Enough is Enough: The Garner Verdict

I have long tried to stay my hand from the cries of police brutality, of officers overstepping their bounds and wielding their authority as a weapon. I have long tried to stay away from using that argument, from feeding the often times ill-found accusatory hysteria we see so frequently from uninformed people with a brooding hatred for police officers of any kind that are jumping at the chance to attack the authorities through whatever means possible. 

But today, it was announced that Officer David Pantaleo, who killed a man named Eric Garner by way of an unauthorized chokehold, would not answer for his unarguably negligent and excessive actions.
Enough is enough. No longer can I continue to silently defend police officers who overstep their bounds. This is not justifiable. It's beyond denial that this system is failing its citizens, that it's discriminatory of race, that it's rigged in favor of the state forces.

In short, justice is just a myth at this point.

As a matter of legality, opinion is utterly irrelevant: Pantaleo employed an unauthorized maneuver--not only unauthorized, but a maneuver that is flat-out banned by the NYPD, mind you--which resulted in the death of Eric Garner. Video evidence in addition to an official autopsy ruling from the Medical Examiner's Office said so. I see no wiggle room in the face of this indisputable evidence. Now, I'm not calling for the man's head, or suggesting he be locked away in prison; I'm merely saying that to have all potential charges dismissed entirely is absolutely unjust. Someone died unnecessarily. The party responsible must answer for it. 

Allow me to drive this point home a bit further by framing the same information in a slightly different manner: Let's keep in mind that Garner was visibly not resisting or struggling. Let's keep in mind that Garner vocalized his concerns that he could not breathe and that Pantaleo held his chokehold regardless. Let's keep in mind that Garner died and that he didn't need to. This man lost his life as a direct result of the chokehold employed by Pantaleo. Accident or not, this is both negligence and brutality. It needs to be answered for. When a man loses his life as a direct result of another man's actions with no intention to kill, it's called manslaughter. And when the man responsible faces no repercussions for his actions, that is called injustice.

In the case of Ferguson and Mike Brown's death, many used a compelling counterargument as to why Officer Wilson did what he did. The argument in question is a dashcam video that depicts a female officer carrying out what appears to be a routine traffic stop with a large man (I will not reveal the races of the individuals involved on this blog; that information is irrelevant in light of the events that unfolded in the video). Everything seems to be going peacefully when in one quick motion, the woman is overcome by the man as he takes the offensive and overpowers and subdues her in seconds, taking her gun and killing her. Obviously, an officer of the law may have a similar scenario in the back of their mind when they are dealing with a suspect who is actively resisting. When one fears for their life, they may feel justified in taking the life of their assaulter.

The catch here is that Eric Garner wasn't resisting. Officer Pantaleo clearly did not fear for his life. Eric Garner was clearly not assaulting Officer Pantaelo. Even if you did agree with the video-based argument used above, it loses all credibility, all relevance in this case.

It's no longer possible to defend officers who clearly overstep their bounds, who renege on their responsibilities, who betray their obligation to protect civil rights through equal protection under the law. This was a clear violation of civil rights. And as a former member of military law enforcement--a federally-certified, professionally-trained unit, to be specific--it's my educated opinion that if the courts were really interpreting the law as it truly stands, Officer Pantaleo would have been indicted in some form or another. He would not have walked away without any repercussions whatsoever.

My brothers and sisters in the service, I believe, can confirm this: if we were to abuse our authority in a similar scenario (specifically: using a prohibited maneuver that results in the death of a suspect who was not actively resisting), we would have been courts-martialled and hanged out to dry without a second thought by the proper authorities. There's not a doubt in my mind about that. We are held to an exceedingly high standard as members of that unit and I think it's only fair that we expect the same of our domestic counterparts.

And so, it seems police are given more protection under the law than we are. When the enforcers of state law have more rights than the constituents of the state, it becomes a recipe for police brutality, for unchecked oppression and negligence. That is not the land I want to live in.

Things need to change. And Officer Pantaleo must answer for his negligence and his abuse.

Luckily, the U.S. Department of Justice is looking further into this matter. I'm hoping that Attorney General Eric Holder called "bullshit" on hearing this verdict and will enforce the justice that we have been raised to believe in so strongly. Otherwise, I fear very much for the future of our people.