NY - Jordan Neely, killed by chokehold in subway during mental health crisis, Manhattan, 1 May 2023 *arrest*

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #381
Income or the lack thereof, is rarely the reason people take the subway. Owning a vehicle is a detriment when you live in a large city. It's quicker than driving and much cheaper than maintaining a vehicle.

Agree with all of this 100%. Cars are expensive - not only to purchase & maintain, but due to a lot of other costs as well, i.e. registration/insurance/gas, etc. And, even if you have a car it's a lot simpler & less expensive to take the train/bus because you're saving a lot of money on gas, parking; limiting the wear & tear on the car (i.e., more driving will result in needing to get a new car faster); limiting the chances that the car will be damaged; etc.

So, again - people should be able to take the subway/public transportation without having concerns for their physical safety. I don't think that's too much to ask for.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #382
RSBM

It's been in nearly every MSM outlet that all 3 men who restrained him and numerous witnesses saw and heard Neely acting in a threatening manner. Penny didn't need to have any insight into Neely's past, he (and everyone around him) was watching him in real time, screaming about how he'd "kill all the MF'ers" and didn't care if he went jail, or died.

Neely WASN'T an innocent man, he was being intentionally threatening and these men reacted to that.
This, 100%

The innocent people were the ones who were simply going about their day, wanting nothing more than the ability to ride on public transportation without being threatened.
 
  • #383
This, 100%

The innocent people were the ones who were simply going about their day, wanting nothing more than the ability to ride on public transportation without being threatened.

So it has been established that he was threatening to kill the people on the train? Sorry, I genuinely don't know. I had seen that he was shouting that he was hungry, thirsty, and would kill the MF'ers, but that could have been anyone - drunk people talk like that a lot, but the object of their anger is often elsewhere. He threw his jacket - was that inherently dangerous, and if so, I wonder why?

I'm skeptical of a group of 3 guys taking such aggressive action, especially when we can see the small man thrashing for his life and people are asking them to stop. While the circumstances are different, it still gives shades of Ahmaud Arbery's murder where 3 "good guys" are so sure they are performing a civic duty. It could be that Mr. Penny was at the end of his own rope that day, lost it, and his friends enabled him.
 
  • #384
RSBM

It's been in nearly every MSM outlet that all 3 men who restrained him and numerous witnesses saw and heard Neely acting in a threatening manner. Penny didn't need to have any insight into Neely's past, he (and everyone around him) was watching him in real time, screaming about how he'd "kill all the MF'ers" and didn't care if he went jail, or died.

Neely WASN'T an innocent man, he was being intentionally threatening and these men reacted to that.

Respectfully disagree. Neely was obviously in some kind of medical (mental) distress. He didn't touch anyone. As physically threatening as he got was taking his jacket off and throwing on the ground.

Plus I wasn't referring to the people who were also in the subway car I was referring to the original poster who wrote that Penny didn't see Neely as an innocent man. Neely was verbally threatening but from what other passengers said, Neely was desperately agitated but did not engage or threaten anyone physically. Being scared of someone doesn't warrant a death penalty. Penny interpreted Neely's outburst as a clear and present danger which, IMO, was not . Plus I believe Penny's lawyers are putting words in his mouth based on other subway passengers statements.

I've witnessed mentally ill people who've had verbal outbursts whether on the street, in a mall or a subway many times. It's a side effect of living in a city. Living in a densely populated city can give residents a sixth sense as to what is dangerous and what is not. Are we right every time? Of course not, but my hinky meter is in excellent working order.

In my opinion, bullies and drunks are way more dangerous than some poor soul who has been marginalized because the general population sees them as an inconvenience. I've known two individuals who had schizophrenia, both of them behaved erratically, one stealing odd things and getting arrested. Both ranted about their delusions and acted in a frightening manner. It was scary to witness but the only people who were ever in danger were themselves and both were successful in ending their lives.
 
  • #385
It could be that Mr. Penny was at the end of his own rope that day, lost it, and his friends enabled him.

Just to clarify: We don't know that the two other men who helped DP restrain JN were his actual friends (that he knew before the incident & was on friendly terms with, etc.) - or, just two fellow subway passengers that didn't know him before this tragedy happened. I thought they were just two fellow subway passengers. Given that many people ride the subway alone (unless they're going to an event with others, commuting at the same time as other co-workers, etc.), then this would make sense to me. If I'm wrong here, please correct me.

Note that this is an important & significant distinction: I.e., if DP & these other two men were all buddies - it could be interpreted that all three "ganged up" on JN. However, if DP didn't know these two before-hand, then they were just two fellow subway passengers that got involved in trying to help restrain someone that was threatening others.

That being said, note that IMHO I don't think these other two knew the severity of the choke-hold that DP was using on JN - nor did they think that JN was going to die due to this choke-hold.
 
  • #386
I lived in Toronto for years, rode the subway twice a day. You are trapped in a tube, sitting next to people with BO, dealing with creepy males who press their privates against you while looking elsewhere; where you deal with amorous couples and people yell out "get a room!" And yes, there are people who are on your radar because of erratic behavior, bumping into people on purpose, yelling obscenities, planting themselves in front of the doors stopping people getting off just because they are pissed off at the world and feel helpless to change the trajectory of their lives.

You move away, don't make eye contact. When you live in large urban areas you adapt. That's the key. Not assigning yourself a hammer and treating all potential riders as a nail. I think that's what Daniel Penny did. He's been trained to assess threats. But if his perception was skewed then his response could be wildly off the mark.
Your whole reply was spot on! But wanted to snip this out. This has always been my behavior on the subways and on the streets or large urban areas, especially NYC. I don't know any New Yorkers who do not behave the same way.

I also think you are soon on with Penny being trained to see threats. But that was to survive in a war setting with the potential of anyone being an enemy. I will be very curious to see what the other passengers witnessed when it comes to trial and they are under oath, not just being anonymous sources. I would bet that a majority of the New Yorkers on the car did not feel in danger.
 
  • #387
Just to clarify: We don't know that the two other men who helped DP restrain JN were his actual friends (that he knew before the incident & was on friendly terms with, etc.) - or, just two fellow subway passengers that didn't know him before this tragedy happened. I thought they were just two fellow subway passengers. Given that many people ride the subway alone (unless they're going to an event with others, commuting at the same time as other co-workers, etc.), then this would make sense to me. If I'm wrong here, please correct me.

Note that this is an important & significant distinction: I.e., if DP & these other two men were all buddies - it could be interpreted that all three "ganged up" on JN. However, if DP didn't know these two before-hand, then they were just two fellow subway passengers that got involved in trying to help restrain someone that was threatening others.

That being said, note that IMHO I don't think these other two knew the severity of the choke-hold that DP was using on JN - nor did they think that JN was going to die due to this choke-hold.
This is a very good point, thank you. That is an assumption I came to just based on what I'd read, but I don't think there is any basis for it. It will be interesting to find out more about Mr. Penny and the other men.
 
  • #388
Every week there's drunken idiots all over the country that get in altercations because they lack impulse control. If every drunken idiot mouthed off to people in bars spewing threats why don't they get neutralized by someone? Is it just happenstance or serendipity that some random Marine isn't in the vicinity to stand up to them as a threat?

I would think that statistics would bear out that violent drunks leave a legacy of damage far more than mentally ill homeless people on subways. The reality is homeless people are demonized as threatening and disturbing while violent drunks are perceived as just temporarily out of their minds.

I find it disturbing that that your comment "He didn't attack an innocent man" suggests Penny was prescient as to Neely's history and there is no negotiation as to the response.
You make such a good point here. I have felt more threatened in bars or in party atmospheres than I have ever been while riding public transportation or walking in urban areas. This brings me back, I had forgotten how scary things would get when the big guy with egos got rebuffed or had their feelings hurt. I have seen many a bar fight in my day, never once seen a chokehold during one.
 
  • #389
RSBM

It's been in nearly every MSM outlet that all 3 men who restrained him and numerous witnesses saw and heard Neely acting in a threatening manner. Penny didn't need to have any insight into Neely's past, he (and everyone around him) was watching him in real time, screaming about how he'd "kill all the MF'ers" and didn't care if he went jail, or died.

Neely WASN'T an innocent man, he was being intentionally threatening and these men reacted to that.
Threatening, yelling, screaming, saying he doesn’t care about the death penalty = not innocent

Riding public transportation and minding your own business = innocent

JMO
 
  • #390
Income or the lack thereof, is rarely the reason people take the subway. Owning a vehicle is a detriment when you live in a large city. It's quicker than driving and much cheaper than maintaining a vehicle. High profile people take the subway all the time, like Keanu Reeves, Anderson Cooper and Sara Jessica Parker.

I have a friend who actually has a 2 car garage at their walk up in Union Square. You talk about money, this is money. They mainly use their cars to go to the Hamptons in the summer and their winter cabin in the winter. Otherwise they walk or use the subway. They would not dream to use their cars in the city.

Edited for spelling
 
  • #391
Which Mf’ers? Was he specifically saying he’d kill people on the train?

I am pretty sure no one could inspect the contents of his mind to know what he really meant. In an emergency situation, many a person has been harmed by deciding that they needed to "know more" about what a threatening person is actually doing. This is why some people go so far as to shoot people who are at their front door in the middle of the night (they are terrified and have no desire to wait for police or to have a through-the-door discussion with a person; they don't even want that person to know they are inside the house).

However, when assessing threats, do you usually interview the screaming, threatening person? I know that I don't. I have a pretty good sense of when someone ought not to be screaming and threatening. Enclosed public spaces where people are basically trapped (say, an Emergency Room or a subway car), well, it is a very different situation to it being inside a private domicile (where one would call the police and report a disturbance, rather than go over and try and subdue the threatening neighbor).

Are you saying that people on trains should be expected to know what is meant when a person is incoherently shouting threats? The risk of violence has gone up, just because the person is shouting and threatening. That's how some forms of violence begin.

I think the discussion is more about whether the citizen response can be expected to fall within legal and social norms. If LE had arrived, I suppose they wouldn't have been allowed to use a choke hold and would be expected to use a taser instead.

I don't think it's legal for NY citizens, though, to carry tasers. It's technically against the law (unlike 40 other states) for citizens to carry tasers, but from what I read, LE is no longer enforcing the rule for small tasers. However, I suspect that the marine would still have gotten a citation of some kind, had he instead used a taser.

Would it have worked? No clue. People have died from taser use too (rare). But it seems to me that if it's really this scary to ride public transport, and for obvious reasons, pepper spray can't be used, citizens should have some protection if the State can't provide it. Tasers of course have the ability to harm other people than the person aimed at - they are only as good as the person aiming them.

The fact that NY had to remove 1400-1500 homeless people living within the subway system in the past six months (I think that's the time period), is alarming. They were taken to shelters (most mentally ill homeless depart shelters almost immediately and schizophrenic people who are violent almost never stay - many reasons, but shelters cannot serve both the purpose of housing potentially dangerous people AND housing people who are homeless; it's not fair to the people who simply need a shelter). That's why we have mental health services. NY needs to think about its laws.

This man, with oustanding arrest warrants, likely should have been in a jail psychiatric ward, IMO. I don't understand why he wasn't there.

IMO.
 
  • #392
I can't believe people are trying to call that marine a hero. He executed someone in distress. He held him in a killing choke hold for 15 minutes. Think about how long that is. He did it with the help of two other people. Why didn't they just stop when he was down and subdued? He wasn't attacking anyone.

He was hungry, tired, at the end of his rope and yes he was yelling out in despair. Yes, I can imagine it was scary. But the marine guy took him out from behind, unprovoked. This was a murder, as far as I am concerned.

Anyone who argues in favor of summary execution because someone was being disorderly in a public space, I have to wonder what other kinds of extra judicial, vigilante justice they're in favor of.

We have people being killed or shot at for coming on to the wrong porch, or entering the wrong vehicle. And now this. Where is this paranoia and hate coming from?
I don't consider DP a hero, but you are mischaracterizing the events. Witnesses have stated that JN was making threats.

You're trying to turn JN into a victim even though he was the aggressor. We reap what we sow. In this case, the person who died brought it on himself. He posed a threat, and DP had a right to defend himself and others. He may have used too much force—that's for a jury to decide based on all of the facts—so I don't disagree with the criminal charges, but the claim that it was murder is absurd.

It is unfortunate that mental health isn't dealt with appropriately here in the U.S. JN's continuing issues were such that he should have been institutionalized or at least closely monitored, but he was more or less cast adrift. It has a lot to do with inadequate funding of public services.
 
  • #393
  • #394
This undated photo, provided by Mills & Edwards, LLP, in New York, Friday, May 12, 2023, shows Jordan Neely, left, with Carolyn Neely, an aunt.

This undated photo, shows Jordan Neely, left, with Carolyn Neely, an aunt.

Thomas Kenniff, a lawyer for Penny, said he didn’t mean to harm Neely and is dealing with the situation with the “integrity and honor that is characteristic of who he is and characteristic of his honorable service in the United States Marine Corps.”

Donte Mills, a lawyer for Neely’s family, disputed Penny’s version of events, saying the veteran “acted with indifference. He didn’t care about Jordan, he cared about himself. And we can’t let that stand.”

“Mr. Neely did not attack anyone.” Mills said at a news conference Friday. “He did not touch anyone. He did not hit anyone. But he was choked to death.”

“No one on that train asked Jordan: ‘What’s wrong, how can I help you?’” Mills said, urging New Yorkers in a similar situation: “Don’t attack. Don’t choke. Don’t kill. Don’t take someone’s life. Don’t take someone’s loved one from them because they’re in a bad place.”

Neely’s father, Andre Zachery, wept as another family lawyer, Lennon Edwards, recounted the last moments before Penny tackled Neely to the ground and put him in a chokehold.

Roger Abrams, a community health representative, said he saw Neely on the subway a week before his death. Neely was disheveled and told people he was hungry and in need of spare change. Abrams said he approached Neely and asked him why he no longer performs.

“I haven’t been feeling well,” Abrams remembered Neely saying.

A second-degree manslaughter conviction in New York requires a jury to find that a person engaged in reckless conduct that created an unjustifiable risk of death, consciously disregarded that risk and acted in a way that grossly deviated from how a reasonable person would act in a similar situation.
 
  • #395
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #396
Threatening, yelling, screaming, saying he doesn’t care about the death penalty = not innocent

Riding public transportation and minding your own business = innocent

JMO
Yelling and saying stupid stuff should not result in a death.
 
  • #397
I am pretty sure no one could inspect the contents of his mind to know what he really meant. In an emergency situation, many a person has been harmed by deciding that they needed to "know more" about what a threatening person is actually doing. This is why some people go so far as to shoot people who are at their front door in the middle of the night (they are terrified and have no desire to wait for police or to have a through-the-door discussion with a person; they don't even want that person to know they are inside the house).

However, when assessing threats, do you usually interview the screaming, threatening person? I know that I don't. I have a pretty good sense of when someone ought not to be screaming and threatening. Enclosed public spaces where people are basically trapped (say, an Emergency Room or a subway car), well, it is a very different situation to it being inside a private domicile (where one would call the police and report a disturbance, rather than go over and try and subdue the threatening neighbor).

Are you saying that people on trains should be expected to know what is meant when a person is incoherently shouting threats? The risk of violence has gone up, just because the person is shouting and threatening. That's how some forms of violence begin.

I think the discussion is more about whether the citizen response can be expected to fall within legal and social norms. If LE had arrived, I suppose they wouldn't have been allowed to use a choke hold and would be expected to use a taser instead.

I don't think it's legal for NY citizens, though, to carry tasers. It's technically against the law (unlike 40 other states) for citizens to carry tasers, but from what I read, LE is no longer enforcing the rule for small tasers. However, I suspect that the marine would still have gotten a citation of some kind, had he instead used a taser.

Would it have worked? No clue. People have died from taser use too (rare). But it seems to me that if it's really this scary to ride public transport, and for obvious reasons, pepper spray can't be used, citizens should have some protection if the State can't provide it. Tasers of course have the ability to harm other people than the person aimed at - they are only as good as the person aiming them.

The fact that NY had to remove 1400-1500 homeless people living within the subway system in the past six months (I think that's the time period), is alarming. They were taken to shelters (most mentally ill homeless depart shelters almost immediately and schizophrenic people who are violent almost never stay - many reasons, but shelters cannot serve both the purpose of housing potentially dangerous people AND housing people who are homeless; it's not fair to the people who simply need a shelter). That's why we have mental health services. NY needs to think about its laws.

This man, with oustanding arrest warrants, likely should have been in a jail psychiatric ward, IMO. I don't understand why he wasn't there.

IMO.
BBM. No, it was a two sentence post in which I asked a question because I don’t actually know whether he was threatening the people on the train or not, and maybe new info has come out about what he was up to that day.

I do know from experience around dysregulated people that they may be brooding over what folks at the SS office or human services or the police or the grocery store person may have said two hours ago, and their problem is generally not with me, so I don’t choke them from behind with the assumption that they’ll kill me.

I get wary around them and am prepared to defend myself and others if attacked, but I don’t consider myself entitled to just kill dysregulated people for yelling and throwing a jacket on the ground, especially if someone is telling me to stop with the choking and if there are 2 other capable people nearby to assist in detaining them until law enforcement can assist.
 
  • #398
However, when assessing threats, do you usually interview the screaming, threatening person? I know that I don't. I have a pretty good sense of when someone ought not to be screaming and threatening. Enclosed public spaces where people are basically trapped (say, an Emergency Room or a subway car), well, it is a very different situation to it being inside a private domicile (where one would call the police and report a disturbance, rather than go over and try and subdue the threatening neighbor).

Are you saying that people on trains should be expected to know what is meant when a person is incoherently shouting threats? The risk of violence has gone up, just because the person is shouting and threatening. That's how some forms of violence begin.

Exactly. There is a difference between someone you don't know knocking on your front door (whether it's during the day or the middle of the night) and someone acting threatening/belligerent in a subway car - where you're effectively stuck until your stop; as previously mentioned, this issue could hold true even if you go to another car, etc.

I posted a while back on the recent horrific tragedy in which an elderly man shot & seriously injured a young man he didn't know who was knocking on his door (it was the wrong address). And, I mentioned that in cases like this - all of us have the option to not open the door & ignore the person, and eventually they may get the picture and leave (that's been the ultimate outcome with me). I.e., when you're in the safety of your own home with a wooden/metal door between you & someone unknown, you're typically not in immediate danger. Going along with this, you can obviously call the authorities if you feel the person is a threat & is trying to break into the home. Also - if they are actively trying to break your door down and/or get into the house via another way - yes, it's evident that you definitely hae a justifiable concern for your safety.

However - IMHO if you're on a subway car/movie theater, etc. (i.e., an enclosed space) with someone acting belligerent/making threatening comments/etc. - IMHO the danger to you & others is more immediate. To a different extent, you're also exposed when you're in a not-so-enclosed public space with other people, i.e. a mall/shopping center/etc. Just look at what's been happening all over the country with all of this mass violence in public places.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #399
BBM. No, it was a two sentence post in which I asked a question because I don’t actually know whether he was threatening the people on the train or not, and maybe new info has come out about what he was up to that day.

I do know from experience around dysregulated people that they may be brooding over what folks at the SS office or human services or the police or the grocery store person may have said two hours ago, and their problem is generally not with me, so I don’t choke them from behind with the assumption that they’ll kill me.

I get wary around them and am prepared to defend myself and others if attacked, but I don’t consider myself entitled to just kill dysregulated people for yelling and throwing a jacket on the ground, especially if someone is telling me to stop with the choking and if there are 2 other capable people nearby to assist in detaining them until law enforcement can assist.
Agreed. While we don't know all the details yet, the impression that I get - even from Daniel Penny's own account and the elderly woman who thanked him (the 2 that are the most charitable to DP; other accounts are far less charitable) - is that he was screaming into the void, not targeting anyone, and not making serious, actionable threats of any sort of specificity.

In the end, it will all depend on the totality of witness statements. But there need to be limits to when and how a "good samaritan" can intervene with deadly force.

imo
 
  • #400
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
106
Guests online
2,511
Total visitors
2,617

Forum statistics

Threads
632,867
Messages
18,632,831
Members
243,316
Latest member
Sfebruary
Back
Top