Murder of Jordan Neely on the Subway

I’m going to say the same thing I have since the beginning: We don’t know everything yet. Let it play out. We don’t know what it was (all I have heard is rumor and speculation) the deceased did that caused the initial alarm of the other passengers. We don’t know what kind of escalation the accused or the other passengers used before the event became physical. We don’t know what the deceased’s reaction to any of that was. Maybe the accused is guilty of using excessive force or manslaughter. I don’t know. I’m open to the possibility. But there are many indications and warnings of a false narrative for political reasons here, and that should give all of us pause. For instance, that the accused was “killed for riding the subway while black” or however that politician put it the other day. Now I don’t know what happened yet, but I’m pretty sure based on the evidence so far that the deceased was not minding his own business when a group of white strangers (to each other) decided to subdue him and choke him out on account of his race. So we can throw that out. We can also throw out that he was being choked for 15 minutes straight. The choke involved, if applied expertly (as it appears it was), would lead to unconsciousness in a couple of seconds and death in less than a minute. So why was the victim struggling in the selective edits we’ve seen over the course of his restraint? The only two possibilities are that the accused wasn’t doing it right or that the accused was not trying to kill the deceased, only to restrain him until authorities arrived. And, sorry, but that doesn’t fit the narrative of racist, malicious intent.

The accused has been charged. He is going to get his legal defense and day in court, same as anyone else. Why can’t we just wait and see what happens without fanning the flames of “us and them”?

 

Here you go again. Attorneys may be privy to information that justifies charges but the process of determining actual guilt still remains. Of course GL can have an opinion but he's routinely fervent in his claims of guilt or innocence based on biases.

We've heard a number of cases involving witnesses bearing false accounts of what actually happened so why not let it play out instead of claiming a random citizen decided to murder a man on camera with help from two others during a confrontation the decedent initiated? I'm not even pleading for his innocence at this time although I readily admit from what information the public has I am of the opinion that it seems more like manslaughter than 2nd degree murder.

There are a handful of members that express differences of opinions with nuance and an attempt at objectivity. An attempt because I recognize people have inherent biases may not be aware of. I visit this forum less and less because of how contentious it is over the slightest disagreements.

 

This poster should be permanently banned, at which point he likely would be hired by DeSantis to join his army. Neely deserved to die according to you. Your post is one of the most sickening ones I have read on these boards.

 

Uhmm, Penny is charged with manslaughter in the second degree. I think that is the appropriate charge based on NY law and is what I would have charged him with.

 

Ummmm, and I'm OK with that. Ummmm, I don't think anyone should walk in a case that has as many uncertainties as this one. Ummm that doesn't mean I think he's guilty or innocent just that it certainly worthy of a scrutiny. Ummm if my comments are so inane they require condescension maybe just skip over them and be better.

 

People inherently lean one way or the other based off the initial accounts whether accurate or not. I understand that and am generally guilty of it as well but I fight my reflex reaction to information that hasn't been vetted and always consider other perspectives.

It is sad to see that discourse has been dragged down to the levels of extreme takes that garner the majority of attention instead of the moderate middle. Majority of the people I know and speak to on a regular basis genuinely don't care about race especially when it comes to criminal records or behavior. That's not to say there aren't bigots, racists and prejudiced people out there. We see them running narratives all the time now it seems.

 

I guess I see the difference here, and in a couple of the police killing/shooting instances, is the defendants are not other wise criminals, did not set out to commit a crime, there was no intention of committing a crime, and the alleged crime was in reaction to a potential illegal and/or threatening action by the ultimate victim. At the end of the day the defendants are judged on the reasonableness and proportionality of their actions.

I don’t see this as similar to a criminal who intends to commit a crime, then commits the crime. But yes, the accused should always be given reasonable benefit of the doubt and cannot be fully judged until all the facts are in.

I ultimately view this instance as a societal failure and bear no ill will to either party. Society failed to deal with Neely in a just and humane fashion, and he roamed be streets for years wreaking havoc. Then we put Penny in a situation where he personally feels compelled to deal with it, and he ultimately fails, so we all want to blame him.

 

While one may have an opinion on whether he's a "murderer," I don't think anybody who understands the legal standards applicable to murder believes New York can convict him of it. The intent isn't there. Sorry if I'm too "fervent" in my belief that a guy who choked a homeless man to death on video---a homeless man nobody has claimed physically attacked anybody---is guilty of a crime.

Homeless or not, Jordan Neely's life mattered. We shouldn't have a society that holds so little regard for life that people would justify taking his because he was mentally ill and unnerving some folks.

 

Ain't that the truth. As I fight for indigent people just to get the process they're due under the Constitution when accused of a crime, there sure as heck aren't a lot of people clamoring for the withholding of judgment towards them. I'm usually the person having to invoke the presumption of innocence.

Of course, some will say that I'm being hypocritical by not affording that presumption to Mr. Penny. Difference is that I'm demanding the government afford the people it accuses of crimes the presumption of innocence. Mr. Penny is entitled to that same presumption from the government, and I'm certainly not demanding that he be held in pretrial detention. If private citizens want to make up their minds, that's their business, so long as they're not serving on the jury.

 

Yeah just continue to skip over the part where a handful or members are simply saying wait and see rather than proclaiming guilt or innocence. Definitely don't want those people on a jury.

 

We have seen the video and are discussing the case here, so in effect we are all already “disqualified” as jurors. But as almost none of us probably reside in NYC anyway…

It’s possible the jury will have to have not previously seen the video to be seated, to not be “tainted” by having a previous viewpoint… assuming it gets that far and there isn’t a plea deal on the table. But when there is already video and witness testimony and people warning he’s going to die (warnings which Perry ignored), that is quite a bit to form an opinion on. It’s already pretty damn clear this was not an authorized use of deadly force, the odds of something making it a clear use of force is not likely given the witnesses did not describe that. The only question was what to charge him with. Obviously the defense would hope for some video of the homeless man generally “acting crazy” beforehand as described , but that *still* wouldn’t authorize a chokehold takedown and ultimate strangulation of the victim. It would just be fodder to malign the circumstances of the victim, a victim that obviously had all sorts of issues including mental illness (as I’d assume practically all homeless living on the streets do). It might still be useful to muddy the waters on a defense, but the prosecution will just remind the jurors of the standards for using force on someone.

 

Coincidentally not ironic

 

I agree with most. Where i challenge your take is the application of the term ‘applied expertly’. As a practitioner, I have to have a mental clock and it’s not much longer than 15-20 seconds that compels me to release and change positions, especially if i could see I had help. If the Marine has a clean record he deserves the benefit of the doubt, but anyone that would keep this maneuver/ hold in place this long would not be considered an expert. I do not think he intended to permanently harm, but once you intercede then you take on some burden of responsibility.

 

I agree with all of this really. I don't see any "good" outcomes. I lean towards believing Penny meant well and screwed up. One question I have without watching the whole video or hearing all accounts is how long Neely was struggling in that chokehold. Was Penny releasing pressure intermittently but reapplying pressure because Neely was still fighting? It doesn't change the fact he killed him but most of my comments here are a reaction to the "white guy killed a black guy" comments that initiated this thread and the protests that call it a modern day lynching. On the surface it doesnt seem like Penny was racist, blood thirsty or randomly violent like some have characterized him as. Doesn't mean Penny doesn't have to pay some price like some others believe either.

Random off topic factoid. The man that killed famous/infamous bass player Jaco Pastorius was charged with 2nd degree murder but plead to manslaughter and got out in 4 months. Jaco was beaten to death as he died of complications from head trauma while hospitalized. Just struck me as interesting because Jacos attacker seemed to have an intention to inflict significant harm but got off very lightly as well. Obviously there are endless cases to compare and its not relative at this time but a Jaco pastorius rabbit hole resurfaced his death as this discussion is going on.