Jordan Neely killed on the subway by marine veteran. Hero or killer?

[fskimospy]

Kick them out, give them a ticket. If they are a repeat offender, escalate at that point. I'm not sure how arresting them for their drug addiction is going to improve things if you're not going to be able to hold them. But I'm sure if they want to do drugs, they might choose to do them somewhere where they won't be hassled, and that might be a little different of a situation compared to your homeless encampment example.


Yes, that particular activity is a waste because we don't give people without homes housing - it's instead treating some symptom in one of the worst ways possible. They're going to go somewhere. They probably shouldn't be clearing it unless there is actually a place to give those people, like some sort of supportive SRO-style housing.

You aren’t arresting them for drug addiction, you’re arresting them for doing drugs on the subway. It’s a quality of life issue. If you make it very clear to people that smoking crack on public transit will get you arrested people will stop doing it. This is from someone who thinks all drugs should be legal, but even if they were all legal they should be illegal on the train.

It’s just like open container or public intoxication laws - drink all you want in a bar or at home but you should be ticketed or arrested for getting shithammered at a playground or whatever because it hurts everyone else’s quality of life.

 

[brycejones]

It is in the Salvation Army. They are benefactors to Bryce, MrSquishy and Polehemyrider

What time is your street performance today? I want to watch the show.

Felix I am glad the Salvation Army is able to help you. Given the poor quality of your posts I didn’t think you would earn enough from your street shows to make ends meet.

 

[ondma]

Maybe go read what I said again. I never said it wasn't a defense, I said I AM not using PTSD as a defense to what he did. But the fact remains, regardless of what I think, his past Military service/past employment is relevant if he has PTSD, as it can be used as a defense, as proven by precedent set by the the courts.

NVM

 

[skyking]

How do you find that out without looking at his Military career and medical records related to his time of service and the impact it had on his mental state? That's the whole point, his Military service can't be ignored.

If he does not already have a diagnosis for PTSD related to his service, he is in a bad spot.
I never suggested ignoring his service. If his defense tries to create a PTSD diagnosis out of thin air, it will fail.

 

[NWRMidnight]

If he does not already have a diagnosis for PTSD related to his service, he is in a bad spot.
I never suggested ignoring his service. If his defense tries to create a PTSD diagnosis out of thin air, it will fail.

Not necessarily true. It's not creating a PTSD diagnosis out of thin air, it's reviewing his service record, his behavior, including this situation, that warrants getting tested or evaluated for PTSD. PTSD isn't just tested for out of the blue, there are specific criteria that has to be met before that happens. His actions here could be the final behavior issue and changes, that gets him tested and evaluated for PTSD, which will include doctors, therapists, etc. HIs lawyers can get evaluation and testing court ordered before the trial can move forward, if they can show proof that supports such testing / evaluation is warranted. It's very possible that Penny has PTSD and doesn't even know it, or refuses to get tested and evaluated for it. Some people it takes years for symptoms to come out, or for them to be diagnosed with PTSD. Who knows. But it's one many possibilities. But to say if he doesn't already have a PTSD diagnosis, he is in a bad spot, isn't necessarily accurate. There are many cases thru-out history that mental disorders are discovered and/or diagnosed during trial.

 

[skyking]

It's very convenient.
I know several people who have or had PTSD, including my late father. There was no bullshit about finding out about it late. Why are you carrying water for this guy?

 

[NWRMidnight]

It's very convenient.
I know several people who have or had PTSD, including my late father. There was no bullshit about finding out about it late. Why are you carrying water for this guy?

I'm not carrying water for this guy. If I tell you, you can buy a car in lime green, does that mean I like or want a lime green car? No, I am just pointing out a fact. Same here, I am just pointing out one of the possibilities, and why his past employment, being his military service is relevant. Doesn't mean I am defending him or support what he did. It's a wonderful gift to be able to step back and look at things from many different aspects.. maybe you should learn to do it?

P.S. Is your reply button broken, do you not know how to use quotes?

 

[woolfe9998]

First, lets clear something up, I am not using PTSD as a defense for Penny. I brought it up as an example of to WHY Penny's past employment, which includes his Military service, is very relevant to what happened, specially if he has PTSD, because some people think Penny's past employment is not relevant. It is. It is very relevant.

With that said, PTSD effects each individual differently, which is also influenced by what brought on the PTSD. PTSD witnessing your mother being killed is different than PTSD brought on by combat.

Again, I am not arguing that PTSD is a defense for Penny, I am just simply pointing out some facts, and showing why his past employment (HIs Military Career) is relevant.

You mean legally relevant? Probably not. Self-defense is judged on a "reasonable person" standard which takes no account of the defendant's past experiences unless they are past experiences with the victim. So prior threatening behavior from the victim would be relevant, but not prior employment experience or PTSD.

His mental state would only be relevant if he was making an insanity plea, i.e. claiming he didn't know what he was doing or that it was wrong because he was so mentally disturbed. But his defense is going to be self-defense, and I doubt his past military experience or even a PTSD diagnosis is legally relevant to that defense.

 

[NWRMidnight]

You mean legally relevant? Probably not. Self-defense is judged on a "reasonable person" standard which takes no account of the defendant's past experiences unless they are past experiences with the victim. So prior threatening behavior from the victim would be relevant, but not prior employment experience or PTSD.

His mental state would only be relevant if he was making an insanity plea, i.e. claiming he didn't know what he was doing or that it was wrong because he was so mentally disturbed. But his defense is going to be self-defense, and I doubt his past military experience or even a PTSD diagnosis is legally relevant to that defense.

Incorrect. see post #98 . The appeals courts has already set precedent on PTSD. It doesn't always mean it will be successful.

 

[woolfe9998]

A point of clarification on my above post. There are broadly two elements of self-defense: the defendant must both actually, and reasonably, be in fear for his life. The "actually" part is a "subjective" standard. For that, the defendant must convince a jury he was actually in fear for his life. For that part, past experiences might in theory be relevant. But the second part, the "reasonably" part, takes no account of past experiences like being in the military or having been robbed before on the subway. It says would a hypothetically "reasonable person" (every juror thinks that means them) have made the same decision in the same or similar circumstances.

The reason past experiences are not relevant is because people aren't allowed to kill people then claim they were hyper-vigilant because of things that happened to them before. Because the implications of allowing that are pretty staggering in terms of what may be justified under the law. It would effectively give military veterans and crime victims an open license to kill.

For those interested in self-defense, this is a little more detail. You can skip it if not interested. So some states have a doctrine called "imperfect self-defense" (may be called other names in different jurisdictions), which means the defendant satisfied the subjective part but not the objective part. So if a jury decides that Penny irrationally believed his life was threatened but did actually believe it, imperfect self-defense would reduce the charge from murder to manslaughter, but is not a complete defense. That is because your subjective belief that your life was threatened would mean you lack the "malice" necessary for murder but your unreasonable decision made you reckless.

Not sure if NY has this defense or not.

 

[nakedfrog]

I'm not carrying water for this guy. If I tell you, you can buy a car in lime green, does that mean I like or want a lime green car? No, I am just pointing out a fact. Same here, I am just pointing out one of the possibilities, and why his past employment, being his military service is relevant. Doesn't mean I am defending him or support what he did. It's a wonderful gift to be able to step back and look at things from many different aspects.. maybe you should learn to do it?

P.S. Is your reply button broken, do you not know how to use quotes?

If we want to harp on his military service, he surely had LOAC training. People keep acting like joining the Marines just turns one into this unstoppable killing machine, but there are rules about when and how you're supposed to kill a combatant, upon which there is training as well. If his level of PTSD from one 4 year term was so severe that he can't determine/apply an appropriate level of force to use in this situation, that's a pretty damning indictment of our military both training-wise and mental healthcare wise, we shouldn't just be releasing people into civilian life that are liable to just "accidentally" choke someone to death in response to this level of threat.

 

[NWRMidnight]

If we want to harp on his military service, he surely had LOAC training. People keep acting like joining the Marines just turns one into this unstoppable killing machine, but there are rules about when and how you're supposed to kill a combatant, upon which there is training as well. If his level of PTSD from one 4 year term was so severe that he can't determine/apply an appropriate level of force to use in this situation, that's a pretty damning indictment of our military both training-wise and mental healthcare wise, we shouldn't just be releasing people into civilian life that are liable to just "accidentally" choke someone to death in response to this level of threat.

Uh, you really should go look up LOAC. What it pertains to. I don't think you don't fully understand the Marines roll in a conflict, what LOAC, or even rules of engagement covers. If Penny saw Neely as the enemy, for what ever reason, non of that applies.

It's clear you don't understand PTSD. If you did, you would know years of service really has nothing to do with PTSD. A single traumatic even can cause it. How many of those do you think a marine might go thru during a 4 year enlistment, if they see combat?

My step dad had PTSD. The things witnessed in the Vietnam war he wouldn't even talk about, ever. Not in the 36 years he was married to my mother, not at all before he died. All I know is one of many things he witnessed was he watched his best friend get killed right next to him.. and I didn't learn that from him. I learned it from others that knew the guy. Then you have to consider all those he had to kill. He only served 4 years as well.

I also was on the receiving end when the PTSD took over. If it wasn't for my Mother, and the fact that her voice brought him back, I wouldn't be here. He even told her would have snapped my neck. I don't even remember what the argument was about, as it was 30+ years ago. My point is you can't predict how PTSD will effect someone, specially if untreated.

Now, violence with PTSD is not common, but it does happen. There is no 100% full proof method to Mentally prepare anyone for what they might see and/or experience in combat, or how it will effect each person. There's a reason PTSD is higher with Military people vs regular civilians. Not having wars or sending our military into combat is the only way to prevent it from happening to people in the military.

Also understand, I am not saying Penny had PTSD, but it is one of many possible scenarios that may play out, and explain why he reacted in the manner he did. It doesn't mean what he did was okay. It's just one of many possibilities.

 

[eelw]

At this point, let’s just take PTSD off the table. The police have the subway footage. They can see the entire incident. There is more recaps that they didn’t interact and he just came up from behind and immediately choked him. And once paramedics got on scene, he released him and was calm and cooperative after. If it really was a PTSD incident, a Dr will be able to analyze the footage.

 

[nakedfrog]

Uh, you really should go look up LOAC. What it pertains to. I don't think you don't fully understand the Marines roll in a conflict, what LOAC, or even rules of engagement covers. If Penny saw Neely as the enemy, for what ever reason, non of that applies.

It's clear you don't understand PTSD. If you did, you would know years of service really has nothing to do with PTSD. A single traumatic even can cause it. How many of those do you think a marine might go thru during a 4 year enlistment, if they see combat?

My step dad had PTSD. The things witnessed in the Vietnam war he wouldn't even talk about, ever. Not in the 36 years he was married to my mother, not at all before he died. All I know is one of many things he witnessed was he watched his best friend get killed right next to him.. and I didn't learn that from him. I learned it from others that knew the guy. Then you have to consider all those he had to kill. He only served 4 years as well.

I also was on the receiving end when the PTSD took over. If it wasn't for my Mother, and the fact that her voice brought him back, I wouldn't be here. He even told her would have snapped my neck. I don't even remember what the argument was about, as it was 30+ years ago. My point is you can't predict how PTSD will effect someone, specially if untreated.

Now, violence with PTSD is not common, but it does happen. There is no 100% full proof method to Mentally prepare anyone for what they might see and/or experience in combat, or how it will effect each person. There's a reason PTSD is higher with Military people vs regular civilians. Not having wars or sending our military into combat is the only way to prevent it from happening to people in the military.

Also understand, I am not saying Penny had PTSD, but it is one of many possible scenarios that may play out, and explain why he reacted in the manner he did. It doesn't mean what he did was okay. It's just one of many possibilities.

I've been in LOAC briefings myself, that's why I brought it up in the first place. I also understand PTSD, because I know people who have been diagnosed with it. But it's clear no one knows more about this situation than you, so I'll just leave it there.

 

[NWRMidnight]

I've been in LOAC briefings myself, that's why I brought it up in the first place. I also understand PTSD, because I know people who have been diagnosed with it. But it's clear no one knows more about this situation than you, so I'll just leave it there.

Oh, and what makes you believe that being in briefings makes you believe you understand LOAC (Laws of Armed Conflict) and how it applies, or when it applies to military service members? Have you served? I have, I am a veteran.

So please, educate us and tell us how you think LOAC, which is a serious of broad-based set of rules defining how we fight a war, applies here? Even during a war and combat, how do you think those rules apply to the enemy you in direct combat with? What is the purpose of LOAC and who are they designed to protect? If you really want to apply LOAC to this situation, it could be argued that LOAC supports Penny's actions. Of course, first, you have to be able to understand the purpose of LOAC and who they are designed to protect, to see that. You have actually, inadvertently, brought another possible perspective into what happened.

As for PTSD, I know people as well who have been diagnosed, one who was very close to me who I lived with, did you even read everything in my response to you?. I don't know more about this situation, I am just throwing out one of many possibilities.

 

[nakedfrog]

Yes, I'm a veteran, and as I said, I'm leaving it there.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Yes, I'm a veteran, and as I said, I'm leaving it there.

Oh, then why can't you answer my questions? Because it doesn't support your argument of LOAC? I also added to my post.. maybe you should go read it.

 

[nakedfrog]

No, because I'm not interested in having this discussion with you, as you've already determined what the right answers are.

 

[NWRMidnight]

No, because I'm not interested in having this discussion with you, as you've already determined what the right answers are.

How can you make that determination if you haven't even attempted to answer the questions I asked, nor have we had a chance to discuss them? Isn't the very purpose of a discussion is to discuss different views and interpretations of a subject?
Is it that you don't know the answers? or is it that you do know the answers, and you realize that they don't support your argument?

 

[mindless1]

Many people have undiagnosed PTSD. Could it cause him to react to the situation the way he did? Yes, but that doesn't mean it necessarily did, even if he has PTSD. Is it a viable defense? It shouldn't be, whether it was his *fault* or not for over-reacting, that still poses a potential danger to society and resulted in someone's death, even IF it was the cause or contributing factor.

I don't think he intended to kill but it happened, in a non-accidental way. Voluntary manslaughter at the very least because we can't have people going around deciding to put others in choke holds then hope for the best, unless there was physical harm occurring to others already, not just the ramblings of a wacko.

Even then, there is some point long before 15 minutes, where he could have relaxed his hold and seen if the person is excessively combative, physically not verbally. Excessive because you have to expect someone you are choke holding to be a bit resistant to having their neck in a headlock, not just get all relaxed and submissive to a stranger doing that. Then again I'd still consider it manslaughter if he had crushed his neck within the first 2 seconds.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

What kind of twat writes something like "most were on mental drugs like Prozac, etc"
Oh that's right the @FelixDeCat kinda twat.
Mental health is health care. Would you chide someone for needing to take insulin to regulate their diabetes, or spironolactone to treat heart failure, or is it just mental health that is your boogeyman.

 

[FelixDeCat]

What kind of twat writes something like "most were on mental drugs like Prozac, etc"
Oh that's right the @FelixDeCat kinda twat.
Mental health is health care. Would you chide someone for needing to take insulin to regulate their diabetes, or spironolactone to treat heart failure, or is it just mental health that is your boogeyman.

There is no bogeyman. I support mental care 100%. Now go take your meds. 😉

 

[brycejones]

There is no bogeyman. I support mental care 100%. Now go take your meds. 😉

So now we know for sure that Felix is off his meds. I guess that explains a lot about his posts.

 

[Paratus]

If we want to harp on his military service, he surely had LOAC training. People keep acting like joining the Marines just turns one into this unstoppable killing machine, but there are rules about when and how you're supposed to kill a combatant, upon which there is training as well. If his level of PTSD from one 4 year term was so severe that he can't determine/apply an appropriate level of force to use in this situation, that's a pretty damning indictment of our military both training-wise and mental healthcare wise, we shouldn't just be releasing people into civilian life that are liable to just "accidentally" choke someone to death in response to this level of threat.

Ok I have to ask what LOAC training means in this context. At my work LOAC stands for Loss of Attitude Control and is what happens when your space vehicle starts to tumble leading to loss of communication and for solar powered vehicles loss of power potentially permanently if your drain the batteries all the way.

(LOACs that I had to help save happened to me enough times while I was working missions that I use the term in my PS gamer tag)

 

[ch33zw1z]

There is no bogeyman. I support mental care 100%. Now go take your meds. 😉

Voting for GOP means you don’t, because they dont