Daniel Penny’s defense fund over $1M after manslaughter charge in Jordan Neely subway death

JMDZ, waiting until he produces a weapon is too late, unless the women is as fast on the draw as an Old West sheriff. Ditto for grabbing. I am only slightly exaggerating here. Women walk around fearful a good part of their life. Much of the time it's entirely reasonable and justified.

Trying to quantify "reasonable fear," is ludicrous. If you don't think being harassed by a man following you in close proximity down a dark street doesn't qualify as "reasonable fear," I must respectfully disagree.

 

Armaud Aubrey
Garret Foster
George Floyd
Trayvon Martin
Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber

All their deaths shrugged by the the right wing of this nation as their killers were hugged. Why?

What do they have in common? Right wingers think they were all “thugs” who got what they deserved. Street justice from a white guy.

 

Are you sure you aren't talking about Trayvon Martin?

 

If you are suggesting that is enough to use deadly force, we definitely disagree.

 

I found this in reviewing NY's jury instructions. NY allows their judges more freedom in adapting their standard instructions to specific situations than Florida does. This is a footnote in their instructions advising the judges of the law to assist them in formulating an instruction:

"For context, a brief discussion of the law related to the victim’s prior violent conduct and
his alcohol/drug use follows. Although proof of the victim’s prior violent conduct is not admissible
in New York to prove that he may have been the initial aggressor, the defense may introduce
evidence of the victim’s prior violent acts or reputation for violence when the defendant knew about
them at the time of the incident, as material evidence relevant to the reasonableness of the
defendant’s fear of the victim. See, e.g., People v. Miller, 39 N.Y.2d 543 (1976). Evidence of the
victim’s recent alcohol or drug use is admissible and relevant to a justification defense when there
is proof of some irrational behavior consistent with its use, even if the defendant is unaware of the
victim’s use of the drugs or alcohol, because a person acting under the influence of drugs or
alcohol may be perceived as acting more dangerously. See People v. Frazier, 6 A.D.3d 455 (2d
Dept.2004).

Here is the instruction when a victim made threats against the defendant, but the defendant was unaware of them:

[where applicable, prior threats against the defendant] Evidence was
presented that the victim made prior threats against the defendant. You
may consider any such prior threats, regardless of whether the defendant
knew about them, in determining whether the victim was the initial
aggressor.

So, the only time the victim's prior violent acts comes in when the defendant was unaware of them was when the victim made specific threats against the defendant and then only to show the victim was the initial aggressor. Obviously there is no evidence Neely had made prior threats directed to Penny.
Florida's evidence code is slightly different. It would allow Neely prior violence to come in regardless of knowledge, but only to show Neely was the first aggressor, not not to show propensity to commit violent acts.

The prior acts of violence are not coming in.

 

Well, mostly I'm expanding the logic of the Neely supporters, regarding preemptive defense. I agree it's not enough to employ deadly force; on the other hand, waiting until potential assault becomes actual assault doesn't sit quite right, either. Isn't this what the "stand your ground," law is about?

 

Smart! I you’re afraid kill ‘em. Kill ‘em all. If you’re a coward you can do it.

 

Stand Your Ground technically only eliminates the common law duty to retreat. Under common law, before you could use deadly force against another, you had an absolute duty to retreat if you could do so safely. That was modified by the Castle Doctrine which eliminated the duty to retreat in your home. SYG extends that to everywhere. It does not allow you to use deadly force against lesser threat levels, there still must be adequate provocation, it just allows you to blast away at the road rage incident without driving off if your soon to be dead guy created adequate provocation.

Florida mucked up our SYG law by combining it with elements from our justifiable use of force statute.

New York is NOT a SYG state, they follow the common law rule with the Castle Doctrine.

BTW, I didn't mean to suggest you had to let your hypothetical sex bat case go that far, I was giving examples where the use of deadly force was pretty clearly authorized.

I will also say when I worked at the State Attorney's Office in Hillsborough we tended to give citizens/homeowners the benefit of the doubt in close calls. It's easy to play Monday morning QB when you're not the one in that kind of a situation.

 

What?

 

Wut yourself. Read what you wrote, don’t wait. Kill ‘em. Just to be sure…

 

Rosenbaum molested pre teen boys; 5 of them. Spare me the sob story for that guy.

 

Trayvon Martin actually has a similar fact pattern though not as favorable to Zimmerman as to Rittenhouse.

But similar in that Zimmerman shouldn’t have been there, the situation escalated, but it wasn’t murder, it was self defense. Doesn’t mean Martin was wrong to be wary of this weird guy following him, but once it became a ground game fight with a gun and two guys reaching for a gun it was a matter of one person or the other. That’s not murder.

That’s a completely avoidable situation escalating.

 

Come on now. That is not what I said at all. I do believe though is that woman walking down the street getting verbally accosted should be prepared. If it is my wife or daughter, I would want them to be ready. Perhaps hand on their CCW, if he gets into their personal space then all I am concerned about is their safety and if the low life loses his so be it. This Neely guy was listed as 1 of the 50 worst homeless people in NY. This guy was an obvious menace, and I don't understand why some of you are running to his defense.

 

Sorry for having an opinion that you don't agree with. I was trying to not call out crime in any city but of course having an opinion that doesn't line up with the 10 or so chronic on here it doesn't count for anything. I'll try harder to conform to your wishes in the future your heinous.

 

Crime rates for an entire city are only so useful. Looking at crime rates for neighborhoods, boroughs, etc , provides more useful information.

 

Opinions are welcome, that’s the point here. What you’re supposed to do next is defend your opinion from simple criticism. Your statements were based on a narrative that isn’t accurate, I pointed that out. The move to insult me is a losing argument move.

 

False narrative??
I don't believe I insulted you unless you consider me having my own opinion and not falling in line an insult.
You are the one being insulting by telling me what I should have written instead of taking what I said and commenting, you chose to be the person of all knowledge and point how wrong I am.

 

The thing that makes this case tougher is that it's on a subway car with no place to run. At least with Trayvon Martin and Rittenhouse they had a place to run.

 

Rittenhouse did run and was chased down by the mob.