The problems with sudden death and the police

[Bill Glasheen]

Last night I listened to a very long talk given by Johnny Cochran.

All right, before you get your skirts in a tissy (as I often do with lawyers in general and folks like Johnny in particular), remember that JC was just doing his job with OJ. It may have been an outrage to us to see his professed outrage at the OJ trial, but you have to hand it to the guy - he got OJ off!

When you listen to the guy speak, you realize he has quite the strong moral compass and - right or wrong - does wonderful work attacking the problems he sees in the justice system. You may not like what he does if you're a white middle class male (as I am), but then you don't have to wake up every day as a minority. Imagine what it would be like living as an American in France... Imagine someone who would tirelessly fight for your rights.

In any case, Johnny brought up a few issues that hark back to stuff Bruce Siddle was talking about to me about 18 years ago - sudden death in members of the community at the hands of law enforcement officers (For more info on Bruce Siddle, see PPCT). It seems there were people croaking in spite of the best efforts of officers to do the right thing while dealing with angry, hateful, violent criminals. The unexplained deaths brought lawsuits - right or wrong. The problem was so bad that Bruce was actually trying to train and recruit me as an expert witness for the defense during trials.

Two issues that Johnny talked about were 1) the use of the "choke hold" (technically a lateral vascular neck restraint) and 2) hog-tied defendants. Understand these techniques were used instead of shooting a suspect, so it's unfair to characterize a law enforcement officer as brutal when you consider the violence of those they were attempting to restrain. In any case, Bruce had argued strenuously for keeping the lateral vascular neck restraint as a valid tool for law officers. He pointed to judo matches as an arena where these techniques were used without incident.

In his talk, Johnny talked about how and why he made an effort to stop the use of the LVNR (a.k.a. "choke hold") in LA. Johnny claims that the problem was with certain individuals. Allegedly some folks continue to struggle when KO-ed, so the officer continues to clamp the neck. It should only take about 5 seconds IF you do it right... But either out of bad technique or a misunderstanding of the physiology of certain folks (Johnny claims mostly African Americans), the subjects would continue to struggle until they literally had the life choked out of them. By whatever process this happened, I find it...fascinating.

The hog tie thing was also a problem with certain individuals. It apparently triggered cardiac arrest in certain individuals under certain conditions. It too was eliminated as a proper means of restraint.

It's sad to think that the alternative may be shooting someone - thus causing a net loss of life in the long run. But... the new information is fascinating. I'll be interested in seeing if I can find good literature to back these legal decisions up. We all must remember that legal decisions are often made IN SPITE OF the facts. For instance, the makers of silicone breast implants were sued mega millions for causing connective tissue disorders in women, when it was later shown NOT to be the cause. The women who had the implants had the same rate of CTD as those that did not... It took time for science to catch up with legal stupidity. But that's just the way the adversarial system works sometimes.

More later...

- Bill

[Rick Wilson]

Yes J.C. did his job and got O.J. off.

This does not lead me to believe however that “When you listen to the guy speak, you realize he has quite the strong moral compass and - right or wrong - does wonderful work attacking the problems he sees in the justice system.” B.S. You get a murderer off to make apolitical point then you have no moral compass that I am interested in.

”IF you do it right... But either out of bad technique” – definitely bad techniques as a study of the autopsies (previous link on a thread long long ago) clearly showed the chokes were not applied properly because of the damage to the trachea

They are limiting the police’s ability to do less harm.

I have no doubt there can be racial prejudice at work but deal with that issue.

[RA Miller]

First of all:

http://www.judoinfo.com/chokes5.htm

Dr. Kowai went over all known deaths from application of LVNR's at the time. It's a pretty complete list, since most agencies stopped using them in the mid eighties.

All the fuss is over about a dozen incidents.

Though these are just abstracts, if you see "asphyxia" under cause of death it's very probable that the airway was cut off, implying the technique was applied improperly. You'll see that in almost all of them.

Positional asphyxia is usually associated with stimulant drugs and a long fight. If placed face-down while "hog tied" all of the suspects weight rests on the diapragm and breathing can restricted.

Rory

[Gene DeMambro]

This does not lead me to believe however that “When you listen to the guy speak, you realize he has quite the strong moral compass and - right or wrong - does wonderful work attacking the problems he sees in the justice system.” B.S. You get a murderer off to make apolitical point then you have no moral compass that I am interested in.

He defended his client's legal rights to his upmost abiliity. No person-guilty or innocent deserves anything any less. What's wrong with that? Any lawyer who doesn't do this, has no moral compass I'm interested in.

And what political point was Johnnie Cochran trying to make with OJ?

Gene

[Bill Glasheen]

This is sooo funny. Here we have Rick sounding like me (while disagreeing with me), and Gene agreeing with me on the subject of lawyers.

In all fairness, if you read Johnny Cochran's book, you will see that the high profile cases he takes are partially a reflection of his political agenda. But he's a pretty persuasive litigant. I wouldn't mind having him on my dream team if ever ....

I'm the innocent bystander
Somehow I got stuck
Between the rock and the hard place
And I'm down on my luck
....
Now I'm hiding in Honduras
I'm a desperate man
Send lawyers, guns and money
The ##### has hit the fan

- Warren Zevon

Rory

I enjoyed the article. I'll comment more later.

- Bill

[student]

In all fairness, if you read Johnny Cochran's book, you will see that the high profile cases he takes are partially a reflection of his political agenda. But he's a pretty persuasive litigant. I wouldn't mind having him on my dream team if ever .

Litigator. Litigator.

I have learned that there is only one thing worse than being the litigator in Family Court.

That was being the litigant.

Neither is any fun...but one is a lot less fun than the other....

Murray/student

[Rick Wilson]

Gene:

J.C. was using the O.J. to showcase the prejudice of some police have against minorities. This is indeed a terrible truth, having two daughters of a minority has let me see the ugly side of this very clearly.

J.C.’s case was that O.J. was only thought to be guilty because he was black and these police officers hate black people. Let’s not let facts screw it up. Let’s not pay any attention to the DNA evidence. Let’s cloud it over with smoke and mirrors.

“He defended his client's legal rights to his utmost ability. No person-guilty or innocent deserves anything any less. What's wrong with that? Any lawyer who doesn't do this, has no moral compass I'm interested in.”

Certainly an opinion shared by defense lawyers who have murders walking and stalking our streets. This is indeed their moral compass

That everyone should have a lawyer who will defend them “to his utmost ability” is a very desirable thing; however, when did this become perverted from presenting the facts of a case into any tactic or unethical maneuver or warping of the law that gets their clients off.

We went greatly off any moral path when this happened.

I doubt you will find many citizens would share a moral compass that has the guilty walking our streets.

There is no search for truth or justice.

My first university law course (not a lawyer) they made it clear that law had nothing to do with truth or justice or right or wrong. Lawyers operate by a very different code and morality.

I wonder if those who could get a murder off to kill again and sleep at night would welcome a personal visit from their clients. No they leave that to their client’s next victim.

I am sure you are thinking how naïve he is – truth – ha – justice – ha. And that is the very problem.

Blood on their hands. When their guilty clients walk out and harm again the lawyers who made it happen have blood on their hands.

By the way I have just as little respect for any crown prosecutor (DA in the USA) who also does not seek the truth. Those who hide facts or manufacture facts have the blood of the wrongly convicted on their hands.

[Gene DeMambro]

Imagine the lawyer, defending you from serious charges, saying to himself, "I'm not going to defend this man to my upmost abiliity, because, hey, he might be guilty and it's better, if he is indeed guilty, for him to go to jail, than for me to defend him, even though there's a chance he might be found not guilty"....

J.C.’s case was that O.J. was only thought to be guilty because he was black and these police officers hate black people.

But the arresting officer was (and is) a racist. Whether it had any bearing on the case.......

Let’s not pay any attention to the DNA evidence. Let’s cloud it over with smoke and mirrors.

The expert OJ used, Dr. Henry Lee, is a world renowned forensic pathologist from Connecticut who has solved scores of seemingly unsolvable crimes on a lot less evidence used to try OJ. He also is currently assisting the authorities in Colorado with the Ramsey case as well. His credentials, across the board, are unimpeachable. When after reviewing the DNA evidence in front of the jury, he says, "Something's wrong", that's not smoke and mirrors.

Let’s not let facts screw it up.

Yes, but don't screw up the fact that the prosecution's own timeline didn't fit. And let's not have the fact that the police royally screwed up he chain of custody with the blood samples get the in way, either.

But, this thread isn't about OJ, it's about neck restraints by police...

If it's very probably the airway was cut off in the asphyxia cases, and this implys the technique was applied incorrectly, that almost tells me that the utilization of the technique itself is potentially flawed, and the strictest possible limitations be placed on it's use. The proper utilization of the technique can't be reasonably assured.

Now this begs the question of what type of training POs receive in the proper use of a LVNR, and is it enought to ensure it's use is above board.

Gene

[Rick Wilson]

This thread IS about choke holds which should never have been banned; however:

“Imagine the lawyer, defending you from serious charges, saying to himself, "I'm not going to defend this man to my utmost ability, because, hey, he might be guilty and it's better, if he is indeed guilty, for him to go to jail, than for me to defend him, even though there's a chance he might be found not guilty"....

Don’t remember saying anything or implying anything close to this type of opinion.

The words posted are interesting and perhaps explain why we will never agree on this issue.

Your post: “even though there's a chance he might be found not guilty"

It does not read “even though there's a chance he might not be guilty"

Being “found not guilty” and “not being guilty” are two different things to me and that I think that might sum up our difference of opinion.

While I would argue on the O.J. facts I will leave it be.