Murder of Jordan Neely on the Subway

5 facts from Heavy

Neely’s death comes as concerns about dangerous behavior in the New York subway system escalates; in one previous incident, 10 people were shot during an active shooter incident in the Brooklyn subway, according to Axios. However, prominent New Yorkers and others have called for charges, and The New York Times reported that major crimes in the subway system dropped 16% from October 2022 through January 2023. The city’s treatment of mentally ill and homeless people has also raised concerns.

Jordan Neely Video: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

 

Ultimately if they banned choke holds for cops, I dont know why a civilian should get to do a choke hold who is basically taking it upon themselves to be a cop.

 

Just guessing that chokeholds for cops are banned because they should be armed with less lethal weapons, restraints, training and then what should be the last resort being lethal measures. A chokehold as it pertains to a civilian shouldn't necessarily be banned if it is used against a lethal threat in kind. Determining that threat is the tough part I imagine.

Obviously that's not how it plays out all the time for LEO or civilian altercations.

 

They've covered extensively in the media what happened (the witnesses didn't shy away from talking about what the homeless man did), and there's a video of the guy with him in a chokehold. Nothing the homeless man did invited deadly force. And putting a person in a chokehold for 15 minutes is deadly force.

At most, the homeless man shouted some things that could be viewed as a threat (I didn't construe them as a threat), threw his jacket down, and tossed some garbage at people. At no point did he brandish a weapon. At no point did he violently assault anybody. And at no point did he even attempt to do something that could credibly be considered as justification for deadly force.

You don't get to kill homeless people because they unnerve you. You don't get to kill mentally ill people if they annoy you or scare you. That's not how our society works. (Unless you're a cop.)

 

My comments are based on the link given. I also made no indictments or exonerations one way or the other based off the little info given in that link, even acknowledging you may know things I don't yet.

Initial reports vary quite a bit once scrutinized more thoroughly as seen in several cases before. "Hands up don't shoot" was misreported. Jacob Blake was presented as a good Samaritan initially when in fact he was the subject of a restraining order initiated by the resident of the property he was at when he was confronted by police. I used these cases by the way since they were so heavily publicized and were the impetus for some significant protests before facts were all out.

As for the ugly implication Tampa ascribed regarding taking a stance of wait and see instead of condemning someone immediately I won't even bother.

Mental illness doesn't take away a person's right to defend themselves from a mentally ill person. I made no comment one way or the other as far as murder/manslaughter or innocence but given that 3 people were involved in public view it stands to reason no one involved planned for this to happen but instead reacted to something. The reaction needs to be scrutinized as much as the initial action. But I guess innocent until proven guilty only applies to whatever bias we have for or against someone or something...

 

Also, it's not enough for some to just look at evidence but some here have to ascribe motivation behind peoples intentions to take a wait and see approach. Love the rhetoric. Killing because people are uncomfortable about homeless people or implying racial bias is garbage. No wonder this place is so uncivil lately. I come to these forums because I want points and counterpoint and appreciate the knowledge base by many here from various walks of life. Always amazes me how some of the brightest minds here let vitriol and emotion take over otherwise legitimate discourse.

 

Except they don't vary here on whether Neely physically attacked anybody.

The presumption of innocence applies in the courts, and he'll receive the benefit of that. I owe him no presumption in coming to my own opinions. You don't have a "right" to use deadly force against a mentally ill person because they unnerved you. I had a schizophrenic neighbor for years who was unnerving. But I couldn't go grab a gun, walk outside, and shoot her for yelling threats at me.

Not a single person has claimed that Neely used physical force. In fact, even the people who spoke in support of the killer said that Neely wasn't engaging in any physical violence when the guy put him in the chokehold.
Manhattan DA Bragg investigating after aggressive homeless man on NYC subway dies from Marine vet's chokehold
Passenger Juan Alberto Vazquez told the New York Post that while Neely was screaming aggressively, he did not physically attack anyone. Neely reportedly complained about being thirsty and hungry.

 

We were taught the “choke hold” in the police academy back in 1977. Why it’s called a choke hold is a legit question. The hold if properly administered cuts off the flow of blood to the brain by squeezing the carotid arteries. It doesn’t stop the person from breathing. We literally caused each other to pass out during practice. What’s important is to loosen the hold the second the person starts to go limp. Do that and no one dies from it. If they do there’s more likely a medical issue involved. It’s an excellent way to stop someone. I will use it if I have to. Hopefully not.

 

I had a pretty embarrassing episode years ago. Alcohol fueled, emotional and antagonized by a cheating ex. Made an ass out of myself in public and the more people tried to calm me down the more enraged I got. I threw someone down who was trying to restrain me. At some point came to senses and walked away. Totally out of character. I drank way too much. Had I not walked away and continued to escalate I'd be subject to whatever consequences. I don't think I "deserved" death but if I continued to get aggressive I wouldn't expect people to wait until I caused harm before they dealt with me. You make decisions and sometimes you get away with them and sometimes you don't.

I'm empathetic to homeless people. I'm empathetic to mentally ill. I don't expect an average citizen to guess at how far a mentally ill or intoxicated person will go before a person defends themselves.

If it's proven they jumped the gun and initiated the physical response then I'd be in full support of incarceration. I'll continue to wait and let's the facts come out before making a firm opinion one way or the other.

 

It only applies in court. Given the fact set. No weapons, no violent behavior duration of choak, any reasonable person can deduce this is likely murder or manslaughter. I’d also like to know the size fitness level between the two but as a reasonable person I can deduce that too. Bully’s fight down

Bet this guys defense is he was “in fear for his life”

 

At the same time, it is often best not to engage them as a pedestrian because they may either target you, hit you up or become annoyed and blame you as the one they engage. These are often not rational reasonable people, they are addicted and/or mentally ill.

 

It’s a fault of the public trans system if it doesn’t have a way to respond to a passenger being choked like that. Total failure of the city’s contract with its people to provide safety. I’d fire the head of the MTA.

 

He was most recently arrested in November 2021 on felony assault charges after being accused of “slugging a 67-year-old female stranger in the face,” Daily News reported, adding that a warrant was issued in that case.

 

Is it fair to punish one guy who felt compelled to act, because we as a society are unwilling to address this issue?

We have democrats who think these people are just normal down on their luck people and they should be free to roam about and do what they will.

We have republicans who complain about it but are unwilling to even contemplate allocating the necessary funds to deal with the complex issue.

 

Absolutely given the outcome and fact set. It’s either murder or manslaughter it DEMANDS punishment. This is an easy answer don’t know why some struggle with it. Edit it’s a real stretch to say he felt compelled to act because we as society are unwilling to address the issue. Presumes facts not in evidence.

 

I’m not an expert on this matter, but did hear a podcast where chokeholds were addressed. Obviously one has to be trained on when and how to use them. I don’t have enough facts on this particular incident to judge either way.

However, in terms of cops, when we take away tools like this, sure, you get rid of the risk of a choke hold taken too far. But you’ve also narrowed the options for cops when they must restrain someone, and you increase the chance the perp tries to reach for the gun, and you increase the chance the cop feels the need to use the gun. A choke hold, if used by a cop properly trained, may be a better option than going directly for his gun.

 

You don’t even have the full fact set. You are just virtue signaling here.

 

Real life isn't Hollywood. 15 minutes is a insanely quick response time.

 

It is a dangerous tool even if effective. If they implemented it would have to be only a select few supervisors. As a medic, not everyone is allowed to use paralytic medications like succinylcholine for procedures in the field. Flight medics and a select few trained on the med are allowed to use it because it literally paralyzes you and takes away your ability to breathe.

There is a lot of incompetence that get pushed through hiring processes in police and fire departments out of necessity for warm bodies. Not everyone will be capable of utilizing the discretion, technique, poise and strength to use chokes safely