NY - Jordan Neely, killed by chokehold in subway during mental health crisis, Manhattan, 1 May 2023 *arrest*

[angelainwi]

Folks have reasonably stated that literally no one on that subway car knew about Neely's violent past, on that day. However, that may or may not be true. I'm sure we've all seen comments from subway riders who actually did recognize him, as many regular riders knew him years ago as the MJ impersonator. I mean, how many MSM outlets are still using that picture of him from 10 years ago, dressed as MJ? Also, his violent attacks on senior citizens were both public, as well as his attempted kidnapping of a 7 year old child. All of this was public, so it's a good bet at least some of the regulars that saw him that day, may have known who he was, even if they didn't "know" him.

And I will say again, for those who wrongly assume I'm saying or implying this means he deserved to die or anything else creepy like that, no, that's not what it means at all. Nothing he did warrants a death penalty, and I'm sure we can all agree to that.

All of that being said, we all know his history, now.

Interestingly, if the first time we ever heard about this guy, was when we heard that he punched an elderly woman in the face, knocking her to the ground and breaking her orbital bone...
or first heard about him after he punched an elderly man in the face...
or first heard about him after his failed (thankfully) kidnapping attempt of a 7 year old girl...

then later heard he was killed on the subway by a guy trying to restrain him from acting out his violent threats against passengers, the discussion would look so much different. Night and day, different.

The case threads here that deal with violence against the elderly or child abuctions are proof plenty. In every single one of those cases, the perp is treated with the contempt and disgust they deserve, when they prey on the most defenseless in our society, children and the elderly. Yet, when the person's current status is "victim" instead of "perp" it's a completely different conversation. I find that very interesting indeed.

jmo

I have not seen any reports of anyone recognizing him that day. Can you point me to it please

 

[Ontario Mom]

I have not seen any reports of anyone recognizing him that day. Can you point me to it please

I never said there were reports, I said it's a good bet some of them *may* have recognized him, since he was rather well known to the regular riders as the "subway Michael Jackson impersonator". It's merely a possibility to consider.

 

[Sonny Crockett]

Folks have reasonably stated that literally no one on that subway car knew about Neely's violent past, on that day. However, that may or may not be true. I'm sure we've all seen comments from subway riders who actually did recognize him, as many regular riders knew him years ago as the MJ impersonator. I mean, how many MSM outlets are still using that picture of him from 10 years ago, dressed as MJ? Also, his violent attacks on senior citizens were both public, as well as his attempted kidnapping of a 7 year old child. All of this was public, so it's a good bet at least some of the regulars that saw him that day, may have known who he was, even if they didn't "know" him.

And I will say again, for those who wrongly assume I'm saying or implying this means he deserved to die or anything else creepy like that, no, that's not what it means at all. Nothing he did warrants a death penalty, and I'm sure we can all agree to that.

All of that being said, we all know his history, now.

Interestingly, if the first time we ever heard about this guy, was when we heard that he punched an elderly woman in the face, knocking her to the ground and breaking her orbital bone...
or first heard about him after he punched an elderly man in the face...
or first heard about him after his failed (thankfully) kidnapping attempt of a 7 year old girl...

then later heard he was killed on the subway by a guy trying to restrain him from acting out his violent threats against passengers, the discussion would look so much different. Night and day, different.

The case threads here that deal with violence against the elderly or child abductions are proof plenty. In every single one of those cases, the perp is treated with the contempt and disgust they deserve, when they prey on the most defenseless in our society, children and the elderly. Yet, when the person's current status is "victim" instead of "perp" it's a completely different conversation. I find that very interesting indeed.

jmo

Agree with all of this 100%. Perps. who victimize/assault/kill the elderly/the disabled/children and/or kidnap children are treated by society as dangerous pariahs - as they should be.

I have always attested that anyone who abuses/victimizes/assaults/kills the defenseless of our society are especially heinous criminals.

I also believe that perps. who victimize those (who can't defend themselves) are doing this intentionally, because they are fully aware that these victims can't fight back.

 

[Jade]

Neely’s frame of mind was terrified, imo. Terrified more than any of us could even conceive.

Some have hallucinations that are easy to differentiate from reality, such as a 10 foot tall neon spider that’s talking, if his hallucinations were more like reality there is no knowing now if he was striking out at hallucinations or delusions or the actual people he hurt.

Imagine if everyone is frightened of you; thinks you are a monster.

What if Penny that day could “see” Neely and was the “be” for Neely.

If Penny was compelled to interfere had instead said [while standing back about 4 to 6 feet]:

“Hi, I’m Daniel. Can you tell me your name? I hear you’re thirsty and hungry let’s get off on the next stop and get food. Who’s your people you got any people we can call?”

The other passengers had given Neely room already.

Penny could have said:

“Here’s a 20. Get some food sir, I hope your day goes better maybe I’ll see you tomorrow.”

If one is willing to attack a raving guy from behind surely they are brave enough to offer food or money to deescalate.

I’ve seen it done. God bless the smokers, guess they’ve seen everything, I’ve noticed them leading a person with racing thoughts then stand listening to them as they have a cig away from others.



Schizophrenia usually involves delusions (false beliefs), hallucinations (seeing or hearing things that don’t exist), unusual physical behavior, and disorganized thinking and speech. It is common for people with schizophrenia to have paranoid thoughts or hear voices. For example, they may believe that someone is controlling their mind or going to cause them harm. These psychotic episodes are often frightening, confusing, and isolating.

People with schizophrenia can experience:

False beliefs that cannot be changed, even when presented facts (delusions).

Seeing or hearing things that do not exist, such as a voice making commands (hallucinations).

The belief that others are reading or controlling their minds.

Disorganized thinking and speech, including shifting from one thought to the next without a logical connection, or speaking in sentences that do not make sense to others.

Difficulty speaking and expressing emotion, as well as problems with attention, memory, and organization.

Disorganized or abnormal physical behavior, including inappropriately, repetitive, or excessive or strange actions, or a complete lack of movement or talking.

A reduced ability to function normally, such as ignoring personal hygiene or not showing emotion.

Schizophrenia



All imo

 

[Ontario Mom]

If Penny was compelled to interfere had instead said [while standing back about 4 to 6 feet]:

“Hi, I’m Daniel. Can you tell me your name? I hear you’re thirsty and hungry let’s get off on the next stop and get food. Who’s your people you got any people we can call?”

The other passengers had given Neely room already.

Penny could have said:

“Here’s a 20. Get some food sir, I hope your day goes better maybe I’ll see you tomorrow.”

If one is willing to attack a raving guy from behind surely they are brave enough to offer food or money to deescalate.

I think it's completely unrealistic to expect any random member of the public (including Daniel Penny) to respond to sudden threats of violence like a trained mental health expert or as a charity with extra cash on hand to placate the person shouting the violent threats.

Could he have done things differently? Of course, and I'm sure if he's like most human beings, he's second-guessing everything he said, everything he did, how he did it, why he did it, etc. He made a horrible mistake, while attempting to do something good. I feel bad for the guy. He never got on the subway that day looking for trouble, but it sure found him.

jmo

 

[Jade]

I think it's completely unrealistic to expect any random member of the public (including Daniel Penny) to respond to sudden threats of violence like a trained mental health expert or as a charity with extra cash on hand to placate the person shouting the violent threats.

Could he have done things differently? Of course, and I'm sure if he's like most human beings, he's second-guessing everything he said, everything he did, how he did it, why he did it, etc. He made a horrible mistake, while attempting to do something good. I feel bad for the guy. He never got on the subway that day looking for trouble, but it sure found him.

jmo

What’s unrealistic is going ahead and killing a stranger on a subway.

I’m not putting forth possibilities I’m relying actual interactions of those exact types put to this as an example.

Most prefer to deescalate than to kill.

If he had no idea of how to correctly approach a situation he should have called for trained help rather jump in with his killing training.



Penny chose trouble let’s get that clear.

He had the same options of the others who didn’t kill Neely that day.

Penny chose continue to keep the chokehold until death.

Penny didn’t try to do something good if he had he would have been kind and helpful not sneak up behind a stranger and kill them.





all imo

 

[Ontario Mom]

What’s unrealistic is going ahead and killing a stranger on a subway.

I’m not putting forth possibilities I’m relying actual interactions of those exact types put to this as an example.

Most prefer to deescalate than to kill.

If he had no idea of how to correctly approach a situation he should have called for trained help rather jump in with his killing training.



Penny chose trouble let’s get that clear.

He had the same options of the others who didn’t kill Neely that day.

Penny chose continue to keep the chokehold until death.

Penny didn’t try to do something good if he had he would have been kind and helpful not sneak up behind a stranger and kill them.





all imo

We couldn't possibly disagree more. However, I appreciate you taking the time to express your thoughts.

 

[elevatorific]

I think it's completely unrealistic to expect any random member of the public (including Daniel Penny) to respond to sudden threats of violence like a trained mental health expert or as a charity with extra cash on hand to placate the person shouting the violent threats.

Could he have done things differently? Of course, and I'm sure if he's like most human beings, he's second-guessing everything he said, everything he did, how he did it, why he did it, etc. He made a horrible mistake, while attempting to do something good. I feel bad for the guy. He never got on the subway that day looking for trouble, but it sure found him.

jmo

bbm
I mostly do agree with you here (though I don't think he was attempting to do something good). But then my question for you and others that share your perspective on this is: why are you so confident that he will be acquitted? It seems to me that most people on this thread agree, at the least, that he wasn't over-charged.

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

bbm
I mostly do agree with you here (though I don't think he was attempting to do something good). But then my question for you and others that share your perspective on this is: why are you so confident that he will be acquitted? It seems to me that most people on this thread agree, at the least, that he wasn't over-charged.

I think a lot of us agree he wasn’t under-charged by this particular DA. Daniel Penny and witnesses were questioned by LE on scene. It’s telling that he wasn’t arrested at that time. imo

 

[Ontario Mom]

bbm
I mostly do agree with you here (though I don't think he was attempting to do something good). But then my question for you and others that share your perspective on this is: why are you so confident that he will be acquitted? It seems to me that most people on this thread agree, at the least, that he wasn't over-charged.

I'm curious why you don't think he was trying to do something good. Has anyone come forward to dispute his version of the events? I mean, anyone that was actually there.

I'm not confident at all that he will be acquitted. While it appears national and international reaction to this is highly in favor of Penny, I don't know if that's the same reaction local New Yorkers, and they're the ones who matter, since this is their community, and it'll be their say.

As I've said before, taking a human life is a HUGE deal, even in self-defense or the defense of others.
There have to be consequences for that but I think it has to depend on all of the circumstances, and the totality of evidence, testimony, etc. to make the call if there's a legal punishment.

I would imagine being responsible for taking a human life there would be emotional, spiritual and psychological consequences, regardless.

 

[Ontario Mom]

I think a lot of us agree he wasn’t under-charged by this particular DA. Daniel Penny and witnesses were questioned by LE on scene. It’s telling that he wasn’t arrested at that time. imo

I'd sure love to hear first hand what those witnesses had to say about what they saw and heard.

 

[10ofRods]

What’s unrealistic is going ahead and killing a stranger on a subway.

I’m not putting forth possibilities I’m relying actual interactions of those exact types put to this as an example.

Most prefer to deescalate than to kill.

If he had no idea of how to correctly approach a situation he should have called for trained help rather jump in with his killing training.



Penny chose trouble let’s get that clear.

He had the same options of the others who didn’t kill Neely that day.

Penny chose continue to keep the chokehold until death.

Penny didn’t try to do something good if he had he would have been kind and helpful not sneak up behind a stranger and kill them.





all imo

I don't think it's unrealistic (it just happened). But I do think it's likely illegal in NY, and as we are a crime forum, I think that needs to be stated once in a while.

NY is a Duty to Retreat state, like the one I live in.

I believe Penny *may* have thought he was doing the right thing, but surely he knew that a choke hold would eventually produce death - he's had training on this. He held Neely down after Neely was limp. He could have released the hold, even a little, at some point (as LE used to be trained to do when choke holds were permitted - they may still be legal some places, don't know).

HOWEVER, I have worked in mental health settings for decades now and sometimes, an agitated psychotic person seems to possess incredible strength (they are highly adrenalized). So, I also believe that once a person starts into this kind of personal hold on an agitated person that it's all bets off. I've seen two (large muscular men) struggle to contain one woman (who was military and very fit, but absolutely in the throes of psychosis). They didn't use a choke hold, of course - but they had had months of training and weekly reviews of the past week's incidents to go on. Even with her first dose of anti-psychotics on board, they had to put her in a padded room, rather than in 4 point restraints - by the next day, she was in 3 point restraints and on the third day, she could be allowed around the ward for an hour (she organized a dance party, it was wild to watch it).

DP, once he had started and realized the guy seemed strong, might have feared to let go. I assume that's what happened.

JMO.

 

[Jade]

The video is in this link:

Marine vet ignores warnings while restraining Jordan Neely in video

WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT: The longer video that emerged today shows the three minutes and 52 seconds after the train pulled into Broadway Lafayette station on Monday at 2.30pm.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[10ofRods]

bbm
I mostly do agree with you here (though I don't think he was attempting to do something good). But then my question for you and others that share your perspective on this is: why are you so confident that he will be acquitted? It seems to me that most people on this thread agree, at the least, that he wasn't over-charged.

In the end, it comes down to the actual jury and its own definition of "reasonable" or "justified." The standard changes all the time, as cultures change and people develop new ideas. The reason the choke hold is now against policy for many LE agencies around the nation and around the world, is that it once seemed "reasonable" and wasn't much questioned. Then, people changed their opinions and juries, in particular, started thinking that certain LE actions were unreasonable.

People are really divided on what is reasonable. I used to do sexual harassment/discrimination training for police and for both public defenders and prosecutors, in three different states.

What we already knew, at the time, is that older people took a really dim view of certain words, phrases, actions that younger people thought were okay.

I also found out that it varied a great deal from community to community (and the Supreme Court has stated the "reasonable person" standard so that it really does allow for everything that involves "reasonable people" to be decided within local communities.

Utah juries, at the time, were not awarding sexual harassment claimants their legal victory if the woman in question was scantily clad. In Nevada, juries felt (in general) that workplaces who put women into scantily clad costumes were just fine, and that if a drunken customer happened to smack someone's butt, it was not sexual harassment. Indeed, some acts in Vegas encouraged it.

This was 15 years ago. In California, it was clear that any employer who put women in what local "reasonable people" on juries deemed to be overtly sexual clothing were themselves at fault, not the bar patron who touched someone (and, Hooters disappeared entirely from the area where I live - it still exists in 42 other states). Same with *advertiser censored* (although the internet has made local prosecution of *advertiser censored* almost impossible - but one of the first cases I was involved in, way back, had a group of judges who were trying to decide what to give as jury instructions about the materials in question. Since then, many legal decisions have helped make it clear.

We each have our personal views of what is reasonable (as one can see on this thread). I would need to know more about DP, as a juror. The prosecution has some leeway as to how they treat this. But, since many New Yorkers (of all colors) are upset about this, it's going to be hard to impanel a jury where all 12 agree that DP acted impulsively and recklessly, as each juror has to decide that his acts were unreasonable and are prohibited by NY law. The Duty to Retreat law will be at play. This was a very short term incident, which the Defense will surely emphasize. I can't think of a lesser charge to which DP could plea, though.

I'd be very interested to hear what NYers and lawyers think about what other charge would apply here. It's sure to be a history-making case, in its way.

IMO.

 

[elevatorific]

I'm curious why you don't think he was trying to do something good. Has anyone come forward to dispute his version of the events? I mean, anyone that was actually there.

rsbm
I think it was such an extreme snap judgment and overreaction that I can't call what he was trying to do 'good'. IMO, trying to do something good and having it go terribly wrong would be something like trying to help a victim but rendering first aid improperly.

 

[elevatorific]

I think a lot of us agree he wasn’t under-charged by this particular DA. Daniel Penny and witnesses were questioned by LE on scene. It’s telling that he wasn’t arrested at that time. imo

It took them several days to track down and interview all the relevant witnesses, that's what it tells me. (Source)
This is one of the first comments I've seen asserting that the 2nd degree manslaughter is potentially an overcharge and I'd love to hear more.

 

[10ofRods]

The video is in this link:

Marine vet ignores warnings while restraining Jordan Neely in video

WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT: The longer video that emerged today shows the three minutes and 52 seconds after the train pulled into Broadway Lafayette station on Monday at 2.30pm.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Thank you. I am having a hard time getting anyone I usually turn to (outside WS) to comment on this. It's very hard to watch. No one wants to watch it. Many people say they "can't" watch it, after a few seconds. I am not saying I agree with the word "warnings," but the one man is providing what he sees as factual information to DP and what I see is that DP does not show that he understood or even heard it. He seems to continue to chew his gum.

We don't know DP's own background, beliefs or philosophies - or mental health status on that day.

But I think, in the end, he may plead guilty to the charge in exchange for the minimum sentence. I have no clue what I would do, if I were DP (since NY allows "defense of others" as a defense. I don't know what the witnesses will say. With lenient sentencing (3 years; with parole being possible - perhaps very soon), I don't know what DP will choose.<modsnip - rumors>

<modsnip - opinion articles are not allowed>

And of course, from MSM, there are plenty of reports about demonstrations against this killing.

When it gets to GMA, that's as mainstream as a case can be, IMO.

All JMO.

 

[elevatorific]

Thank you. I am having a hard time getting anyone I usually turn to (outside WS) to comment on this. It's very hard to watch. No one wants to watch it. Many people say they "can't" watch it, after a few seconds. I am not saying I agree with the word "warnings," but the one man is providing what he sees as factual information to DP and what I see is that DP does not show that he understood or even heard it. He seems to continue to chew his gum.

We don't know DP's own background, beliefs or philosophies - or mental health status on that day.

But I think, in the end, he may plead guilty to the charge in exchange for the minimum sentence. I have no clue what I would do, if I were DP (since NY allows "defense of others" as a defense. I don't know what the witnesses will say. With lenient sentencing (3 years; with parole being possible - perhaps very soon), I don't know what DP will choose.<modsnip - rumors>

<modsnip - opinion articles are not allowed>

And of course, from MSM, there are plenty of reports about demonstrations against this killing.

When it gets to GMA, that's as mainstream as a case can be, IMO.

All JMO.

BBM - I should say, I'm not personally skeptical of a conviction or acquittal (though I do feel very certain of liability in civil trial later). But I do think the facts we've seen make 2nd degree manslaughter a fairly easy sell, and I think an acquittal, while certainly the prerogative of any jury, would be pretty clearly based on a pro-marine anti-dirty-homeless-man bias. (Pending actual evidence at the actual trial, of course)

 

[Ontario Mom]

rsbm
I think it was such an extreme snap judgment and overreaction that I can't call what he was trying to do 'good'. IMO, trying to do something good and having it go terribly wrong would be something like trying to help a victim but rendering first aid improperly.

Which makes it all the more important that we (the public) hear from 1st hand witnesses.

What they saw, what they heard, how they felt, etc.
To me, that's what matters most.
None of us were there, but THEY were, and we need to hear from them, and how they "read the room" so to speak.

 

[everybodhi]

Which makes it all the more important that we (the public) hear from 1st hand witnesses.

What they saw, what they heard, how they felt, etc.
To me, that's what matters most.
None of us were there, but THEY were, and we need to hear from them, and how they "read the room" so to speak.

There are some media interviews but we will probably have to wait for the trial to hear all the testimony from witnesses, according to the prosecution it took some time to locate and interview witnesses, that’s why the decision to charge Perry took so long.

An Eyewitness to Jordan Neely’s Death

“There were maybe twenty-some people outside the train car. I was looking in the window, and I was, like, ‘Something is ****ing wrong.’ Because I was looking at him, and he was staring off into space. His eyes were dead. He wasn’t moving.
But the thing is, these guys that choked him the **** out were saying that he was still breathing, that he still had a pulse. They were acting in such a way that no one else could come next to him.
I told them to put him on his side. I didn’t believe that he was dead. I’d never seen a dead body before. I didn’t want him choking on his own spit or vomit.
I had my water bottle in my hand. I wanted to try to check him out. But I was intimidated by these people. I didn’t know anybody. I wasn’t not trying to get stabbed. I tried to move in. I poured a little water on his forehead.
And Daniel Penny came over and told me to stop. He shuffled me off.

Jordan Neely, the man killed in chokehold on NYC subway, is remembered as an entertainer shattered by his mother's murder

In the minutes leading up to the deadly chokehold, Neely had been "acting erratically," but he did not attack anyone on the train, according to Juan Alberto Vazquez, a witness who recorded the altercation on video.
As soon as Neely got on the train, he started yelling about being "fed up and hungry" and "tired of having nothing," Vazquez told CNN.
Before he was killed, Neely said, "I don't care if I die. I don't care if I go to jail. I don't have any food ... I'm done," according to Vazquez.
At some point, Neely took off his coat and threw it on the train's floor, repeating he was ready to go to jail and get a life sentence, Vazquez said.
As the yelling continued, many passengers became visibly uncomfortable and moved to other parts of the train car. Neely did not appear to be armed or looking to attack anyone, Vazquez told CNN.
Then a rider came up behind Neely and put him in a chokehold, with the two eventually falling to the floor, said Vazquez. Neely did not interact with that passenger at all prior to the attack, Vazquez continued.

Protesters call for charges in NYC subway chokehold death of Jordan Neely

Neely was reportedly acting erratically, but there is no evidence or any witness statements indicating he was physically violent.
There were several witnesses on board the train, including one who shouted out to Penny as he held Neely in a chokehold: “You gotta let him go. My wife is ex-military. You gonna kill him now…I’m tellin’ you,” the witness can be heard saying in the video.
Criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor Bernarda Villalona said it’s not surprising that Penny’s attorneys would cite self-defense “of others.” She said witness statements could play a large role in whether a grand jury decides to indict.
“Was it objectively reasonable for this man to place his arms around the neck of Mr. Neely? What was Mr. Neely doing? Was he a reasonable threat of physical injury? Was it necessary at the time? Was it an imminent threat? Because we’re not talking about seconds – we’re talking about minutes,” said Villalona.