So the marine that choked out the crazy guy on the subway is being charged with 2nd degree manslaughter. Does that mean the others who assisted him will be charged too?

I remember when that guy was jogging through a neighborhood that had had a lot of burglaries and a guy and his son tried to stop him. He resisted and I believe the son ended up blasting him. Not only did he go down for murder but his dad and a neighbor who was there also went down for murder. I'm not understanding the law at this point. If they did that how are those that assired the marine with a career criminal not also liable? Nothing seems consistent and fair with the legal system these days.

Bb

I’m praying for him. It’s NYC. So you knew the charges were coming. The father and son were in GA and shot a jogger resisting a citizen’s arrest, not for burglarizing construction sites but for being an aspiring architect student interested in learning about home construction and falsely detained.

The laws mean nothing, they make it up as they go and the msm provides cover/cheers it on.

Comparing those two cases is like comparing apples to feces. It appears that this guy probably not be charged.

I don't think this is a hard case based upon info I have seen which may not be all the info out there. However, generally speaking deadly force is justified where a person fears for imminent great bodily injury or death to himself or others around him. That is why if someone is pointing a gun at you or others you might have grounds to fire in return. If the homeless man did behave in a way that rose to the basic standard then perhaps fine. However, if not and the Marine negligently caused his death then whoopsie, the Marine seems to be in legal peril. You don't get to kill someone without justification.

He killed a protected species. He’s fugked, and it’s the whites on the jury that will do it.

Dimocraps, the satanic minions of babbel, derived from Babylon.

+1

This^^^^

What ever you do don't kill one of the sacred neqqros

And there it is. Best to just run away and let them wreak havoc.

Liberals fuqk up everything they touch, Everything!!

The fact that he is a Marine will be used against him

Pretty much sums it up.

This Marine was clearly trying NOT to kill this fellow.

If he really had intent to kill (vs immobilize) the guy would have died much sooner.

Irrespective of his intent, he's screwed now. Its NYC. He's screwed and will serve time.

I'll chip in for his inevitable go fund me.

Yes. The Marine negligently caused his death. The dead guy was skinny and about 140 pounds. Three men to restrain him, one guy on each arm and one guy on the legs, they could have restrained him without the choke hold.

There is nothing suggesting the Marine intended to kill, rather a negligence standard will apply. In light of the fact the Marine has been previously trained to kill that will work against him.

Facts don't matter. The true definition of homicide doesn't matter. It's New York. They redefine everything. We are witnessing the destruction of the Nation and our cities are being ran by criminals that are protecting their own. They want protected classes of people. They want civil unrest. They need civil disobedience. They run their own elections and why anyone seems to be surprised that they won is beyond logic.

I'm a Marine, why would that hurt me in a courtroom?


White people & Republicns

Blacks & Demorats

Who does / does not always have each others back?

SMH

You are really dumb on this one or are you just a demonrat?

The pile of chit shouldnt have been out in society. 44 arrests, some violent. Best advice we can all follow is stay clear of any democrat run city anymore. They have turned into 3rd world countries and you are not allowed to defend yourself or someone else.

The choke hold used is one of the first martial arts techniques Marines are taught in boot camp. When correctly applied it can incapacitate in just a few seconds and kill in just a few seconds more. That said, circumstances leading up to the action should dictate the outcome. The Marine was just trying to be a Good Samaritan and protect innocent people from a crazed felon. If the DA in NYC would prosecute these people and allow them to be held accountable the crazy bastard would probably still be alive.

Spot on

I don't remember you in my law school classes. Perhaps you were out shoveling manure? You seem pretty good at it this morning.

In your "law school" classes, did they go over the right to defends one self or someone elses? Man, we are fugged with clowns like this dictating our laws. Yup, let all the criminals beat, threaten and rob whoever the hell they want

I don't think it would. Marines are not trained to kill the mentally-ill homeless. They are not trained to deal with them on subways either. No more than any one of the rest of us.

It's just an interesting detail about the guy, and that's what sells stories.

It’s the deadly weapon argument the prosecution will use. As to the manure shoveler yeah, in law school one learns in crim pro the standard under which deadly force may be deployed against another person. Read the words pal. It’s not hard to understand; imminent threat of great bodily injury or death to self or other. If the victim displayed such behavior it should be an open and shut case right? Certainly you have no issue with the philosophy and rationale underlying the law do you?

Did you see videos or hear the witnesses? He was threatening people on the subway. Has a history of violence, long history. Does this not allow one to defend themselves?

And with the help of a blackman, he put the dude to sleep and then placed him in the recovery position. That sounds like someone who was trying to kill him? Look at facts, not internet emotions

I still haven't seen an autopsy report. What drugs were in his system? What was his cause of death?

Watch for the toxicology report. My bet is the deceased was full of something bad. Ever try to control someone with ill intent that is high on drugs....it's not easy.

The jogger in GA wasn’t out committing home invasion he was an aspiring architect LOL.

The jogger in NYC wasn’t a dangerous menace trying to intimidate the public into giving him money and fresh out of prison with over 40 prior arrest and having recently beat an elderly woman. He was a happy go lucky street performer spreading smiles.

Both cases were nice innocent black men attacked by evil racist white men over the color of their skin… the media told me so.

Someone with over 40 arrests should not be on public transportation threatening passengers. Should be in jail.
What bothers me most is the people of NY protesting his death. I guess they like being assaulted on the subway.
I knew democrats were dumb but this is a new high. Hasbeen

Almost a guaratee drugs were involved. Cant let that info out though. Wouldnt help crucify that hero marine who stood up to the evil that exists because of one party

#saintgeorge

Thats exactly why ive been saying, the city chits get what they deserve. They vote for this madness. They can have all of it

The chokehold kills within seconds? Seconds?

I mostly agree other than that the cities get most of the US Representatives, most of votes ect; and gradually take this country over from the inside out.

If the guy don't tap out, keep going.

Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

The groid let his mouth override his a$$ one too many times, the Marine took out the garbage that no one else had the balls to deal with. Not Guilty, 🖕 the prosecutor...

Looks to me that citizens have a choice. It’s going to cost taxpayers one way or another.
Mental health asylums
More prisons
Lest favorite choice is to allow the criminals to rob, assault and murder innocent people. Hasbeen

My bet is that the Marine is screwed. He will most likely get convicted and serve time, given the circumstances and location. Even if he wins in court it is going to cost him hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney and legal fees. It is a lose - lose situation.

Day was black.

Neely wasn't just doing a funky dance on the train and making a general pest of himself asking for handouts. He was highly aggressive, agitated, and threatening the passengers with imminent violence.

Expecting perfection in the actions of passengers who respond to that is ridiculous. Penny was apparently supposed to perfectly thread the needle between restraining and killing a guy like that, according to the standards imposed on White people when dealing with black criminal violence.

Neely wasn't even supposed to be loose at the time he was killed, because he had an outstanding arrest warrant for recently breaking an elderly woman's nose by randomly hauling off and punching her in the face on a subway.

It looks like it's a black prosecutor getting back at whitey for keeping him and his kind down.

kwg

Edit to add: they are only making a martyr out of the kid. It will backfire greatly.

kwg

You have a risk of death with just about any restraint. Just ask the kids who grew up in mental health institutions. They killed a lot of very healthy kids with restraints.


You put a human in a headlock for 15 minutes, there is a good chance you will kill him. This is more of a failure of law enforcement. Nobody in a city should be put in a position to have to put someone in a headlock for 15 minutes to have defend himself and other. And 40+ priors? WTF. I hope the marine sues the [bleep] out of the city for having that guy on the streets.

Go fund me will seize the account and give the funds to a leftist cause.

Bb

If anyone is to blame its NYC government for failing to enforce laws and get mentally ill people treatment.

I just saw that the deceased guys family is upset because the charges aren't strong enough. The one who needed stronger charges was the career criminal. Where was his family when he was running wild in the streets crazy as an outhouse rat?

Bb

"The city medical examiner has ruled the death of a homeless man choked by a Marine on the subway earlier this week a homicide — as prosecutors mulled whether to pursue charges.

Jordan Neely’s cause of death was “compression of neck (chokehold)” and the manner constituted a homicide, the medical examiner determined Wednesday afternoon." --nypost.com

The "15 minute" hold has been shot down, latest reports are he held the choke hold for 3 minutes.

Have not seen that exact evidence yet have you?

Can you look into something and research a bit before arguing online? Witnesses stories have been out there since this story hit. You just need to look for it

You cannot find any video of what the niqqer was doing before the choke hold. Only the guy choking him? I’m sure that’s just a coincidence lol. You can bet the whole niqqer crazy tantrum was filmed but no one will see that only that this poor innocent niqqer got kilt.

I saw some videos early on, but they have since been pulled. Surprise surprise

If cities don't start getting crime under control youre going to start seeing some Charles Bronson like guys quietly cleaning the streets at night. I have a feeling some of the people who live in the cities know who the the chronic criminals are.

And we just let most of Venezuelas most violent criminals in too. I fear for my kids futures.

Bb

Same.

Not so much from a physical safety standpoint. There’s going to be plenty of safe enclaves well into the foreseeable future.

I worry about the brainwashing and cultural rot that is only going to get worse and that you can’t escape. All we can do is teach our values based on logic and reason. When kids grow up from day one in a society that is a morally insane never ending propaganda machine and politically corrupt clown world in too many ways to list it’s bound to have negative consequences for them either directly or indirectly.

I hope that’s the case. Last article I saw had him unconscious in a few minutes with the choke applied for about 15. That would sink Penny, imo.

Who knows what actually happened. I’d trade a Neely for a Penny everyday and twice on Sundays. Hopefully a jury agrees.

He should have disappeared right after he got off the subway, he'll pay for being a stand-up citizen.

I haven’t followed this closely but holding someone in a headlock for 15 minutes flexed tight enough to restrict air that entire time Vs. using the headlock to just restrict movement but still allowing airflow it would be difficult to keep the arm flexed the entire time without a bicep cramp and would seem pointless to do towards an obviously non struggling lifeless body.

From the limited video that I saw the Marnie had him in a headlock with the other arm up around the forehead (to restrict movement) had he been deliberately trying to choke the life out of him the offhand would have been around the wrist that he was us for the headlock in order to gain leverage and avoid muscle fatigue IMO.

Yes, I saw it too, when it first became a story. He was quite agitated and threatening in his words and behavior.

Everbody complains that nobody does nothin ta help another person in a crisis.

Then, somebody does help, and gets charged with murder.

Good God in heaven, you are dumber than a bushel sack full of broken vibrators. Try answering these simple questions about the incident.

Did you see the part of the video preceding the choke?

What SPECIFIC threats were made?

Did the deceased have a weapon?

Did the deceased initiate forceful physical contact?

Can you describe that forceful physical contact and tell me why you think it placed the Marie in imminent danger of severe bodily injury/grave bodily harm or death?

How long was the deceased in a choke hold?

How long does it take to kill someone with a choke hold?

What is the cause of death?

How does his past history of violence change New York's self-defense laws?

Have you read New York's self defense laws?

Provide written justification under the language of New York's laws against the facts of this case?

What legal precedents do you think will be applied by the prosecution and defense?


Unless you can definitively answer those questions, and more, you are engaging in half-cocked internet blowhardery.

What forceful physical contact did the deceased engage in?

They did it with Rittenhouse, and with that ensured I will never donate through them again.

nypost.com

Thousands of donors raced to the aid of Marine Daniel Penny Saturday as a fund for his legal defense surpassed $1 million – a tsunami of support so massive it swamped the hosting website and disabled it for more than an hour.

“There was a big surge in traffic and our servers were temporarily overwhelmed,” Jacob Wells, co-founder of the giving platform GiveSendGo, told The Post.


https://www.givesendgo.com/daniel_p...2I3Epe14IZLRr0BL025CJjr-K3krObaxE8V_FCR0

It's possible to be justified to use a restraint on someone without a fact pattern justifying lethal force (such as the case of an obviously deranged and agitated man making credible and imminent threats towards those trapped in a subway car with him), which was the case here. The death was an unintended consequence of the restraint. Manslaughter would only be an appropriate verdict if he was not justified in attempting to restrain the lunatic. He doesn't need to prove justification for lethal force, since that wasn't his intention.

It seems pretty well agreed upon that the deceased had an arrest warrant and a lengthy history of other arrest and mental health issues.

That he was at minimum posturing and ranting in an aggressive manor, stating that he didn’t care if he went back to prison and was trying to intimidate passengers in addition to having beaten the hell out an elderly woman fairly recently.

I don’t know the facts anymore than you do but life experience would lead me to believe that given the above established facts. I doubt that some evil racist white man randomly jumped out of his seat and with the help of another black man decided that he was going to randomly rough up much less kill the deceased.

The deceased played stupid games and brought it upon himself. It wasn’t an elderly woman this time and he got his.

How many headlocks have you held people in be it roughhousing or brawling? Nobody is going to keep a headlock tight enough to restrict air for 15 minutes unless their life depended on it. More likely he was only held that tight for a few minutes as he fought and resisted which goes back to having brought it upon himself.

You’re equating Imminent danger and applied reasonable force as if the marine had pulled a firearm and shot him dead where he stood with the reasonable expectation being death. Attempting to physically restrain a mentally ill nut while unarmed is not at all the same thing or expected outcome.

Nobody least of all violent criminal fugitives are allowed to harass, threaten, intimidate, or cause public disturbances. He did and multiple people attempted to restrain him. He resisted and consequently brought it upon himself from beginning to end.

If the DA truly believes that this was manslaughter then they need to equally prosecute every other passenger including the black man that assisted in restraining the deceased. They haven’t and won’t because it doesn’t fit the narrative.

Pretty sure that I believe the Marnies narrative of what happened and how it happened over NYC or the deceased family looking for a payday in case. YMMV

Well, if anyone around here would be an expert at a sack of broken vibrators that would be you. 🤣🤣🤣

Under the TRH interpretation of the law, is a citizen legally justified in using a choke hold on someone who is unarmed and never lays a hand on anyone or takes a swing at someone, but is behaving oddly and uttering things such as "I am going to hurt someone," "I don't care if I die," "I don't care if I go to jail today."

Swing and a miss - that's not what happened, he wasn't some wino nodding off in his seat and mumbling to himself.

Yes!

You can’t really be this stupid..

You can and really should restrain someone on a plane or a train claiming that he’s “going to hurt someone” and that he “doesn’t care if he dies or goes to jail.” Given his arrest record, multiple witnesses, and the reaction of the passengers he likely meant what he said.

He said it himself while threatening the passengers. He “didn’t care if he died.” Well😂

From what I've seen of the video, it appears the good guy used a choke hold (airway constriction), rather than blood (vascular restriction).

Airway constriction can result in swelling of the neck area, resulting in a lack of air even after the choke is released, which may not be obvious to observers.

Which is why chokeholds are barred in MMA, while vascular restraints are allowed.

Thank you.

Since you have read NY's self defense laws, and the details of this case, let me ask you some questions.

Under New York's self-defense laws, how does the deceased's history come into play and how would those who used self defense have known that history?

Is posturing, ranting and someone saying they don't care if they go to prison grounds for using force in self defense?

What specific threats did the deceased make?

How long does it take to choke someone to death? Is that more or less time than "more than likely...for a few minutes?"

LOL

You think that you made a point asking me about NY self defense laws? I couldn’t care less about NY state much less NYC’s unconstitutional selectivity enforced “laws.” So little of how NYC operates is within boundaries of our Constitution that they can claim or make up any “law” that they want. That doesn’t make it morally right or Constitutionally legally right. Look no further than NY “gun laws.” Or what they just did to Trump.

Just like Trump NYC is going to get the Marine because they want to. It has nothing to do with what’s morally, logically or Constitutionally legal.

I keep hearing the "threatening passengers" comment, but have yet to read what the specific threat was. What was the specific threat that he made to the passengers. I an not saying that he did or didn't. I am saying that I think applying a choke hold to someone who's behaving oddly and saying things such as "I don't care if I die" is shaky legal ground.

Even if we establish the fact that he made direct threats, appeared willing and capable of carrying them out and/or made the first forceful physical contact, the duration of the choke hold is extremely problematic.

The marine may very well say that he only applied substantial force for about 30 seconds until the deceased stopped struggling, then he relaxed his grip.

Then a whole string of new questions come into play. Why apply a hold that you know can be deadly when you have a substantial advantage in terms of the number of people? There are more, but the answer to all of these questions, which I think nobody here has, is why this isn't the slam dunk legal case folks wish it would be. It's hard for some of you to parse out facts when your emotions are standing in the way.

Damn bruh, whose laws do you think are going to be applied in this case?

Fixed it.

Back to my original question. If it happened during an illegal restraint why aren't the others who assisted in the restraint being charged as well?

Just trying to understand the law. I'm still a little uncertain about prosecuting the neighbor in the jogger shooting case when he didn't pull the trigger. I heard it was because he assisted in detaining the jogger.

They are really making it hard to want to assist at all in any situation. Some other guy could join in and push it to far and you hang with him for it.

I'll wait for all the facts because we don't have them yet but their could have been kids on that train or old people. I'd have a hard time not intervening if I felt he was putting others at risk. Like they said on the movie 13 hours. It's hard to put a price on being able to live with yourself.

I had to go to court at age 14 because some migrant kids jumped a classmate in a park near school at 3 on 1. By the time I got there he was in rough shape so I went to work and broke ones jaw and then layed another one out. I was 6'3" and 185 pounds at that age. The judge shook my hand and told me I was a brave good Samaritan. No one expected me to even pay for staws for the one to suck soup through. Sucks that we know have to second guess what was always considered doing the right thing in the past.

Bb

It does, indeed.

NYC’s which is why he’s fugged.

Unconstitutional illegitimate “laws” will land you in prison. Everyone gets that. The point was that he’s headed to prison because it’s a corrupt politically driven system with an Agenda and illegitimate “laws.”

The history of violence has zero to do with the Marine, unless the Marine knew about it.

Exactly.

If it were true manslaughter then everyone that assisted is to at least a lesser degree culpable. NYC isn’t going after the black passengers that helped restrain him.

That’s about as legally legit as putting Maxwell in prison for sex trafficking but never prosecuting one single client that actually committed the abuse.

Just because they can and will do it doesn’t make it lawful.

It is what it is but I can’t see being dumb enough or morally bankrupt enough to cheer it on as though it’s good or just.

I'm not an expert on criminal law in New York like so many others here, but in most states this is the case

It's all about whether he reasonably thought he or others were in danger of bodily harm.

Which ain't exactly cut and dried.

This is true. That fact cannot be introduced as evidence unless he establishes that he knew about it.

It might justify the marines intuition that the guy was a dangerous threat. The marine didn't know his history but his history supports that the marine may have rightly judged him as dangerous.

Bb

I suspect that his arrest record will wind up in court even in NYC. It absolutely lends credence to the credibility of his threats and that he had acted out violently on the similar threats before.

40 plus prior arrest including random violence on elderly woman. That would indicate to most reasonable people that the passengers likely exercised reasonable judgment in being concerned enough to consider it reasonable to restrain him as he postured aggressively and stated that he was “going to hurt someone” and didn’t care if he wound up dead or back in prison for it.

What if he had done the exact same thing on a plane? Or are the poor on a train less valuable and expected to just take it.

100 percent incorrect. The violence is what was reasonably believed in that moment. Imminent threat of great bodily injury or death to self or others. Based upon a reasonable person standard. In other words, if a reasonable person in Penny's position would have concluded that there was an imminent threat of great bodily injury to himself or others in that moment then Penny might have a defense. Moreover, the force deployed must be reasonable and concurrent with the level of threat. A gun for a gun, for example. In this case, the charge is negligent homicide. It matters not a whit what the victim did or did not do in the past, it mattered only what occurred in the moment preceding Penny's action. This is not hard to understand, guys.

The law does not care.

But a jury might. Legally, they cannot, but they still might.

The prosecution will move to exclude the decedent's prior history, and the judge should grant that motion.

We will see what happens.

I don't know enough about this case to pick sides, I'm only stating the law.

Rather included in court or not.

For those of us in this discussion that have heard of the deceased priors it should speak volumes to his character, the credibility of his threats and his frame of mind rather it’s allowed in court or not.

He was acting aggressively and out of control while stating that he “was going to hurt someone” and didn’t care if he went back to prison. So there that…

Paulyanna doesn't believe in credible threats. It's gotta be Marquess of Queensberry rules, even for ranting lunatics.

Quite the contrary. If there were threats, that will factor into whether or not they were justified in putting their hands on him. I am not sure that "I am going to die" or "I don't care if I go to jail" rises to the level of a threat.

I have not read that he said that he was "going to hurt someone." Can you give me a source?

I just read this: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65573879

"The video, captured by a freelance journalist on the train, shows the former Marine holding Mr Neely around the neck for two minutes and 55 seconds."

The previously reported 15 minutes seemed like a stretch. 3 minutes in a true choke hold is something that few people could survive.

The fact that the criminal died doesn't necessarily mean you must establish the grounds for a lethal force justification. A lethal force justification is only necessary if the defender took action that a reasonable person would have expected to be highly likely to result in death. I guarantee that Penny didn't anticipate his actions would result in death, and nor would a reasonable person in his shoes have so believed.

That being the case, the justification defense only needs in this case to assert justification for restraining someone who is reasonably believed to be a danger to the safety and well-being of the passengers in the subway car. A lunatic behaving erratically and making credible threats in a space where his potential victims are trapped in with him qualifies. Therefore there is no need to make a justification for lethal force defense argument. The criminal's death was not an anticipated result of Penny's actions. His purpose was restraint.

Choking someone is applying deadly force, and Penny knows that. There are a world of restraint options other than choking, especially when you are 3 or more on one and you have a substantial size advantage.

Absolute total BULLSHIT! That fatfuck, Alvin Bragg, oughta have his fat triple-chinned neck stretched for his racist actions. He’s the personification of an ignorant racist and an embarrassment to an already embarrassed “judicial system”. When you single out people based only on race and you apply the “law” disproportionately because of one’s race you are the epitome of a racist. When you do that from an “elected” position with powers beyond that of the normal citizen and you use the power of the state to disproportionately punish someone because of the color of their skin you’ve crossed the line and you’re guilty of civil rights crimes and violations.

These communist negroes like Bragg and Lightfoot are proving what many of us have known from the beginning, they’re wholly incapable of rational thought. They’re unable to follow the laws they’ve sworn to uphold because that isn’t in their nature…..said the scorpion to the toad.

I would love to see that race wake up and join the 21st century. That race would be smart to watch the Tim Scott’s and Allen West’s of this nation and follow their lead instead of following the barely literate, victimhood attitudes of their fellow groids and homeboys.

I cannot believe that the fat, racist horses ass Bragg can actually do the things he’s doing AND get away with it! I had more faith in the “best criminal justice system in the world” and I believed that the “checks and balances” were real….stupid me. I long ago pushed back against the bullshit excuse that we had the best criminal justice system in the world. It is the most self-serving criminal justice system in the world. It is the most ineffective criminal justice system in the world or close to the worst when you look at the recidivism rate. It is an extremely corrupt system, as most institutions are when they seek to serve themselves and their own self-interests, as evidenced by the amount of illegal drugs and other prohibited contraband that somehow finds its way into even our most “secure” prisons, the Supermax’s. If we can’t keep drug’s out of a Super-Max prison then we damn sure ain’t keeping them out of the country. When the most “secure” facility that’s under 24 hour video, audio and human surveillance can’t keep drugs from getting inside then people are fooling themselves that it could ever be “controlled” on the outside.

We’ve survived almost 250 years of “white rule” since our country was founded by, built by, governed by and “designed” for whites. This “experiment in democracy” as deTocqueville would refer to us has had its rough spots and unexpected twists and turns but our leaders at the time were able to affect policies which straightened things out and those policies and actions are the foundation of everything we have today, for good or for bad.

Unfortunately once we started electing negroes that didn’t care about our country other than what our country could give them, or in the absence of having everything given to them, what they can steal has created generations of gimme-dats that contribute nothing to society but they copiously breed more welfare rats….creating more generational welfare rats. Dipshits like that triple-chinned chubbyfuck Bragg proves that even if they take exploit white-guilt by availing themselves of every shortcut that affirmative action gives them and they use their RACE as their qualifying factor instead of their competence or intelligence….even then….even after they’ve attained the position like Bragg….even when the world is watching…and even though he has an oath and obligation he’s a prime example of how being black exempts him from the responsibility of the job and since he’s black he doesn’t have to follow the law he’s sworn to uphold and the restrictions that restrain everyone that is not black don’t apply to him….statute of limitations doesn’t apply to whites, only blacks can benefit from the those limitations. If you’re black you have the right to defend yourself….if you’re black you have the right to verbally assault other’s, make threats, scream racial slurs and basically act like a rabid monkey and since you’re black you should be allowed to do those things without interference….especially interference (self defense) from whitey.

Almost 250 years of whites founding, building and governing this country will be destroyed in a few short years if blacks get much more power. They’re incapable of governing a T-ball team let alone the best country in the world with the strongest military but there’s no shortage of dipshits that’ll happily vote against themselves and their children’s futures by electing negroes.

Man, just when i think we may be somewhat closer to agreeing to anything, you out do yourself. Lol, dumbass isnt strong enough of a word

Damn brother, once again you are spot on!

I've met a lot of marines, 90% were dumbphucks. If you're on the subway in NY, you are a dumbphuck..

Doubt he did anything wrong, besides putting himself in a terrible situation, but he'll probably do time.

Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. If he previously punched an old woman in the face he could have potentially killed her. Although the marine did not know this it supports his intuition that this guy was a dangerous threat to vulnerable people. He was in fact a danger to others and had proven it before. NYC should be liable for not having the deceased in lock up or treatment. If they are going to leave the policing to amateurs the should anticipate some incidences such as this.

We had a Hispanic cop in Idaho Falls wrongly shoot an innocent unarmed white man in his own backyard a few years ago. He was sentenced to do 100 hour of firearms training. He was pursuing someone trying to evade him on foot when he saw someone else in a similar colored shirt unarmed in his own backyard and opened fire. Lucky for the officer the guy he murdered was white so no one made a big deal in the media.

I didn't have much faith in the legal system anymore but now I have almost none. It is political and a respecter or of persons. Soon people will start to realize the only justice they'll get is what they serve up themselves and then we'll have a real mess. The only thing that keeps some of us from vigilante is our belief in God and the hope he'll settle the score in the next life. If I was atheist I'd have a hard time not wanting to settle some scores.

Bb

"The fact that the criminal died doesn't necessarily mean you must establish the grounds for a lethal force justification. A lethal force justification is only necessary if the defender took action that a reasonable person would have expected to be highly likely to result in death. I guarantee that Penny didn't anticipate his actions would result in death, and nor would a reasonable person in his shoes have so believed.

That being the case, the justification defense only needs in this case to assert justification for restraining someone who is reasonably believed to be a danger to the safety and well-being of the passengers in the subway car. A lunatic behaving erratically and making credible threats in a space where his potential victims are trapped in with him qualifies. Therefore there is no need to make a justification for lethal force defense argument. The criminal's death was not an anticipated result of Penny's actions. His purpose was restraint."

Do you have a basic understanding of manslaughter? It is a charge for negligently causing the death of another. Do you know what the elements of negligence are which the prosecutor will have to establish? If so, then you will recognize the need to focus in on the third element and its two subparts. The first sentence of your second para quoted above is what brought Penny and the vic together while the last two sentencers of the second para above are what will cook his goose. Work that out for us then, counselor.

"If you White, and you on the subway, what are you thinking?"

- Hodge Twins

As I thought.

The first thing is to find out what really killed him.
Autopsy results first

Your analysis goes out the window once justification for physical restraint is established. Your analysis would be fine if Penny said to someone he was talking to on the subway, "Hey, let me show you a choke hold I learned in the Marines, it's really cool," and then proceeded without permission to demonstrate it on him, causing his death. Different situation, since there was no justification for any sort of restraint there.

Acting insane, getting agitated, and threatening folks trapped with you on a subway car, justifies anyone around you to physically restrain you till the police can arrive. No ordinary citizen coming to the aid of the public at that point in restraining a lunatic under those circumstances is held to a perfection standard, where he is required to perfectly thread the needle between harmless restraint and injury or death, so long as no reasonable person would have anticipated death a likely outcome from that action.

Too bad that's not what happened. You could make the case that someone who puts himself in the position of restraining crazy people on subways with chokeholds is negligent if he doesn' have enough training to know how to do it without killing someone but does it anyway.

That was the intention. Negligence isn't defined as coming short of perfection in an emergency circumstance where you were forced to take action for the safety of those around you.

I edited my post and whether that was a real emergency or just another crazy person ranting on the subway is not for you to decide. That's the jury's job.

Shouldn't even go to trial.

Yes, as a matter of fact, I did note that you didn't or couldn't answer any of the many questions I asked.

Fundamentally things like this are simple. You measure the letter of the law against the facts of the case. The facts, as we understand them at this point, are limited and likely sketchy, because media reports in the early going are notoriously bad, but it's interesting to roll with what we have.

I'll bet 95% of our armchair QBs haven't even read NYs self defense laws.

https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/penal-law/pen-sect-35-15.html

As always that standard of "reasonableness" is at play, and that will surely vary in interpretation from one person to the next and one geographical location to the next. That is something that all of us need to be mindful of.

A few of the basic legal questions.

Did the deceased threaten anyone?

If so, how?

Did it appear that the deceased had the ability or capacity to successfully carry out that threat?

Would a reasonable person under those circumstances believe that the "imminent use of unlawful physical force" was forthcoming?

If so, what is a reasonable response in defense? Note that the law does not allow the use of deadly force in this circumstance. Choking someone is widely understood to be deadly force, and that's why many agencies no longer allow officers to use chokes unless the believe they are in imminent danger of grave bodily injury or death.

Would a reasonable person in similar circumstances believe that they were in imminent danger of grave bodily injury or death under the circumstances that Penny found himself in? If so why?

Yes, a reasonable person on the train with him would have felt threatened by him.

Break away from the typical TRH emotional response. Look up the NY self defense law. Using the exact language of the law, start measuring Penny's actions against the language of the law.

Us conservatives can engage in embarrassingly emotional responses to incidents like this rather than using a logical approach rooted in the law.

that's kinda thin on justification, but let's roll with it. What was the perceived threat?

The legal question comes down to what they reasonably believed was forthcoming from the deceased. It's not about their feelings, it's about their beliefs. The word feel, and its derivatives are typically avoided in legal language, and there's a reason for that.

"imminent use of unlawful physical force"

or

"deadly physical force"

Language plucked straight from NY code.

Once you select one of those, then you plug in what kind of physical force is legally permissible under NY law. Which one of the two is it for you and why?

If your elderly mother were on that train car with you, Paul, would it have occurred to you that she was in imminent danger of harm?

Remember, you're all trapped in the same car with an animated, agitated, threatening, lunatic.

Just stop it bro. The FACTS of THIS case measured against NY LAW. Don't throw in a hypothetical that is unrelated to this case.

Says Paul libtard

You a soros puppet too ?

That is hilarious. The person using a logical, fact based approach is called a liberal. The ones running on emotion are the true conservatives. Love that you walked right into that one. lololololololol

There's a reason the simple legal questions are being dodged here.

This^^^^

Staying clear of a Democrat run city is a good idea, if you can. I worked in one. I knew when I crossed from my residence, which was very conservative, into that one, that interpretation of "reasonable" changed too.

That's just your opinion, which doesn't count for much since you weren't there that day, I hope you know that. And I hope you know that if you lived in NYC and commuted on the subway every day, your opinion would most likely be different because a crazy person ranting would not be something you'd never seen before. What happens if the prosecution puts some witnesses on the stand who say "oh yeah, we knew him, saw him every day. He always said crazy stuff but never hurt anybody and we never felt threatened."

You think you have all the answers but let me ask you a simple yes or no question. Remember, it's "yes" or "no."

If you were seated on this jury, do you think you'd learn things about New York law and/or the circumstances on the subway that day that are currently unknown to you?

Yes or no?

The problem with your analysis is that you are wrongly applying lethal force justification standards when that's not appropriate given the facts of the case. The fact that death resulted doesn't automatically mean that a lethal force justification is required, as the defender had no reasonable expectation that his actions would result in death, nor did he possess the intention to cause permanent harm, but rather merely to subdue (i.e., bring under control by force) the dangerous lunatic.

The defense should pray that that happens, because that opens the door wide for entering into the record his violent criminal past.

No it doesn't.

Didn't think so.

If nutjob's prior arrest record can't be mentioned if Penny didn't know of it, how can his other prior behavior be mentioned if Penny didn't know of it?

For the love of God, you are dense. I haven’t analyzed anything. I am asking you to. You still haven’t analyzed the deceased's actions against the wording of New York’s. Self defense laws. You are dodging using the language of the law for a reason, as you always do in these conversations. We both know why you are.

It certainly does. Once a prosecution witness claims on the stand that the deceased was harmless, the door becomes wide open for the introduction of facts and testimony in rebuttal.

Only in rebuttal to prosecution witness testimony to the contrary.

No it doesn't Perry Mason. The deceased's criminal record is irrelevant and prejudicial, and a judge will rule on that, not you.

What other people would have done in that situation is very relevant, because what a reasonable person would have done is central to the case.


Now, are you going to answer my simple yes/no question?

I'm afraid you know not of what you speak.

Those were prior situations, not this situation.

Don't be afraid. I'm certain you don't. And why won't you answer my question, Perry?

Defense may always introduce evidence or testimony to rebut testimony offered by a prosecution witness with regard to an assertion that (were it not rebutted) would be harmful to the defense.

He won’t answer anyones question. This isn’t about the law and facts, it’s about feelings and emotion.

Not if the judge rules that it's irrelevant and prejudicial. The point being, all of the things you're so certain of will be ruled on by a judge and anyone who thinks they know the facts of the case that the judge will rule on, and how the judge will rule just from the accounts reported in the media is a fool.

It's quite relevant, since the hypothetical you offered involved inculpatory testimony on the part of a prosecution witness.

Defense fund is up to $300,000

Evidently the Holiday Inn has been busy the last few nights. "I'm not an Attorney, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night..."

I read somewhere that it was up to $1M?

Glad he will have good lawyers, this will be a complex case.

Once again, a judge will rule on that, based on New York law and the legal arguments presented by both sides.

Both of which you're ignorant of

If Hawkeye is a reflection of how Americans look at the law then it’s abysmal how bad the education system has become. The guy can’t even follow the basic story.it’s about negligence you dipwad. I’ll even spell it out: duty, breach, causation (legal and proximate), and damages. If you want to play lawyer start there.

You read that on this thread. I, too, am glad he is getting the best lawyers because he needs them. It looks like to me he is guilty of manslaughter.

The rules of evidence in criminal cases are fairly consistent across the country. Prosecution witness testimony that Neely was known to be harmless and peaceful would be subject to rebuttal, on the part of the defense, by evidence and testimony to the contrary. Which is why the prosecution would never introduce a witness to testify to Neely's reputation for peacefulness and harmlessness, i.e., to prevent such rebuttal evidence from coming in.

What are the odds that a white man has a confrontation with a (random) black man on the subway,
and the black man is a career criminal w/40+ arrests?
Has to be astounding !!

Our resident Nancy Grace is on this one!

Your duty to a lunatic who's placing others in reasonable fear of harm is limited to not taking actions that a reasonable person would anticipate were likely to result in serious harm or death. Unless you are asserting that Penny meant to cause serious harm or death, he met his very limited duty to Neely, thus no negligence. Penny didn't start his day with the intention of finding someone to place a choke hold on. He was forced by circumstances into a situation where someone required restraint, and a choke hold was how he knew to accomplish that.

Have you ever used public transit in a major metro area? If you choked everyone that was acting weird and talking gibberish to death, you could fill a stadium with the dead bodies.

A choke hold is deadly force.

In your words, "reasonable fear of harm" isn't grounds for using deadly force under NY law. Look it up!

Urban cleanup action plan.

It's a technique practiced in Judo schools the world over. Death resulting from it is rare in the extreme.

Not necessarily.

What about when it's applied for 2 minutes and 55 seconds?

Many, if not most, LEAs have prohibited the use of choke holds unless deadly force is authorized.

How long do those judo schools, the world over, tell you that you should restrict blood and oxygen to the brain when applying the hold? What is the name of the hold that Penny used?

I predict both of those questions will be dodged.

They will be dodged because they have no bearing on the case. The questions are, (a) did Penny feel he or others were threatened? and, (b) did he restrain Neely with the intent to kill him.
The choke was improperly applied and, therefor, ineffective. Penny's lack of expertise resulted in the death. He is no hero but he is also not a criminal. GD

Knew or should have known is the key here. What did the Vic do that required another to put his hands on him?

Dude, you are slow on the uptake. He was acting weird and saying weird things. If your great aunt had been on the subway, she would have felt afraid.

No.

A lateral vascular restraint, where the sides of the neck are compressed to cut off blood flow, is the judo technique.

A choke hold, where the trachea is compressed, is more of a jui jitsu technique, as it can have permanent effects.

Don't know if the Marine was trained poorly, or if, in the heat of combat, it was done poorly.

(a) is flat out wrong. Neither the word feel or its derivatives appear in the language of the law. There is a reason for that. Would you care to take a look at the law and try again?

To force civilized society to its knees, the state propaganda corps crams perverted narratives down naive folks’ throats reminding them that if they stand up for order against the flood of chaos they’ll be canceled and possibly sent to prison.

Naive folks who take the state propaganda corps at face value are useful idiots.

If only Bigsqueeze would weigh in on this. Lol

Thanks for sharing your feelings. lololol

What propaganda, we're talking about New York law here. Who is quoting or relying on "propaganda?"

The thing about the law is, it doesn't always align with what's fair or just in every case.

You can lead a horse to water you can’t make it drink.

So true.

Where did you hear he compressed the trachea? What I observed him administering was a rear naked choke, which cuts off blood flow to the brain.

The choke is commonly called a figure 4.

The elbow is located too short of the "chokee's" midline to be effective as a vascular compression.

In addition, a properly applied vascular compression would not have the "choker's" hand applying forward pressure behind the head.

Now acting weird and saying weird stuff is reason to put your hands on someone? I’m slow on the uptake? Uh-huh…

You must have missed my previous posts. If you had read them, you'd know that my tongue was in my cheek when I was typing that.

Too often.

When you have someone in a choke hold you have an on off switch to their life. Keep it on, and they die.

Sorry

Someone has to make the judgement calling and that is nothing but a feeling. Replace "feel" with "think" if it makes you "feel" better. It certainly is not a call which can be made by anyone not there. If he goes to trial, I imagine the jurors feelings might well enter into it as well. GD

Probably hard to pull off with a combative adult, but when properly applied is happens quick. I’m no doctor, but pretty sure it’s something like 15 seconds with no blood to the brain can be fatal. I can say that the choke will make a man pass out in just a few seconds if it’s properly applied.


This is correct. Its not an air choke, per se, and it meant to block blood to the brain by blockading the carotid arteries sensing blood to the brain. That’s not to say that when you apply the choke, you may not end up air choking instead of blocking blood flow.

Hopefully the million dollar lawyers will make easy work of this I can’t imagine fughin NYC crackhead career criminal threatening citizens on a train car and “several people” stepping up to help out then trying to crucify the one guy!

Reasonable belief is the operative word. Belief is stronger than feeling.

Why do so many of you yo-yos fail utterly to understand the standard needed to do what Penny did? Did Neely physically threaten anyone or otherwise attempt to seriously hurt or kill them? Were any of his words of a nature where he indicated he planned to do harm to someone right at that moment? Listen up tribe: when you put your hands on someone you are responsible for what happens to them as a result of putting your hands on them regardless of whether you intended a particular outcome. That's why if you do something to someone where a reasonable person knew or should have known a certain outcome was a possibility and that possibility came to pass you can be held responsible for the damage to the person you laid hands on.

Look back through this thread and so many of you seem more focused on the labels placed upon these people as a way to take sides: Homeless nutter guy. US Marine. Since none of us was actually on the subway it is merely an exercise in conjecture, but it is clear very few of you understand anything about the law. Here is an old test taking tip from law school: IRAC which means spot the correct legal issue, cite the correct rule of law, apply facts of the case to the rule, and draw a legal conclusion. So, for some of the birdbrains here the legal issue is whether Penny had a legal right to engage Neely, the rule of law is the NY manslaughter statute, apply the known facts of the case to the rule, and draw a legal conclusion. That, by the way, is what the jury will do. Change the facts a little and I bet a lot of you would change your conclusion; what if your son or daughter had the same history and mental profile as Neely and someone like Penny stepped in and did what he did. Would you still be cheering for Penny or would you at least be asking for the legal system to take hold and run its course?

But what if people like TRH were scared, because he was acting and talking weird? Could they legally accidentally choke him to death? If you had been paying attention, you’d know this is about feelings, not facts.

What is about feelings? Feelings are emotions. The law is based upon rational thought.

Do you practice civil or criminal cases?

How many criminal trials over the years have you participated in?

Have you ever went to trial on a manslaughter or homicide charge? Were you successful in your defense?


Has the cause of death been determined yet? Are coroners' reports used as evidence in homicide trials? Its well established that Neely was a drug addict his entire adult life. Can decades of hard drug use cause death?


Did you witness the altercation?


Did Neely assault Penny before the incident?

Do we know yet?



In 2021, Neely socked a 67-year-old woman as she exited the Bowery station in the East Village in Lower Manhattan.

The woman sustained a broken nose, a fractured orbital bone, and "bruising, swelling and substantial pain to the back of her head" in the Nov. 12 attack, according to a criminal complaint.

In June 2019, Neely attacked Filemon Castillo Baltazar, 68, on the platform of the W. 4th St. Station in Greenwich Village, according to the court papers.

"Out of nowhere, he punched me in the face," the victim told the New York Daily News. He said he'd seen Neely before looking for food in the trash bins.

One month prior, he hit a man so hard in the face that he broke his nose on the platform of the Broadway-Lafayette station – the same subway stop where he died four years later.



But before Neely’s death, from March 2020 until early April, 27 people lost their lives to murder in the subway




We know the guy has over 40 arrests, many for assault on the subway,( Im sure these were all wrongful arrests and you can sue NYPD for abusing their authority arresting a poor innocent black man again without cause)



So you've already tried the case before a complete investigation is completed? Is that how law is practiced these days? We all know how corrupt and politicized our legal system is these days especially in the New York court system

You just brought up a case from 2021 as if it had anything to do with whether or not Penny’s actions were just. Try to stay focused Sparky.

Paul you were a criminal investigator for 20 years. How many felony arrests have you made in your career? How times have you appeared before a grand jury, or Judge to secure an arrest or search warrant? How many times have you testified in trial in state or federal court? How many affidavits have you authored ?

You've tried this case before a compete investigation is completed? not surprised, were you that sloppy in your job?

Was virtue signaling part of the criminal investigative process?


lol

. Focus on the matter at hand Toots.

Paul, Did you ever testify in a trial or at least in a state of federal GJ in your 20 years of criminal investigations ? A typical law enforcement officer will appear, testify in court, grand jury dozens of times a year. So you must have over 200 appearances Im guessing?

Did you even carry a firearm in your line of serious criminal investigations ?


lol

If only Neely would have had access to some of that 'white privilege', then maybe, just maybe he wouldn't have acted as he did the past 4-5 years, thus getting himself into situations like this.

Unbelievable

Or in simpler words, the marine should not have killed an unarmed nutjob who just flapped his jaws with general threats and attacked noone with a weapon. Or so it appears. If he is vindicated then everytime some assjack yells across the street at you "i'm gonna cap yo white ass mudda [bleep]" then you can just draw and smoke him! Or jump on him and crush his trachea.

A key factor in the case at hand was that of being confined together in a tight space with someone appearing insane while making credible and imminent threats, combined with body language and statements indicating potentially violent mental instability. The element of being confined with him in a tight space is key, and quite different than someone across the street acting crazy and indicating violent intentions.

So I take it you never appeared in court to defend at least a felony assault case?

Can you provide a cause of death yet?


As attorney you're lecturing everyone on here that there was no justification for subduing the assailant before the investigation is finished?


No wonder no one respects attorneys

Lol

Where in the coroner's report does it state his trachea was crushed.

Do you even know how difficult it is to crush someone's trachea?

jfc. 24 campfire clown world

[quote=ribka]Where in the coroner's report does it state his trachea was crushed.

Do you even know how difficult it is to crush someone's trachea?

jfc. 24 campfire clown world



figure of speech. choke him until he suffocates or cut off blood flow to brain until his brain dies. or use a baton to choke him. Keep in mind marines are trained to kill people in hand to hand.

You now have evidence of imminent threats of grievous bodily injury or death? Can you link us to those so we can see?

I’m not lecturing anyone you mouthbreather. I’m giving the framework for the legal analysis of the case which seems to have flown right over you. It’s ironic that so many can act as lawyer and decide the case but when someone with credible knowledge speaks you then hide behind an argument from authority where apparently only felony trial attorneys can now speak about this? Is stupid your regular mindset or is it just Monday? Go back to breaking rocks.

Based on video no longer available, the nutjob was indeed behaving in a threatening manner to include words and body language that would, taken in totality (to include the confined space everyone there was trapped in with him), put the ordinary prudent person in fear of imminent harm, thus justifying use of sufficient force to restrain him.

To make a decision, both would be needed

Plus the little fact that he has 'priors' where he DID cause harm harm to others with out provocation.

What your missing is the fact that this wasnt just some ordinary dude yelling at someone. This is a life long criminal who shouldnt have been in society in the first place. Huge history of violence and according to witnesses, was making violent threats. There is a reason the marine wasnt the only one involved. Remember, a black man was helping him. Once again, stay away from demonrat run cities. They arent america. They are 3rd world chitholes designed to ruin your life

Exactly. This absolutely comes into play.

Yup. I saw videos early on. They have been magically scrubbed from the internet now. So convenient. Witnesses stated he was threatening folks with violence.

Reading posts in here are fuggin sad. No wonder America has become so bad. The demonrats are doing it on purpose and they have so called conservatives rolling right along with it. F ucks sakes guys, some of you are apart of the problem

I don't know about you guys but I saw a restraint and not a choke hold. But, using the word restraint isn't inflammatory enough for the political left. Like George Floyd, a mentally ill and physically compromised person dies. Now it's a homicide but in reality, it was a suicide.

kwg

Nope. The law will care about that snapshot moment as it relates to Penny and his actions. If it is determined that Penny acted reasonably in engaging Neely that benefits his defense. However, if a fact finder determines that Penny, under a reasonably person standard, knew or should have known that the chokehold he employed could have resulted in Neely’sdeath that will not favor him and a conviction under the charge at be warranted.

So 44 counts of violence and charges will not matter at all to a jury? What about if a convicted pedo was out and got caught threatening to kidnap a child from a school. Would his history be valid?

Same here. The original video looked just like a restraint to me

The fact that it might matter to a jury is the reason the prosecution will move to exclude it.

"Nope. The law will care about that snapshot moment as it relates to Penny and his actions. If it is determined that Penny acted reasonably in engaging Neely that benefits his defense. However, if a fact finder determines that Penny, under a reasonably person standard, knew or should have known that the chokehold he employed could have resulted in Neely’sdeath that will not favor him and a conviction under the charge at be warranted."

I am with you as much as I detest these street rats. I think the marine made a huge mistake doing what he did and in NYC of all places. If he had been a jeweler on his way home just trying to be a good samaritan and did what he had seen in the movies then maybe the death could be considered accidental. But the marine was a marine! I was taught to pick my time and place for battle.

Unfortunately that will have no bearing since the victim’s character is not at issue. Try following along ok? What did Penny perceive which led him to engage Neely as measured by a reasonable person standard.

Where he got caught and processed. It's likely that less than 10% of the time was he identified and captured by police for hauling off and punching random old ladies square in the face.

Well put. Sucks but I get it

Our society is sick, very sick. The way the law is written in many of these chitholes is the reason there are so many criminals out in the streets. I hate to say it, but things are going to have to get real uncomfortable for some to right these wrongs. Once again, avoid these areas if possible

Like I said elsewhere, the FA/FO balance is out of whack. As things stand, people are allowed to FA far too much before it's acceptable for them to FO the hard way.

You are onto something here. Maybe this is how the guy ended up choked to death since our resident experts say he was held in a restraint. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/VoeLx9USoJQ

I'm so cynical these days I actually had the thought what if the former marine is an undercover fed and this whole thing was set up for as another wag the dog event.

If guys like Bragg had done their job in the past the street guy would be in a psych hospital getting treatment instead of on a slab. The guy needed committed for treatment.

Bb