Crime Guy RNCed on NY subway dies.

[Patrick Jane]

That violent criminal clearly had a Death Wish.

 

[nostradumbass]

New York is a duty to retreat state, so if the man and his GF didn’t try to leave the situation first, they can’t legally use deadly self defense like a knife


Hopefully a lawyer can argue that within the confines of a subway car, there’s no use trying to retreat as there’s no where to go

*If the details as present above are accurate. If the GF started something and got appropriately punched then it would be manslaughter

Otherwise known as a pro crime shithole.

Lol at "duty to retreat" from a dude who punched your gf.

 

[cincymma79]

Now you're just being a big dummy. Floyd didn't die from the choke it was fentanyl. This guy didn't die from the choke it was a heart attack. Ok, move on, nothing to gain from your posts.

Heart attack from the bear hug. Maybe I win at trial after six months of being a white supremacist on cnn, getting fired, and being out 82,000 in legal fees. Huge victory for me

 

[cincymma79]

The fuck? Once the guy punches his GF, game over. People die from being punched too, this became clear self defense at that point.

You want to charge him for "illegally carrying the weapon" or whatever, fine. But manslaughter? No.

Hoping they hastily get more info and realize this kid shouldn't be in jail and get him out of there.

It wasn’t a violent punch. He didn’t stab his girlfriend so obviously it wasn’t a threat. Also why are you saying punching women should be a death sentence.

 

[mkess101]

It wasn’t a violent punch. He didn’t stab his girlfriend so obviously it wasn’t a threat. Also why are you saying punching women should be a death sentence.

 

[jamel]

It wasn’t a violent punch. He didn’t stab his girlfriend so obviously it wasn’t a threat. Also why are you saying punching women should be a death sentence.

Suplex yourself
Hug yourself around the shoulders and backflip onto your face

 

[Rod1]

Manslaughter is Murder you goof, it just doesn't carry malice with it. It would have to go down to Criminal Negligence to get out of the Murder Realm.

No, its not, if there is no mens rea its not murder.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

BLM were rioting and setting fire to every city in the country for 8 months. They had celebrities posting their bails and posters on here claiming that they were 93% peaceful.

Yet, despite this, the January 6th rioters get punished to the fullest extent of the law.

America deserves what it tolerates.

Go complain about your own country.

 

[DavidsGhost]

I don’t see it.


I think stabbing someone is manslaughter unless that person is trying to kill you.


I mean, extend the logic, if we say it’s okay to kill anyone you get in a fist fight with then what?


Right call unless the guy has a weapon or was being choked or was being mounted and had no way out.

over reaction

 

[Hog-train]

Of course it's the law. A verbal threat is just a verbal threat, it's not an imminent or active threat of violence. It's just words.

An unarmed man cannot kill an entire train car of people without a weapon. It's not reasonable to expect that to happen.

Red herring. No one is claiming he was going to be deadly to the entire train. No one is claiming deadly force toward him was justified.

Why didn't the prosecutors also charge the other 2 men?

 

[DavidsGhost]

Also this is the literal definition of manslaughter

 

[Bald1]

Duty to retreat is such a harmful concept. It gives the benefit of a doubt to the attacker. That they can be trusted not to dial it up a notch when by virtue of being the aggressor they're demonstrably a wild card. That if you run away they'll leave you alone. Retreat where in a metal tube? Retreat into a corner where your options are more limited than where the situation first popped off?

Disproportionate use of force is a thing. Pursuit after the attacker has retreated is also to be viewed with suspicion. But to remove viable options in the face of imminent danger is to give advantage to the aggressor. The best defense is a good offense is truth.

@Deorum

This is probably a better thread for me to follow up. I'd probably catch a case nowadays if my dogs caught that guy, but I'd do the same thing. Once you put me in danger I no longer have any responsibility to take your well-being into consideration as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Sano]

I'd like to see the overlap between the people saying "equal rights and equal lefts" and the ones saying he deserved death for punching a woman regardless of what the laws says. We have no context here, this is just a lazy race baiting thread that TS wanted to make because he's perpetually caught up in the political divide. You clearly don't care about this woman.

Obviously physically assaulting anyone is wrong and should be punished, but so is stabbing someone to death. The trial will decide if lethal self defense was justified or if it was simply retribution.

Otherwise known as a pro crime shithole.

Lol at "duty to retreat" from a dude who punched your gf.

NYC is a middling city as far as crime is concerned. Less crime than a place like Jacksonville and way less than Miami. NYC is one of the safer big cities. The narrative that it's a particularly criminal place is not factual, but it's certainly politically convenient.

 

[Hog-train]

I wouldn't be so sure about this. A lot of times judges wont allow past history in a case like this because it doesn't matter in this case. For instance what does the victims past history matter? No one on the train knew about his past history so it's like they can use it as part of their defense. The defendant has to justify his use of self defense in this scenario with the facts that were known at the time. He can't murder someone and then start researching the persons past to justify it after the fact. I'd honestly be shocked if the judge allowed it in this case.

It depends what facts are being argued in the case. Was he truly being threatening to other people on the subway car? If those facts are being litigated, then prior similar behavior will come into it. I wouldn't be shocked at all and in fact I expect this to come out in trial.

 

[NoSmilez]

It's a Democrat run area. He's likely to get life or an extended sentence. My recommendation is to move out of Democrat run areas and don't visit them. For instance, I do not go into L.A. County (except to drive through or LAX). My neighbor's only grandson was murdered there (shot in the face as he tried to escape some thugs after his fire dancing practice). There has been no suspects arrested, no progress on the case, nothing. Don't frequent Democrat areas. Drive through them and don't stop.

Red States tend to have a higher murder rate. It isn't something any side should be proud of or gloating over. Murder isn't a Democrat/Republican thing. It is an American thing. We have a much high murder rate compared to other developed countries. Our murder rate is closer to the "safer" parts of Africa and South America.

Every city has problem areas. In Los Angeles half of the murders are accounted for within 4 districts/divisions. Police spending in Los Angeles has almost doubled since 2010. The rates of violent and property crime don't necessarily change with higher spending. Some years it goes down and some years it goes up. Sometimes murder goes up while violent/property crime goes down.

 

[Whippy McGee]

Red areas have DA's, Sheriffs, and Police Forces that uphold the law.

 

[Poatan Power]

Because chokes are the safest way to take someone down if you know what you’re doing. They were my go to on people less skilled than me for years

Position is the safest way to subdue someone. Chokes are a means to incapacitate them. The problem with incapacitation is it comes with risks, so you better know what you're doing. There's a chance that with the other people helping, he may not have been aware that he was "out" or not resisting because of everyone else applying pressure / moving around. But, the nature of the choke just makes it damned dangerous if you're not in practice. I've used it a few times in the hospital setting, but with scalpel like accuracy on the appropriateness. You have to be so this doesn't happen

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Why didn't the prosecutors also charge the other 2 men?

@Rational Poster knows the answer to the question.

He just doesn't have the balls to say it.

 

[Blayt7hh]

if someone is acting erratic and screaming threats people should just believe that said person is just blowing off steam and not take them seriously until they actually attack someone or what ?

You're right that those people didn't know his criminal history...but we do. Is it hard to believe a guy that has attacked people before might do it again and was building up to it ? Ya know what else no one new ? If that guy had a weapon ....its not like we've never heard of a mental patient randomly killing someone before . It's a real damned I you do damned if you don't kinda situation.

Im actually completely fine with him putting the guy to sleep. You just can't choke him to death when he hasn't actually done anything. The Marine definitely did something super or the guy would have been fine. And really we know what he did- he held it for a long time.

 

[Gutter Chris]

Im actually completely fine with him putting the guy to sleep. You just can't choke him to death when he hasn't actually done anything. The Marine definitely did something super or the guy would have been fine. And really we know what he did- he held it for a long time.

While I find it unfortunate that guy died I don't really think anything criminal took place other than the failure of the state that made it even possible for these 2 to meet in the first place. If you think you are in a fight with a violent mentally ill person it seems reasonable to me that you fight him til he stops moving.

To me it's like a self defense shooting. You weren't shooting to kill you were shooting to stop the threat. It's not always fatal but sometimes it is.if it was reasonable to put the guy in a choke hold than whatever result that produced is also fine no?

Now I'll be honest with you about 2 things. One I don't know if my opinion on the situation matches with what the law says. And 2 I think mentally ill homeless people are Sketch af and due to that bias there's no way I'd convict this guy if I was on his jury and it's hard for me to see it any other way.