would likely be generally inapplicable, or at least inordinately difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, in a circumstance where they are employed by police to subdue a suspect. Criminal negligence would not satisfy the "intent to impede the normal breathing or circulation of the blood of another person" criteria.

[A Simple Game]

8. A choke hold is specifically to impede the flow of blood and air.

Not to mention that the cops should have known the reasoning behind banning the use of choke holds. There was intent, watch the video, that choke hold was no accident. That cop showed a surprising familiarity with the use of the hold.

Again, a choke hold is used to subdue a person by weakening them from the lack of circulation and air causing the person to become weaker and/or pass out.

[Red Mountain]

9. So under what circumstances.....

in your opinion would a choke hold resulting in death be considered criminal?

[branford]

10. It depends on the circumstances, as would any other potential crime.

A chokehold, regardless of whether employed by a police officer or not, most certainly could be criminal, under the cited statute or others. More importantly, note that my criticism only concerned the particular statute cited by the poster, and I was not claiming that no criminality could be potentially be proven.

In fact, I do indeed believe the evidence could have easily supported an indictment in the Garner matter. However, I don't believe it could have supported a murder charge. Rather, I believe a lesser manslaughter or criminally negligence homicide charge would have been appropriate, particularly because of the high threshold required in specific intent crimes and the inordinate difficulty of proving it beyond a reasonable doubt in a matter concerning a police officer attempting an otherwise lawful arrest.