The Prosecutor Who Cleared Nick Christie’s Jailers For Pepper-Spraying Him to Death Had a History of Letting Cops Off the Hook

Ohio resident Nick Christie was picked up by the Lee County Sheriff’s Department for public drunkenness in March 2009 while visiting his brother in Ft. Myers, Florida. His wife contends that he wasn’t drunk, but had simply traveled from Ohio to Florida without his anti-psychotic medication. When he was booked at the county jail, Christie explained that he had a heart condition, emphysema, and suffered from mental illness, and was released.

Two days later, Christie was arrested again, this time for trespassing at the hotel where he was staying. He was taken to the same county jail, but this time, due to erratic behavior that his wife has claimed was in response to being without his medication, Christie was bound naked to a chair, gagged, and pepper-sprayed ten times. At various points, employees at the jail felt uncomfortable with Christie's treatment, and Christie pleaded for mercy because he couldn't breathe. Two days later, he died.

A medical examiner in Lee County declared Christie’s death a homicide. Nearly three years later, no one has been charged with Christie’s murder, because Assistant State Attorney Dean R. Plattner declined to recommend charges against the officers at the Lee County Sheriff’s Department. In his January 2010 memo to State Attorney Stephen B. Russell, Plattner, who oversaw the homicide and special prosecution units for the 20th Judicial Circuit, wrote:

Christie died following cardiac arrest at the Gulf Coast Hospital on March 31, 2009. He was transferred to the hospital from the Lee County Jail on March 29, 2009. As indicated in Chief Investigator Smith’s memo, Christie had been restrained and had OC spray applied several times during his presence in the jail, and the medical examiner has indicated that this was a contributing factor in the death, and the manner of death has been listed as “homicide”.

As in all cases, our legal review is limited to whether criminal charges can and should be brought against one or more individuals, based upon the law and the available evidence. Not all deaths determined to be “homicides” are criminal matters subject to prosecution. A killing of another may be “murder” or “manslaughter”, which are criminal offenses subject to prosecution. Other killings, however, may be the result of “justifiable homicide” or “excusable homicide” which are defined as “lawful”, not criminal.

The evidence presented in this case does not legally prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any individual or group of jail personnel had any intent to kill Nicholas Christie, or otherwise committed an act of murder. Even considering the lowest level of criminal homicide, manslaughter, the evidence does not prove that such criminal offense was committed.

According to the Florida Supreme Court’s Standard Jury Instructions, in order to prove manslaughter, we would have to prove that someone acted more than merely negligently or by failure to use ordinary care. We would have to prove that the conduct of the jail personnel was “gross and flagrant”, showed “reckless disregard for human life”, and was such that they “must have known, or reasonably should have known, was likely to cause death or great bodily injury.” The facts of the case do not support this level of proof. The application of restraint and chemical spray to Christie obviously had an unfortunate and tragic result in this situation. This memo, however, is not intended as an opinion or comment on any federal and/or civil issues that may arise, as these are outside our jurisdiction and scope of review. Based on Florida law, and the evidence developed, we do not have a basis to bring criminal charges against anyone in this matter.

In short, Plattner refused to call the behavior of Christie’s jailers “gross and flagrant,” even though it was; to say that it showed “reckless disregard for human life,” even though it did; or to insist that the jailers “reasonably should have known” that suffocating and repeatedly pepper-spraying the chest of a man who they knew to have emphysema and a heart condition “was likely to cause death or great bodily injury," even though they should have. (For a full history of deaths similar to Christie's, see Radley Balko's "Death in the Devil's Chair.")

I had planned to call Plattner to ask him if he saw the pictures of a gagged and tortured Christie before he wrote his memo, but the prosecutor died several weeks ago of a heart attack (my condolences to his wife and sons).

So instead, I started digging through Plattner’s publicly available memos on investigations of law enforcement officers in Southwest Florida. I found cases dating back to the mid-2000s (Florida records law only requires records be kept for five years, with the exception of murder-1 records, which are kept forever, and misdeamonor records, which are kept for three years), but not one in which Plattner recommended charges against police officers. Below are a few cases that invite the kind of scrutiny the former prosecutor should’ve received for his mishandling of the Christie case.

On January 9, 2010, Plattner wrote a memo to Russell in which he cleared Fort Myers Police Officer Christian Reynolds of shooting an unarmed man:

Dion Maycock was shot once in the shoulder by Officer Reynolds, after failing to comply with an order to get on the ground, and making a sudden turn towards the officer while holding an object in his hand that the officer feared was a weapon. The item was actually a cell phone. It was later determined that Maycock had initiated the entire event by having made the call that resulted in the police response. [emphasis added]

In this case, the FMPD Officers, including Officer Reynolds, were sent to a location where a caller (later determined to have been Maycock) indicated a man was walking with a gun. Based on the information known to the officer at the time, the evidence indicates that he reasonably believed he was in danger, and used deadly force on that basis. Therefore, the use of deadly force was legally justifiable, and this matter should be closed without further action.

In June 2009, Plattner wrote a memo defending the actions of officers conducting a pre-dawn raid to serve a warrant in which officers killed the warrant subject (a man), and opened fire on a car with a woman and children inside it. According to Plattner’s memo, the officers arrived at the warrant subject’s residence at 4:50 a.m., just as two vehicles were leaving. In one vehicle, a white Acura, was the warrant subject, Arthur Coleman. According to Plattner’s memo, Coleman drove towards a group of officers, who then opened fire on the vehicle, killing Coleman. The second vehicle attempting to leave the residence was a Dodge Durango:

At around the same time, the green Dodge, after backing out of the driveway, began driving on Gibson Street towards other officers. Fort Myers PD Officers Robert Kerbs and Tim McCormack gave verbal commands for the vehicle to stop. Instead the vehicle accelerated towards Officer Kerbs. In fear of his life, Kerbs fired one round at the vehicle. Fortunately, neither the driver, Kevondra Marion, nor either of her two small children who were in the vehicle with her were injured, nor were the officers.

There is no indication that the officers knew children were in the vehicle prior to the shooting. A person is legally justified in using force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if the person using the deadly force reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another. ln deciding Whether the person using the deadly force Was justified, that person must be judged by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was used. In this case, the officers who fired at the 2 vehicles, respectively, were clearly in a situation where, according to the evidence, they were reasonably in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm. Therefore, their use of deadly force in shooting at the vehicles was a justifiable use of deadly force.

Despite the fact that Officer Kerbs was justified in shooting at the green Dodge, based on the circumstances he was in, We nevertheless have insufficient evidence to prosecute Kevondra Marion for the aggravated assault charge on which she was arrested. The evidence developed in the investigation does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Marion had the specific intent to do violence to the officers, as required by the statute. [Emphasis added] See Swift v. State, 973 So.2d 1196 (F la. 2nd DCA 2008). She made no admissions regarding this legal element, and under the totality of the circumstances we cannot prove that she was intentionally driving at the officers.

I therefore recommend that this case be closed without further action by this office.

In 2006, Plattner declined to bring charges against an officer who Tasered an incapacitated man who later died from the shock:

A Fort Myers police officer who shocked a man with a Taser shortly before his death four months ago won’t face criminal charges, police officials announced today.

The state attorney’s investigation into Steven M. Cunningham’s death Oct. 13 found no evidence to indicate Officer Scott Townsend acted unlawfully, police spokeswoman Maureen Buice said.

Police officials also said their own internal investigation into the incident concluded the officer’s actions were justified.

An autopsy conducted by the medical examiner’s office ruled Cunningham’s cause of death was cocaine toxicity with excited delirium, a controversial condition often linked to deaths after Taser use.

Townsend shocked Cunningham three to four times in the back with a Taser during the Oct. 13 incident, according to autopsy reports.

Cunningham, 45, collapsed and later died at Southwest Florida Regional Medical Center.

Townsend was at Ruth Cooper that day to deliver a person who was being admitted on Baker Act charges, according to a Jan. 24 letter from assistant state attorney Dean Plattner to State Attorney Steve Russell. Cunningham consumed large quantities of cocaine, Plattner wrote.

“He had taken his clothes off, and was on the ground at one point forcefully banging his head on rocks, causing obvious injury,” Plattner wrote. “I do not believe the evidence supports criminal charges...and I recommend this matter be closed without further action.”

Russell wrote a letter to Daniels two days later, indicating there was no evidence to suggest Townsend violated the law.

Note that Plattner says Cunningham was “causing obvious injury” to himself. Hard to see how Tasering him four times would mitigate that.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    this has certainly altered my perception of memos as pointless-wastes-of-paper.

  • dunkel||

    fuckity fuck fuck!!!!!!!!!!!!

    FFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

  • ||

    Getting paid by the word now, Riggs?

  • Riggs||

    Didn't you see my Newsweek post?

  • ||

    Was that the one about how you and Murtaugh fucked with those South African asshole diplomats?

    Sorry about Patsy Kensit, by the way. What they did was uncalled for.

  • Punchbowl Turd||

    Reading is hard.

  • Tonio||

    But surely the myth of the cop-forgiving prosecutor is a CANARD?

  • ||

    I had planned to call Plattner to ask him if he saw the pictures of a gagged and tortured Christie before he wrote his memo, but the prosecutor died several weeks ago of a heart attack (my condolences to his wife and sons).

    Sometimes one of those spots in hell opens up unexpectedly.

  • ||

    Hell doesn't want him.

  • Raston Bot||

    Was his heart attack induced by being strapped to a devil's chair, gagged, and pepper sprayed at least 8 times?

  • ||

    No but we can at least hope it was extremely painful.

  • ||

    It would be unfortunate and tragic if the pepper sprayers died of painful heart attacks, too. Like, super unfortunate.

  • Matt||

    but the prosecutor died several weeks ago of a heart attack (my condolences to his wife and sons).

    We should offer our advice to his grieving family:

    Give him an enema; you can bury him in a matchbox.

  • RedDragon6009||

    "The evidence presented in this case does not legally prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any individual or group of jail personnel had any intent to kill Nicholas Christie, or otherwise committed an act of murder."

    I thought determining one's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt was up to a jury. Since when did prosecutors need to prove a someone's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt prior to pressing charges?

  • Loki||

    Since prosecutors use their conviction rate as proof that they're doing such a bang up job to dupe gullible voters into re-electing them.

    Can't totally blame the prosecutors for wanting to only try slam dunk cases to make their stats look good. It's a flaw inherent in the system (similar to the violence).

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    If they don't think the evidence proves guilt to an impartial jury beyond a reasonable doubt, they have no business bringing charges.

    Of course, I would have thought there would have been enough evidence here, but what do I know?

  • ||

    At various points, employees at the jail felt uncomfortable with Christie's treatment

    But not so uncomfortable that they would actually prevent his further torture.

  • ||

    They didn't want to be the next in the chair. Can you blame them?

  • Loki||

    Unfortunately the "mob mentality" can be very strong. Especially when you have to work with and may need to rely on one or more of the thugs to back you up one day.

    Anyone who can honestly say they would step up and do the right thing in that kind of situation is a better person than 99.9% of the human population. Most people won't even step in and put a stop to school yard bullying much less something like this.

  • Stanley Milgram||

    Every time you post a comment in this blog, I will deliver an electric shock to a Florida prosecutor.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Sounds like the start of Reason's First Ever Comment-A-Thon.

  • cynical||

    We do not negotiate with terrorists.

  • Rev. Blue Moon ||

    The original victim is and was a manslaughter victim, and the failure to prosecute is an outrage.

    I am, however, in no way convinced about any of the other cases Riggs cites. The Maycock one lacks sufficient facts, the Coleman one was brought on when two idiots tried to run down police with their vehicles, and the tasering one may be justified because tasering the guy would, yes, stop him from hurting himself (in theory).

  • ||

    Where a cop shoots an unarmed man who possesses a cell phome, there is no evidence to support a finding that the tax feeder was justified in shooting the victim.

    It is utterly absurd to suggest that the cop REASONABLY believed that his life was in imminent danger as all he to do was back the fuck off.

  • Colonel_Angus||

    Cops cunts should be expected to accept these kinds of risks as part of conducting the job, which they claim is so noble. People do have a right to be armed.

  • Matt||

    The Maycock one lacks sufficient facts

    Why? They nailed Cory Maye for murder just fine, and he was way more justified for opening fire than this asshole was.

    , the Coleman one was brought on when two idiots tried to run down police with their vehicles

    I don't understand why they needed to shoot. What were they hoping to accomplish? 9mm handgun rounds don't stop cars. Why didn't they just get out of the way?

    If it is "legal" it only shows that the standards for an officer discharging his gun are ridiculously low compared to the standard for a civilian.

    the tasering one may be justified because tasering the guy would, yes, stop him from hurting himself (in theory).

    This would be the only one I'm reasonably sympathetic to, as you could only prove the officer was a moron and not malicious.

  • ||

    Why didn't they just get out of the way?

    There's a new invention called a steering wheel you may have heard of. It doesn't work with a dead person holding onto it.

  • Colonel_Angus||

    Exactly. The vehicle will just continue uncontrolled on an unpredictable path.

  • Matt||

    I think Mr. Angus said it best. Things wrong that happened:

    1. They didn't assess who the target was or who else was in the car (in this case, small children).
    2. While they were lining up and taking the shot they were not getting out of the way, putting themselves in danger.
    3. Assuming they were correct, that it was a BG in the car and there were no innocent bystanders with him, and they hit him (very difficult to do through a windshield), and he was killed, you now have 3 tons of steel lumbering towards you that is completely uncontrolled. Which way is it going to turn? Who knows?

    Everything about the decision to fire on this vehicle was terrible.

  • ||

    The vehicle will just continue uncontrolled on an unpredictable path.

    Which is better than "controlled and always toward you".

    I mean, would you rather be targeted for assassination by a blind person or one who can see? It's unpredictable which direction a blind person is going to shoot in.

  • Colonel_Angus||

    If the vehicle is heading in your direction and is close enough for you to expect to be able to use a sidearm to shoot the driver, your dumb ass should have not been there before that happened instead of standing in the fucking street panicking and attempting to target the driver. Maybe a living driver would use the steering wheel to avoid hitting you or use the brake pedals to slow the vehicle, but now the dead driver is going to mow your motherfucking ass down because you were already in the way by the time you were able to acquire a target.

  • LilDebbie||

    better for you, not so much everyone else who, oh yeah, you supposedly "protect and serve."

    a hope a cop shoots some driver outside your house and the car crashes into your child's bedroom. not that i think you'd learn anything from it. i just want you to suffer.

  • Loki||

    I know cops aren't very popular around here, and for good reason, so even just playing "devils advocate" for them may invite a vicious hate fucking via comments, but:

    In the Maycock case the cop was called to the scene due to a report of a man walking around with a gun. He tells Maycock to get on the ground and he instead makes a "sudden turn" towards the cop with an object in his hand. In that situation, and with adrenaline pumping the cop probably didn't have time to wait and see if the object was a gun or not. It sucks, but heat of the moment and all that.

    In the 2nd case opening fire was probably intended to scare the driver into stopping, which presumably worked, but yeah, getting out of the way would have been most people's 1st reaction, but where's the fun in that?

  • Matt||

    He tells Maycock to get on the ground and he instead makes a "sudden turn" towards the cop

    "Sudden turn" sounds a lot like the "lunge" excuse given by many cops after they blow away some innocent, except even worse for their side. I suppose you could accuse me of Monday Morning Quarterbacking a split-second decision, but I will gladly pass judgement with hindsight on any decision that a person with a badge and a gun who has shot someone. For instance, these guys:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV6Bq8xeQrU

    In the 2nd case opening fire was probably intended to scare the driver into stopping, which presumably worked, but yeah, getting out of the way would have been most people's 1st reaction, but where's the fun in that?

    Not only is getting out of the way the first reaction many would have, it is the correct reaction. Why the fuck would you grab your gun and start blasting away at someone on a public fucking street without finding out who it is first? This is psychopath behavior.

  • BC||

    I will gladly pass judgement with hindsight on any decision that a person with a badge and a gun who has shot someone.

    Seconded. Joe Q. Citizen in those circumstances gets no benefit of the doubt; cops inculcated in the New Professionalism should be held to a higher standard, not a lower one.

  • R||

    , the Coleman one was brought on when two idiots tried to run down police with their vehicles


    I don't understand why they needed to shoot. What were they hoping to accomplish? 9mm handgun rounds don't stop cars. Why didn't they just get out of the way?

    If it is "legal" it only shows that the standards for an officer discharging his gun are ridiculously low compared to the standard for a civilian.

    Err, I hate to defend cops, ever, but this isn't a case where their standards are lower than those of a civilian. If someone is trying to run you down with a car and (depending on jursidiction: the following is not applicable in states with a "stand your ground" law) you can't get away, you'd be perfectly justified in shooting the driver.

  • R||

    I should note that Florida is one of the states with a "stand your ground" law; hence, a civilian shooting into a car that is attempting to run them down in the exact same circumstances would probably not get charged either.

  • ||

    the tasering one may be justified because tasering the guy would, yes, stop him from hurting himself (in theory).

    Once, maybe...and I still wouldn't agree with the decision to tase there. Four times? No way. It's a perfect example of a less-lethal weapon being abused. In the days before tasers were ubiquitous, this guy would still have been alive.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    I present to you for your consideration, Robert Horan, former Commonwealth's Attorney for Fairfax, Virginia.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,193652,00.html

    Courtesy of Radley circa 2006.

  • Gojira||

    Damn, I wish there were comments on that Fox article. I want to see how many people would try to defend the cops.

  • ||

    The evidence presented in this case does not legally prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any individual or group of jail personnel had any intent to kill Nicholas Christie, or otherwise committed an act of murder.

    And, of course, this is exactly the same standard which would be applied if a group of fraternity brothers had fatally tortured a homeless man for fun.

  • Loki||

    Depends on if the frat brothers are member of the fraternal order of police or not some other fraternal group.

  • ||

    Note that Plattner says Cunningham was “causing obvious injury” to himself. Hard to see how Tasering him four times would mitigate that.

    Well, technically speaking, a dead person is quite unlikely to harm himself/herself.

  • ||

    The evidence presented in this case does not legally prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any individual or group of jail personnel had any intent to kill Nicholas Christie, or otherwise committed an act of murder.

    Plattner was prosecution, defense, judge, AND JURY in this case, apparently.

    Positively Solomonic, he was; a great loss to the community.

  • Colonel_Angus||

    Assistant State Attorney Dean R. Plattner is an accessory to murder. And a cunt.

  • Colonel_Angus||

    And now he's a dead murdering cunt. Fuck him.

  • ||

    Necrophilia, anyone? Line up.

  • ||

    This was actually on the Today show this morning. Fun fact: when Christie got to the hospital, he was so drenched in pepper spray that the hospital staff said he was toxic, and could not touch him until he had been washed in milk and other neutralizing agents.

    These all strike me as excellent examples of the double standard. It is hard to imagine any non-LEO walking from any of these, yet LEOs walked from all of them.

  • Gojira||

    Don't worry, Dunphy has reliably informed us that the "double-standard" is a myth, and that cops are in fact held to a higher standard than civilians.

    hth

  • Barely Suppressed Rage||

    The evidence presented in this case does not legally prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any individual or group of jail personnel had any intent to kill Nicholas Christie, or otherwise committed an act of murder. Even considering the lowest level of criminal homicide, manslaughter, the evidence does not prove that such criminal offense was committed.

    Isn't that for a jury to decide?

  • Barely Suppressed Rage||

    we would have to prove that someone acted more than merely negligently or by failure to use ordinary care. We would have to prove that the conduct of the jail personnel was “gross and flagrant”, showed “reckless disregard for human life”, and was such that they “must have known, or reasonably should have known, was likely to cause death or great bodily injury.” The facts of the case do not support this level of proof.

    The fuck they don't. And again - for the jury to decide.

    This fucking nutsack is a dissembler.

  • Barely Suppressed Rage||

    More:

    The application of restraint and chemical spray to Christie obviously had an unfortunate and tragic result in this situation.

    This is like those fucking bullshit non-apologies that politicians and the like always issue - i.e., "I am sorry if anyone was offended by my words." Yeah, you're not really sorry about what you said or what you did; you're just sorry that someone called bullshit on you.

    Same thing here - note the bullshit use of passive voice: "The application of restraint and chemical spray to Christie". Oh really? WHO fucking "applied" restraint and chemical spray to the man?

    "obviously had an unfortunate and tragic result in this situation."

    Oopsie! Sorry. What an "unfortunate result".

    How about somebody tie up a guy naked in a chair, gag him and douse him with OC for hours, and then when he dies, present this fucking memo in defense. "See? The evidence does not legally prove beyond a reasonable doubt that I was unreasonably negligent, so I can't be held responsible if the application of restraint had an unfortunate result in this instantce."

    Fuckin' A this is disgusting.

  • ||

    You're not supressing your rage very well.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Rage was suppressed to such a degree that it was barely manifested. This resulted in an unfortunate climate of disgust.

  • ||

    Seemed like this was a major faux pas at Gitmo. And without the chemical spray.

  • ||

    This was actually on the Today show this morning.

    I hope a high-ranking official from the Department of Homeland Security was on hand to explain how ANYTHING after the perp's failure to immediately and unquestioningly obey the officers' orders was his own fault and nobody else's.

    Suicide by cop. Happens all the time.

  • Paul||

    Suicide by cop. Happens all the time.

    We need a new phrase... Homicide by cop! Yeah... nice ring to it.

  • ||

    so when does revenge, as a response to complete government indifference and inaction when an agent(s) of the government so obviously murders someone, become acceptable?

  • ||

    Now, years ago, far overdue.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    This was mentioned upthread but I want to bring it up again.

    A person is legally justified in using force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if the person using the deadly force reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another. ln deciding Whether the person using the deadly force Was justified, that person must be judged by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was used. In this case, the officers who fired at the 2 vehicles, respectively, were clearly in a situation where, according to the evidence, they were reasonably in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm. Therefore, their use of deadly force in shooting at the vehicles was a justifiable use of deadly force.

    For the sake of argument granting them the fear of death was reasonable, they've still failed to prove that it was necessary. Were they in some tunnel where the "get out of the way" option wasn't available?

  • Loki||

    If you issue arrogant authoritarian dickwads a firearm, you can't really be surprised if their 1st reaction to any dangerous situation is to open fire.

  • Joe M||

    I had planned to call Plattner to ask him if he saw the pictures of a gagged and tortured Christie before he wrote his memo, but the prosecutor died several weeks ago of a heart attack.

    Plattner was 53. Christie was 62. So that's something.

  • Paul||

    The evidence presented in this case does not legally prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any individual or group of jail personnel had any intent to kill Nicholas Christie,

    Wouldn't those conclusions be reached by going to trial?

  • ||

    Stop resisting!!! In my imagination I see cops practicing this mantra as a group each morning before they are set lose on the populace. I don't want to feel this way about cops. I have known cops who were truly decent people. Unfortunately, some truly hideous people also gravitate toward professions where they are given carte blanche (however the fuck you spell it) to bully and hurt other people. It is unfortunate that great cops, often wonderful people, get tarred with the same brush as the awful ones, but to a great degree it is their own fault. The fact that they protect each other even when they are in the wrong discredits the profession fundamentally.

  • ||

    I am seeking the right man who can give me a real love, so I joined in the Seekcasual*com.(user name winklin)It's the first and best club for man and woman finding their intimate encounters. Well, you do not have to be lonely ,for you can meet the Mr. or Miss. Right there!

  • R||

    I had planned to call Plattner to ask him if he saw the pictures of a gagged and tortured Christie before he wrote his memo, but the prosecutor died several weeks ago of a heart attack

    It's times like these when I have to re-evaluate my atheism. Is this proof of a loving god, or that karma is a bitch?

  • mad libertarian guy||

    At various points, employees at the jail felt uncomfortable with Christie's treatment, and Christie pleaded for mercy because he couldn't breathe. Two days later, he died.

    Yet not a single one of those "good cops" thought it prudent to do a goddamn thing? Over the course of two fucking days, not 1 cop who was present in a goddamn police station thought it the right thing to put a stop to this shit?

  • ChrisO||

    The nastiest thugs rule the prison, unfortunately. Fear and intimidation.

    Oh, and you know what happens to cop whistleblowers? Not good things.

  • ||

    Another example, several actually, of when there should be an independent grand jury, fully empowered. Even prosecutors need a check on their power, not to mentiom the cops that get out of line. Bring back grand juries in all their common law glory.

  • Marian Scirrotto||

    This is the petition for Justice for Nick Christie, Please sign and re-post it, Justice MUST be served...This was not an isolated incident, it has been allowed and condoned since 2005 and it Must Stop !

    http://www.thepetitionsite.com.....otect-and/

  • Cal||

    Plattner needs to be charged as an accomplice.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement