Words by Nadia Shakur
Many Americans are questioning the ability for grand juries to act in an unbiased manner police and civilian indictments. Thousands of protesters march through the city of New York Wednesday night after a Staten Island grand jury decision to not indict officer Pantelo in the chokehold related death of Eric Garner.
With the compelling video being recorded by Mr. Orta and the fact that the chokehold in question was banned years ago in NYC, many wonder what really happened in the grand jury process.
Interesting enough another Staten Island grand jury indicted Ramsey Orta, the man who recorded the Eric Garner incident, on a weapons charge back in August stemming from an undercover investigation. Orta was arrested after officers claimed they observed him slipping a .25 caliber handgun to a teenage female accomplice in front of a hotel then walked in the direction of a known drug location in the area. Orta plead not guilty and eventually testified in front of a grand jury claiming he was being targeted and followed for his involvement in the Eric Garner video tapping incident.
The Grand Jury in Staten Island eventually indicted him for possession of a deadly weapon by a convicted felon. The question many have been asking was whether Mr. Orta was targeted because he recorded Mr. Garner being killed by the police.
Legal analyst are asking the judicial system to look at the many cases of grand jury decisions with police conduct in question, compare them to regular citizens and ask themselves if there is a valid reason for protest of grand jury decisions. With the recent events in Ferguson and New York bringing the inconsistencies of police policy to light there can only be more questions asked and furious demands for answers.
