I wrote elsewhere that this case is much, much closer to a homicide than the George Floyd case. I don't reasonably doubt, at least at this point, that Penny's actions did lead to Neely's death. I think the D.A. should have at least taken this case to the grand jury (and may yet do so, if he hasn't).
Penny was in no-win situation, though- you have a vagrant ranting and raving, threatening violence against the riders in moving subway car, so what do you do if you were in his situation- what would you be thinking? I know I would be very concerned for myself and the other riders, and I would feel like a coward if I just got up and left the other riders to Neely's threatened violence (which is what I probably would have done if I were completely unarmed depending solely on my physical capability to grapple with him- but I would have been ashamed of my walking away). Penny faced a choice do nothing and let Neely harm someone, possibly killing them, and then act, or act pre-emptively. Penny chose the pre-emptive approach, and once grappling with Neely, had a tiger by the tail.
Twelve years ago, the last time I was in New York, it was illegal to possess and carry stun guns and tasers for personal protection, and I imagine that hasn't changed. Neely would almost certainly be alive today if Penny had a stun gun or taser to use rather than having to depend on a risky submission hold. Given what I have seen on the video, and what the other passengers described to some of the journalists who covered the story, I would acquit on the present charges (manslaughter at this point) simply because the government of New York, state and city, aren't doing their jobs any longer in enforcing the civil order. I am not going to second guess Daniel Penny here and send him to prison.
The tit-for-tat oppression of Catholics v Protestants, Protestants v Catholics in England spanned over 200 years starting in the reign of Henry VIII, and resulted in civil war, the Wars of the Three Kingdoms regicide and dictatorship. The last flames of that burning until the late 20th Century in Northern Ireland. Just exchange Black & White for Protestant and Catholic.... and consider yourselves warned.
We don't know whether the restraint used on Neely was the cause of his death. For example, in the case of the death of George Floyd, the original Hennepin County Medical Examiner's Report showed Floyd had a much greater than lethal dose of fentanyl in his system, plus several other illicit drugs, and that the restraint used was not a contributing cause. The officer restraining him was nevertheless convicted of homicide in what appears to be a Great White Defendant case, blown up by Democratic media for political advantage (gin up black racial paranoia). To my knowledge no autopsy report has been published on Neely.
Already, nobody in New York who can afford a taxi or Uber will use the subway. It is too dangerous. The rush to charge Neely prior to any thorough investigation sends a message to other thugs that they can misbehave with impunity because severe sanctions may be imposed on self-help against their depredations. At any rate Neely is gone, and given his record, many of his future victims are at least freed of that risk.
When it comes to the latest thing, we're, all of us, usually wrong. The policy of not addressing the latest thing is probably a good one to stick with. Time will tell.
I'm a Brit, so excuse my lack of knowledge of US law. There is no way, over here, that someone could be restrained to the point of death for threats that were only verbal in nature (and no weapon threat) and no investigation ensue. The only complaint I can see is a fast charge, but I'm sure that over here it ends in a trial, all the same. Regardless of race
Jordan Neely utterly fulfilled the regime's purpose for him. He sowed chaos and fear on the streets and trains, and then entrapped a good Samaritan who sought to prevent him from harming others.
One thing seems clear to me: the consistent erosion of the rule of law and the proper role of government is a major cause of the current turmoil. If the state had carried out its primary function competently -- that of protecting the citizenry -- we would likely not be having this discussion. Moreover, the rancor regarding Penny's prosecution stems, in large part, because Americans -- for good reason -- no longer trust their public officials to act professionally and impartially under the law. I don't know all of the facts, but I'd be a fool to believe that Mr. Bragg exercised his prosecutorial discretion without resort to his own personal political considerations.
There is another interpretation of the primary lesson of the parable of the good samaritan. You should treat others as individuals instead of members of a race, religion, ethnicity, or some other group one might have stereotypes or prejudices about. They used to teach a secular version of this in public schools. Now we get everyone telling us group differences are superordinate and matter more than anything and we can judge people by their groups. Pretty absurd to see anyone in the New York Times opinion section reference this parable when they are trying stuff everything inside a contextless race obsessed narrative and the majority of their columns are about the evils and evil leaders of their out group.
Yes, AK you are right, but the sad fact about today's America is this: rush to judgement regarding all things by too many who do not have the facts of what took place. Unfortunately this behavior resembles the lynch em mobs back in the old west, but today, the "Marshall" might be a bit too ready to side with the mob...
To counter the claim that the criminal justice system is biased against minorities, I cite the example of the prosecutor in The Bonfire of the Vanities (a 1987 novel) who was overjoyed to finally have a white defendant.
It might be interesting that none of the other restrainers were charged (i'm assuming they weren't?). If the restraint was disproportional to the threat, and the others knew he was using this type of hold (which they did), I would think it would be unlawful for them to contribute to it.
I predict Penny goes to prison. If the jury is made up of regular subway riders of New York City, he can probably be acquitted, or least get a hung jury several times in a row, but I predict the jury would not contain any such people but, rather, would be made up of people who used Uber for everything and/or are racial justice advocates. I also suspect that the charges will be increased in the coming weeks as the pressure mounts on the D.A.'s office, forcing Penny to take a plea.
I wrote elsewhere that this case is much, much closer to a homicide than the George Floyd case. I don't reasonably doubt, at least at this point, that Penny's actions did lead to Neely's death. I think the D.A. should have at least taken this case to the grand jury (and may yet do so, if he hasn't).
Penny was in no-win situation, though- you have a vagrant ranting and raving, threatening violence against the riders in moving subway car, so what do you do if you were in his situation- what would you be thinking? I know I would be very concerned for myself and the other riders, and I would feel like a coward if I just got up and left the other riders to Neely's threatened violence (which is what I probably would have done if I were completely unarmed depending solely on my physical capability to grapple with him- but I would have been ashamed of my walking away). Penny faced a choice do nothing and let Neely harm someone, possibly killing them, and then act, or act pre-emptively. Penny chose the pre-emptive approach, and once grappling with Neely, had a tiger by the tail.
Twelve years ago, the last time I was in New York, it was illegal to possess and carry stun guns and tasers for personal protection, and I imagine that hasn't changed. Neely would almost certainly be alive today if Penny had a stun gun or taser to use rather than having to depend on a risky submission hold. Given what I have seen on the video, and what the other passengers described to some of the journalists who covered the story, I would acquit on the present charges (manslaughter at this point) simply because the government of New York, state and city, aren't doing their jobs any longer in enforcing the civil order. I am not going to second guess Daniel Penny here and send him to prison.
The tit-for-tat oppression of Catholics v Protestants, Protestants v Catholics in England spanned over 200 years starting in the reign of Henry VIII, and resulted in civil war, the Wars of the Three Kingdoms regicide and dictatorship. The last flames of that burning until the late 20th Century in Northern Ireland. Just exchange Black & White for Protestant and Catholic.... and consider yourselves warned.
I've rarely seen an article of such perfect length.
We don't know whether the restraint used on Neely was the cause of his death. For example, in the case of the death of George Floyd, the original Hennepin County Medical Examiner's Report showed Floyd had a much greater than lethal dose of fentanyl in his system, plus several other illicit drugs, and that the restraint used was not a contributing cause. The officer restraining him was nevertheless convicted of homicide in what appears to be a Great White Defendant case, blown up by Democratic media for political advantage (gin up black racial paranoia). To my knowledge no autopsy report has been published on Neely.
Already, nobody in New York who can afford a taxi or Uber will use the subway. It is too dangerous. The rush to charge Neely prior to any thorough investigation sends a message to other thugs that they can misbehave with impunity because severe sanctions may be imposed on self-help against their depredations. At any rate Neely is gone, and given his record, many of his future victims are at least freed of that risk.
When it comes to the latest thing, we're, all of us, usually wrong. The policy of not addressing the latest thing is probably a good one to stick with. Time will tell.
I'm a Brit, so excuse my lack of knowledge of US law. There is no way, over here, that someone could be restrained to the point of death for threats that were only verbal in nature (and no weapon threat) and no investigation ensue. The only complaint I can see is a fast charge, but I'm sure that over here it ends in a trial, all the same. Regardless of race
Also of interest may be Katherine Dee, who writes,
“Where the Left is constantly looking for demons and martyrs to those demons, the Right is frequently looking for heroes to lead them to greatness.”
Perhaps conservatives are as hungry for heroes as black americans of an earlier era.
https://t.co/iYeGfiGL9I
Jordan Neely utterly fulfilled the regime's purpose for him. He sowed chaos and fear on the streets and trains, and then entrapped a good Samaritan who sought to prevent him from harming others.
One thing seems clear to me: the consistent erosion of the rule of law and the proper role of government is a major cause of the current turmoil. If the state had carried out its primary function competently -- that of protecting the citizenry -- we would likely not be having this discussion. Moreover, the rancor regarding Penny's prosecution stems, in large part, because Americans -- for good reason -- no longer trust their public officials to act professionally and impartially under the law. I don't know all of the facts, but I'd be a fool to believe that Mr. Bragg exercised his prosecutorial discretion without resort to his own personal political considerations.
A Patterico review of the ongoing "journalism" coverage, and the inaccuracies and contradictions he's found.
https://patterico.substack.com/p/is-daniel-penny-criminally-liable
That all sounds likely. Of course in the early 1900s more than 1963, it's very likely such a black guy would have been lynched too.
There is another interpretation of the primary lesson of the parable of the good samaritan. You should treat others as individuals instead of members of a race, religion, ethnicity, or some other group one might have stereotypes or prejudices about. They used to teach a secular version of this in public schools. Now we get everyone telling us group differences are superordinate and matter more than anything and we can judge people by their groups. Pretty absurd to see anyone in the New York Times opinion section reference this parable when they are trying stuff everything inside a contextless race obsessed narrative and the majority of their columns are about the evils and evil leaders of their out group.
Yes, AK you are right, but the sad fact about today's America is this: rush to judgement regarding all things by too many who do not have the facts of what took place. Unfortunately this behavior resembles the lynch em mobs back in the old west, but today, the "Marshall" might be a bit too ready to side with the mob...
To counter the claim that the criminal justice system is biased against minorities, I cite the example of the prosecutor in The Bonfire of the Vanities (a 1987 novel) who was overjoyed to finally have a white defendant.
It might be interesting that none of the other restrainers were charged (i'm assuming they weren't?). If the restraint was disproportional to the threat, and the others knew he was using this type of hold (which they did), I would think it would be unlawful for them to contribute to it.
I predict Penny goes to prison. If the jury is made up of regular subway riders of New York City, he can probably be acquitted, or least get a hung jury several times in a row, but I predict the jury would not contain any such people but, rather, would be made up of people who used Uber for everything and/or are racial justice advocates. I also suspect that the charges will be increased in the coming weeks as the pressure mounts on the D.A.'s office, forcing Penny to take a plea.