Homeless Man Killed by Fellow Passenger on NYC Subway

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who lived in NYC and regularly rode the subway both then and later, Penny’s acquittal is great news. Riding the subway is often not for the faint of heart and riders depend on the guardian angels not to sit back passively when crazy people start harassing riders.

As for Alvin Bragg, he is a disgrace who has no business having any prosecutorial authority. His decision to charge Penny in the first place made most New Yorkers feel less safe in their city, and the sooner this incompetent buffoon leaves his position the better.

+1000. I am a NYC resident and I completely agree with you. It was an insane decision to charge Penny on these facts, and I am very, very relieved he was acquitted.

Yes, I think many people will justify criminal behavior due to fear or frustration with a system that has allowed things to get out of control.

I’m the PP you’re responding to. In addition to being a NYC resident and regular subway rider, I’m also a lawyer, and I don’t agree that Penny’s behavior was criminal. I think it met the legal elements of self defense. I think the decision to charge him was stupid and a waste of prosecutorial resources, on the legal merits, and was likely significantly influenced by the fact that Penny is white and Neely is Black (which had zero relevance to this situation).

+1

Not a New Yorker but also a lawyer. He was charged for emotional reasons, not because of the facts.

+1

He was acquitted for emotional reasons, not facts. Or maybe he had a great defense team like OJ

He was acquitted because the evidence did not support the charges.

All of the eyewitness accounts supported Mr. Perry.

Based on that fact alone, there should never have been charges.

This is not true at all.

From the info that has been leaked from the trial, the two people that offered assistance didn't appear to be supportive of Mr Penny continuing to choke the homeless guy. I think another witness said something about how the choke was going to kill him. Maybe say what happened instead of taking a position and cherry picking "facts."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who lived in NYC and regularly rode the subway both then and later, Penny’s acquittal is great news. Riding the subway is often not for the faint of heart and riders depend on the guardian angels not to sit back passively when crazy people start harassing riders.

As for Alvin Bragg, he is a disgrace who has no business having any prosecutorial authority. His decision to charge Penny in the first place made most New Yorkers feel less safe in their city, and the sooner this incompetent buffoon leaves his position the better.

+1000. I am a NYC resident and I completely agree with you. It was an insane decision to charge Penny on these facts, and I am very, very relieved he was acquitted.

Yes, I think many people will justify criminal behavior due to fear or frustration with a system that has allowed things to get out of control.

I’m the PP you’re responding to. In addition to being a NYC resident and regular subway rider, I’m also a lawyer, and I don’t agree that Penny’s behavior was criminal. I think it met the legal elements of self defense. I think the decision to charge him was stupid and a waste of prosecutorial resources, on the legal merits, and was likely significantly influenced by the fact that Penny is white and Neely is Black (which had zero relevance to this situation).

I'm not sure if being a lawyer is very relevant here. Having knowledge about BJJ is critical to determining if Neely was a threat. At the very least, you need to learn quite a bit before you can come to any reasonable determination whether the force used was appropriate.

It’s relevant because self-defense is an actual legal concept with specific elements, and in my view (clearly also in the jury’s view) Penny’s conduct satisfied those elements. In a situation like that, where you need to act within seconds to neutralize what appears to be a serious, imminent, and potentially lethal threat to yourself and others, and as a PP mentioned above, your body is flooded with adrenaline (i.e., exactly the circumstances necessitating self-defense), you’re not in a position in that split second to weigh all the information and make the most perfect judgment of the exact amount of force needed to incapacitate the person. Distinguish this from a case like the murder of Breona Taylor, which was clearly an unjustified and unreasonable use of force.

Here, Penny was very obviously not acting maliciously. There was a credible and immediate threat to everyone’s safety, he was acting in the defense of himself and others, and he acted to incapacitate Neely, which had the unfortunate result that he died. And “reasonable use of force” is something that’s easy to calculate after the fact, harder in the moment. Legally justified self defense doesn’t exclude the possibility that the aggressor dies. Sometimes it happens, and it happened here. There really shouldn’t have been charges at all.

[Anonymous]

I swear I saw Neely in Times Square the winter before this happened. Dude was melting down so violently that I literally had not seen anything like it before (and I have spent plenty of time in DC, Philly and NYC to see all sorts of stuff). Like he honestly looked like he might attack someone and chew their face off.

If he appeared anything close to like that on the subway then I 100% agree it was self defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Justice was served.

Except that this poor man was put through a totally unnecessary and unjustified trial.

It is about time the authorities started taking the security of the public as seriously as they take the rights of violent criminals.

Agree. Why should bystanders have to step in to ward off violent psychopaths? There needs to be a better way. We need more enforcement, tougher penalties, and hospitals for mentally ill.

People should be safe going about their business. It was ridiculous this guy was even charged.

[Anonymous]

Mr. Penny won't find a wife if he is not already married.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mr. Penny won't find a wife if he is not already married.

That may be the dumbest post on dcum today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mr. Penny won't find a wife if he is not already married.

That may be the dumbest post on dcum today.

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mr. Penny won't find a wife if he is not already married.

That may be the dumbest post on dcum today.

Perhaps in the entirety of 2024. Good lord.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who lived in NYC and regularly rode the subway both then and later, Penny’s acquittal is great news. Riding the subway is often not for the faint of heart and riders depend on the guardian angels not to sit back passively when crazy people start harassing riders.

As for Alvin Bragg, he is a disgrace who has no business having any prosecutorial authority. His decision to charge Penny in the first place made most New Yorkers feel less safe in their city, and the sooner this incompetent buffoon leaves his position the better.

+1000. I am a NYC resident and I completely agree with you. It was an insane decision to charge Penny on these facts, and I am very, very relieved he was acquitted.

Yes, I think many people will justify criminal behavior due to fear or frustration with a system that has allowed things to get out of control.

I’m the PP you’re responding to. In addition to being a NYC resident and regular subway rider, I’m also a lawyer, and I don’t agree that Penny’s behavior was criminal. I think it met the legal elements of self defense. I think the decision to charge him was stupid and a waste of prosecutorial resources, on the legal merits, and was likely significantly influenced by the fact that Penny is white and Neely is Black (which had zero relevance to this situation).

I'm not sure if being a lawyer is very relevant here. Having knowledge about BJJ is critical to determining if Neely was a threat. At the very least, you need to learn quite a bit before you can come to any reasonable determination whether the force used was appropriate.

It’s relevant because self-defense is an actual legal concept with specific elements, and in my view (clearly also in the jury’s view) Penny’s conduct satisfied those elements. In a situation like that, where you need to act within seconds to neutralize what appears to be a serious, imminent, and potentially lethal threat to yourself and others, and as a PP mentioned above, your body is flooded with adrenaline (i.e., exactly the circumstances necessitating self-defense), you’re not in a position in that split second to weigh all the information and make the most perfect judgment of the exact amount of force needed to incapacitate the person. Distinguish this from a case like the murder of Breona Taylor, which was clearly an unjustified and unreasonable use of force.

Here, Penny was very obviously not acting maliciously. There was a credible and immediate threat to everyone’s safety, he was acting in the defense of himself and others, and he acted to incapacitate Neely, which had the unfortunate result that he died. And “reasonable use of force” is something that’s easy to calculate after the fact, harder in the moment. Legally justified self defense doesn’t exclude the possibility that the aggressor dies. Sometimes it happens, and it happened here. There really shouldn’t have been charges at all.

Maybe you are a new lawyer? I say this because many people who have zero experience outside of academia don't fully grasp that there is a big difference between theory and real life. They also think they know more than they actually know. You read about a concept and are attempting to apply it to a scenario, but it doesn't really fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mr. Penny won't find a wife if he is not already married.

That may be the dumbest post on dcum today.

Some girls like that!

[Anonymous]

I won't date men who choke people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who lived in NYC and regularly rode the subway both then and later, Penny’s acquittal is great news. Riding the subway is often not for the faint of heart and riders depend on the guardian angels not to sit back passively when crazy people start harassing riders.

As for Alvin Bragg, he is a disgrace who has no business having any prosecutorial authority. His decision to charge Penny in the first place made most New Yorkers feel less safe in their city, and the sooner this incompetent buffoon leaves his position the better.

+1000. I am a NYC resident and I completely agree with you. It was an insane decision to charge Penny on these facts, and I am very, very relieved he was acquitted.

Yes, I think many people will justify criminal behavior due to fear or frustration with a system that has allowed things to get out of control.

I’m the PP you’re responding to. In addition to being a NYC resident and regular subway rider, I’m also a lawyer, and I don’t agree that Penny’s behavior was criminal. I think it met the legal elements of self defense. I think the decision to charge him was stupid and a waste of prosecutorial resources, on the legal merits, and was likely significantly influenced by the fact that Penny is white and Neely is Black (which had zero relevance to this situation).

I'm not sure if being a lawyer is very relevant here. Having knowledge about BJJ is critical to determining if Neely was a threat. At the very least, you need to learn quite a bit before you can come to any reasonable determination whether the force used was appropriate.

It’s relevant because self-defense is an actual legal concept with specific elements, and in my view (clearly also in the jury’s view) Penny’s conduct satisfied those elements. In a situation like that, where you need to act within seconds to neutralize what appears to be a serious, imminent, and potentially lethal threat to yourself and others, and as a PP mentioned above, your body is flooded with adrenaline (i.e., exactly the circumstances necessitating self-defense), you’re not in a position in that split second to weigh all the information and make the most perfect judgment of the exact amount of force needed to incapacitate the person. Distinguish this from a case like the murder of Breona Taylor, which was clearly an unjustified and unreasonable use of force.

Here, Penny was very obviously not acting maliciously. There was a credible and immediate threat to everyone’s safety, he was acting in the defense of himself and others, and he acted to incapacitate Neely, which had the unfortunate result that he died. And “reasonable use of force” is something that’s easy to calculate after the fact, harder in the moment. Legally justified self defense doesn’t exclude the possibility that the aggressor dies. Sometimes it happens, and it happened here. There really shouldn’t have been charges at all.

Maybe you are a new lawyer? I say this because many people who have zero experience outside of academia don't fully grasp that there is a big difference between theory and real life. They also think they know more than they actually know. You read about a concept and are attempting to apply it to a scenario, but it doesn't really fit.

… except the jury acquitted so obviously PP is correct

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who lived in NYC and regularly rode the subway both then and later, Penny’s acquittal is great news. Riding the subway is often not for the faint of heart and riders depend on the guardian angels not to sit back passively when crazy people start harassing riders.

As for Alvin Bragg, he is a disgrace who has no business having any prosecutorial authority. His decision to charge Penny in the first place made most New Yorkers feel less safe in their city, and the sooner this incompetent buffoon leaves his position the better.

+1000. I am a NYC resident and I completely agree with you. It was an insane decision to charge Penny on these facts, and I am very, very relieved he was acquitted.

Yes, I think many people will justify criminal behavior due to fear or frustration with a system that has allowed things to get out of control.

I’m the PP you’re responding to. In addition to being a NYC resident and regular subway rider, I’m also a lawyer, and I don’t agree that Penny’s behavior was criminal. I think it met the legal elements of self defense. I think the decision to charge him was stupid and a waste of prosecutorial resources, on the legal merits, and was likely significantly influenced by the fact that Penny is white and Neely is Black (which had zero relevance to this situation).

I'm not sure if being a lawyer is very relevant here. Having knowledge about BJJ is critical to determining if Neely was a threat. At the very least, you need to learn quite a bit before you can come to any reasonable determination whether the force used was appropriate.

It’s relevant because self-defense is an actual legal concept with specific elements, and in my view (clearly also in the jury’s view) Penny’s conduct satisfied those elements. In a situation like that, where you need to act within seconds to neutralize what appears to be a serious, imminent, and potentially lethal threat to yourself and others, and as a PP mentioned above, your body is flooded with adrenaline (i.e., exactly the circumstances necessitating self-defense), you’re not in a position in that split second to weigh all the information and make the most perfect judgment of the exact amount of force needed to incapacitate the person. Distinguish this from a case like the murder of Breona Taylor, which was clearly an unjustified and unreasonable use of force.

Here, Penny was very obviously not acting maliciously. There was a credible and immediate threat to everyone’s safety, he was acting in the defense of himself and others, and he acted to incapacitate Neely, which had the unfortunate result that he died. And “reasonable use of force” is something that’s easy to calculate after the fact, harder in the moment. Legally justified self defense doesn’t exclude the possibility that the aggressor dies. Sometimes it happens, and it happened here. There really shouldn’t have been charges at all.

Maybe you are a new lawyer? I say this because many people who have zero experience outside of academia don't fully grasp that there is a big difference between theory and real life. They also think they know more than they actually know. You read about a concept and are attempting to apply it to a scenario, but it doesn't really fit.

I have been a lawyer for 30 years and think the PPs description was accurate. And, as another PP noted, the jury acquitted. Maybe you could point out the parts you think are incorrect, or that don't fit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who lived in NYC and regularly rode the subway both then and later, Penny’s acquittal is great news. Riding the subway is often not for the faint of heart and riders depend on the guardian angels not to sit back passively when crazy people start harassing riders.

As for Alvin Bragg, he is a disgrace who has no business having any prosecutorial authority. His decision to charge Penny in the first place made most New Yorkers feel less safe in their city, and the sooner this incompetent buffoon leaves his position the better.

+1000. I am a NYC resident and I completely agree with you. It was an insane decision to charge Penny on these facts, and I am very, very relieved he was acquitted.

Yes, I think many people will justify criminal behavior due to fear or frustration with a system that has allowed things to get out of control.

I’m the PP you’re responding to. In addition to being a NYC resident and regular subway rider, I’m also a lawyer, and I don’t agree that Penny’s behavior was criminal. I think it met the legal elements of self defense. I think the decision to charge him was stupid and a waste of prosecutorial resources, on the legal merits, and was likely significantly influenced by the fact that Penny is white and Neely is Black (which had zero relevance to this situation).

I'm not sure if being a lawyer is very relevant here. Having knowledge about BJJ is critical to determining if Neely was a threat. At the very least, you need to learn quite a bit before you can come to any reasonable determination whether the force used was appropriate.

It’s relevant because self-defense is an actual legal concept with specific elements, and in my view (clearly also in the jury’s view) Penny’s conduct satisfied those elements. In a situation like that, where you need to act within seconds to neutralize what appears to be a serious, imminent, and potentially lethal threat to yourself and others, and as a PP mentioned above, your body is flooded with adrenaline (i.e., exactly the circumstances necessitating self-defense), you’re not in a position in that split second to weigh all the information and make the most perfect judgment of the exact amount of force needed to incapacitate the person. Distinguish this from a case like the murder of Breona Taylor, which was clearly an unjustified and unreasonable use of force.

Here, Penny was very obviously not acting maliciously. There was a credible and immediate threat to everyone’s safety, he was acting in the defense of himself and others, and he acted to incapacitate Neely, which had the unfortunate result that he died. And “reasonable use of force” is something that’s easy to calculate after the fact, harder in the moment. Legally justified self defense doesn’t exclude the possibility that the aggressor dies. Sometimes it happens, and it happened here. There really shouldn’t have been charges at all.

Maybe you are a new lawyer? I say this because many people who have zero experience outside of academia don't fully grasp that there is a big difference between theory and real life. They also think they know more than they actually know. You read about a concept and are attempting to apply it to a scenario, but it doesn't really fit.

… except the jury acquitted so obviously PP is correct

Juries are highly unpredictable, so you really haven't proven or disproven anything

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who lived in NYC and regularly rode the subway both then and later, Penny’s acquittal is great news. Riding the subway is often not for the faint of heart and riders depend on the guardian angels not to sit back passively when crazy people start harassing riders.

As for Alvin Bragg, he is a disgrace who has no business having any prosecutorial authority. His decision to charge Penny in the first place made most New Yorkers feel less safe in their city, and the sooner this incompetent buffoon leaves his position the better.

+1000. I am a NYC resident and I completely agree with you. It was an insane decision to charge Penny on these facts, and I am very, very relieved he was acquitted.

Yes, I think many people will justify criminal behavior due to fear or frustration with a system that has allowed things to get out of control.

I’m the PP you’re responding to. In addition to being a NYC resident and regular subway rider, I’m also a lawyer, and I don’t agree that Penny’s behavior was criminal. I think it met the legal elements of self defense. I think the decision to charge him was stupid and a waste of prosecutorial resources, on the legal merits, and was likely significantly influenced by the fact that Penny is white and Neely is Black (which had zero relevance to this situation).

I'm not sure if being a lawyer is very relevant here. Having knowledge about BJJ is critical to determining if Neely was a threat. At the very least, you need to learn quite a bit before you can come to any reasonable determination whether the force used was appropriate.

It’s relevant because self-defense is an actual legal concept with specific elements, and in my view (clearly also in the jury’s view) Penny’s conduct satisfied those elements. In a situation like that, where you need to act within seconds to neutralize what appears to be a serious, imminent, and potentially lethal threat to yourself and others, and as a PP mentioned above, your body is flooded with adrenaline (i.e., exactly the circumstances necessitating self-defense), you’re not in a position in that split second to weigh all the information and make the most perfect judgment of the exact amount of force needed to incapacitate the person. Distinguish this from a case like the murder of Breona Taylor, which was clearly an unjustified and unreasonable use of force.

Here, Penny was very obviously not acting maliciously. There was a credible and immediate threat to everyone’s safety, he was acting in the defense of himself and others, and he acted to incapacitate Neely, which had the unfortunate result that he died. And “reasonable use of force” is something that’s easy to calculate after the fact, harder in the moment. Legally justified self defense doesn’t exclude the possibility that the aggressor dies. Sometimes it happens, and it happened here. There really shouldn’t have been charges at all.

Maybe you are a new lawyer? I say this because many people who have zero experience outside of academia don't fully grasp that there is a big difference between theory and real life. They also think they know more than they actually know. You read about a concept and are attempting to apply it to a scenario, but it doesn't really fit.

I have been a lawyer for 30 years and think the PPs description was accurate. And, as another PP noted, the jury acquitted. Maybe you could point out the parts you think are incorrect, or that don't fit?

Lawyer? That's half of the people on DCUM, probably practicing patent or real estate law 😭

Several posters have already given reasons earlier in the thread.