Thoughts on the good samaritan on the NY subway charged with 2nd degree manslaughter (which I think carries up to 10 years).

I felt early on it was for a jury to decide. I'm not sure why it was necessary to continue to apply that much pressure, thinking [maybe?] he'll just pass out and that's not risky.  Also, with his training he SHOULD know better.

Another interesting point I saw was no one helping him has been charged, which does make this look politically motivated to appease the usual BLM idiots.

I do think this could have a chilling effect on people's willingness to intervene. But I also don't think this guy should have died.

My take: All you need is a friendly(?) autopsy to find another cause of death.  And with that, you can't say he was actually choking and killing the guy because you can't really tell from a picture/video how tightly he's constraining.

Also, I can't help but think the recent surge in violence all over is going to heavily influence a jury in how they interpret and react to the threats this guy was making.  But, again, you have 3+ people controlling him at that point so how does he die?

Saw a couple videos where people were shouting “hey you re killing him he already pissed/shit himself he’s dead” and he continued to chick him. I’m on the fence in this one. I’m not sure I’ve seen difunitive video where anyone was actually in any danger that required this level of force. Surely when he passes out u could have released him or offer some aid. I was also curious as to why the people who were holding his arms weren’t charged. Jmog please don’t respond to my comment. I know you disagree and I’m 100 percent wrong. Let’s just get it out of the way now. 

I also think it’s fair to let the legal process play out. It’s so hard to say from snippets. If enough people testify that they felt in danger he could walk, if evidence shows he acted reasonably and another cause of death was to blame or it was an accident that couldn’t be avoided he could walk. If people testify he acted unreasonably and there was no danger or that he should have stopped them idk. I don’t think there is a hall ending here either way. Not sure this guy should be in a jail either. Idk it’s a tough one 

I thought there was a Good Samaritan clause or something for helping choking victims or those needing CPR?

He deserved what he got. He was breathing and fighting until he let go. Also a life long piece of shit. Maybe arrest these morons before it gets to this. Under the actual law, who knows. Either way the guy should do no time for what the government should have done.

posted by iclfan2

He deserved what he got. He was breathing and fighting until he let go. Also a life long piece of shit. Maybe arrest these morons before it gets to this. Under the actual law, who knows. Either way the guy should do no time for what the government should have done.

Very sophisticated response well done 

posted by geeblock

Very sophisticated response well done 

Coming from the best. They put him in a recovery position afterword.  People die everyday. Lots that aren’t pieces of shit and nothing happens. Let me guess why this case is different? Oh the blacks and white liberal women are big mad! It’s possible some people just get what they deserve..

Also possible to admit the liberal policies failed him. It’s pretty obvious why no one wants to live in cities.

Hilarious his shit family who didn’t give a fuck about him alive put out some gofundme’s

Shitty situation overall. Marine bro was probably very eager to lock that choke in. 

Details are spotty though. Was he only verbally assaulted? Physically? If he held him like that for 15 min, he's probably fucked. 

I see subway lunatics every time on on there, I'm aware and stay the fuck away.

i normally get a spicy italian but sometimes i audible and get turkey

There are lunatics everywhere they are just concentrated in the population centers.

Witness calls Neely a hero. I don’t like his chances if his case is tried in NYC. 

https://www.foxnews.com/us/witness-jordan-neely-chokehold-death-calls-daniel-penny-hero

posted by iclfan2

Witness calls Neely a hero. I don’t like his chances if his case is tried in NYC.

His conviction is far from a slam dunk, even in NYC (you need ALL 12 jurors), which is likely why the DA didn't bother charging anyone else.  Or maybe if the DA somehow wins a conviction they may then go after some of the others that assisted.

But at the end of the day, forget Neely's background because it likely wasn't known to Penny and still doesn't warrant dying....I think the verbal threats, at least in the current climate, would likely be enough to justify assaulting Neely, but once you have control you have to let the guy breathe.

I wait for more facts and the defense's autopsy rebuttal, but choking a guy to death is going to be tough to defend.  And maybe the DA is hoping to plea this down.  However, even in NY I think the potential for the defense to win via "jury nullification" is pretty real.

Maybe just don’t kill someone? Seems pretty easy to me. I’ve been on the subway in NYC and Chicago. Homeless everywhere, yelling, following. I’ve never thought to choke them out.

Self defense in public property is such a bullshit response. I’ve been in cities where protests happened and ARs, rifles, handguns and dudes wearing masks are marching and such — felt way more threatened by them than anyone has ever made me feel on a subway. Could I just open fire in those dudes and plead I was scared and they were threatening me?

posted by Laley23

Maybe just don’t kill someone? Seems pretty easy to me. I’ve been on the subway in NYC and Chicago. Homeless everywhere, yelling, following. I’ve never thought to choke them out.

I know you're not citing the "reasonable cop" standard, but I bring it up only because he's not held to that high of a standard, and other people on the subway felt threatened.  So his action was absolutely justified.

Killing the guy was not.  I said from the beginning it's for a jury to decide if his actions contributed to Neely's death.  Whether it's accidental or involuntary manslaughter remains to be seen.  Not sure of the specific charge, seems like one step above involuntary manslaughter.  Doubt the charge requires intent, but if it does there's no way they prove that.

My main point was this guy was yelling and making threats, but only had his person.

I’ve seen MANY people make threatening remarks during marches or whatever. And they are armed. Way more threatening. But you never see anyone whip out their own gun and shoot them in then fucking head and then claim they felt threatened and others around them did also. Even though they probably did, moreso than anyone on that subway.

posted by Laley23

My main point was this guy was yelling and making threats, but only had his person.

Again, was it reasonable for him to feel so threatened?  Other people who were there did, so I disagree with you in that regard.  That's the standard, not what you happened to feel in a completely different situation with different people.

Also, it's really not a difference just because you saw a weapon in those other situations.  Guy could easily have had a gun or knife concealed.  The standard is simply whether a reasonable person had cause to fear for their safety or others, and it's clear that is the case here.