Homeless Man Killed by Fellow Passenger on NYC Subway

[Anonymous]

A lot of hot girls on social media are asking for the ex-marine’s contact info

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of hot girls on social media are asking for the ex-marine’s contact info

They know what's good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in NYC and take the F train most days. The myth or rumor that policing is down is just that. There are more cops in subway stations and patrolling subway cars than I’ve ever seen in my 20 years of living in New York. Obviously homelessness and mental health crisis are also up, and there are a lot of almost tragedies and true tragedies like this happening all the time.
I also believe a trained marine should know the difference between chokehold to subdue and chokehold to kill. Obviously, this guy had some sort of white savior act to “protect others bothered” going on. From
The eyewitnesses it doesn’t sound like the man murdered was doing anything dangerous.

I guess all the witnesses were wrong to be frightened and to feel threatened.

I wonder if he did anything dangerous before he hit the 67-year-old woman in the face?

No one on that train. Could have known about his priors, nor is it appropriate for a vigilante to kill a man for past crimes.

They wouldn't have know his priors, but his past record does suggest that his actions weren't benign and that many people felt rightfully threatened by him. Agree he still shouldn't have been killed, but restraining him doesn't seem unreasonable in that case.

This is why being a vigilante is illegal, no his priors do not matter. You can't assume somebody is dangerous based on priors, you can't kill somebody unless they are a threat to your life. That does not mean looking or sounding scary.

I think it makes sense to try to restrain a violent person before they attack other people.

I don’t think we’d be having this conversation if the person had simply restrained him.

Obviously he went too far in restraining him. I don't think he should have been killed and I think it's appropriate that he be tried for manslaughter. I just think it's ridiculous to act like the guy posed no threat to others.

Or that it's completely unreasonable (without actually having been there) that people might have been frightened by his behavior.

Being frightened does not raise to a level of needing to kill or even assault someone by restraint.

You can only defend yourself or other when assaulted or your life is in danger (like pointing a gun at you).

Says who? You? And verbal assaults count.

“Verbal assault”?

Have you never had a mentally ill person threaten to kill you? Happened to me quite recently in Georgetown. I was able to quickly move away. But if someone threatened me like that on the metro, I would be grateful if someone else was at least ready to restrain the person as I moved as far away as I could.

We don't know exactly what happened leading up to the physical confrontation other than witness accounts that the victim was behaving erratically, including shouting that he didn't care if he lived or went to jail. What is reasonable in terms of a threat from a mentally unstable person is difficult to determine. Sure, anyone who has lived in an urban environment frequently encounters mentally ill individuals and individuals who are addicted to drugs and are exhibiting unstable behaviors. Their mere existence is not a threat, but at some point, are people morally required to wait until they are attacked before they do something?

The mentally ill unhoused person in the video below was muttering about Satan before he brutally attacked a woman who was trying to walk away from him. As a warning, this video is horrible, but who is to say whether a person trying to move to another car might not have been attacked in the same way?

https://abc7ny.com/woman-beaten-in-subway-station-waheed-foster-assault-howard-beach/12268543/

Crazy. That guy should not have been allowed to be living in the community without forced medication.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he was dangerous and needed to be subdued. Why wouldn't someone understand that?

He didn’t do anything dangerous

How do you know? We’re you there?

There have been several statements collected by witnesses, if you have been keeping up. Yes, he was yelling and screaming.

This is not a crime. If it were, I’d be entitled to choke out your brats when they have a tantrum in public. I’m honestly shocked and sickened by the attitudes here. Do we live in Minority Report, where people can be killed for futurecrime?

Not at all surprised it was a Marine who killed him. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

I have read a number of articles about this and watched an interview with the man who took the video. In his interview (in Spanish with a translator), he did note that the man had not assaulted anyone (although you could argue that throwing trash at people might be assault). The witness did, however, note that he was frightened by the man. He also said, in a comment that I found very telling, that if the police had come five minutes earlier, the marine would have been hailed as a hero. I think the fact that two other men were helping the marine subdue the man speaks to the fact that they genuinely viewed his behavior as a threat.

Of course whether they went too far is the question, and it sounds like the force used was excessive.

I ride the NY subway every day, and encounter loud, erratically behaving people regularly. If I deem one of them to be an actual potential threat (and the vast majority are not), I move further down the car, or switch cars. Removing oneself from the threat is the appropriate, and usual, tactic.

The fact that you normalize the necessity to get away from people who pose danger is very telling
It shouldn’t be like that in a civilized country

+1 truly

DP. I think you have it the other way around. In a civilized country, vigilante action is not permitted.

This was not vigilante action, not even close. I'm sure the people on that train felt threatened and they took action, good for them. This sob hit a 67 year old woman in the face, punched her. What a sick individual, and no, he needed to be behind bars hitting himself in the face instead of terrorizing the community. But I'm going to take yours and many other comments, ie AOC, and in the future I will walk/run away and let deviants like this hurt whoever they want to hurt. Not going to be called a vigilante because I'm protecting my personal safety. F society, that's what you want right? Well, you got it.

This most certainly was vigilante action. You are conflating a prior incident with what happened this week. No one on that train knew that he had done this. And yes, please remove yourself from situations like this, I don't want you killing someone and claiming it was on society's collective behalf.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind, please, that 9 people were murdered last year on the NY subway. Anyone with any sense would be 100% in their guard any time they ride it. It wouldn’t take much to perceive fear or feel like one is in danger of being physically assaulted

If someone was screaming like a maniac at me when I was riding a train- that would do it.

And another person was murdered this week. By the marine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he was dangerous and needed to be subdued. Why wouldn't someone understand that?

He didn’t do anything dangerous

How do you know? We’re you there?

There have been several statements collected by witnesses, if you have been keeping up. Yes, he was yelling and screaming.

This is not a crime. If it were, I’d be entitled to choke out your brats when they have a tantrum in public. I’m honestly shocked and sickened by the attitudes here. Do we live in Minority Report, where people can be killed for futurecrime?

Not at all surprised it was a Marine who killed him. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

I have read a number of articles about this and watched an interview with the man who took the video. In his interview (in Spanish with a translator), he did note that the man had not assaulted anyone (although you could argue that throwing trash at people might be assault). The witness did, however, note that he was frightened by the man. He also said, in a comment that I found very telling, that if the police had come five minutes earlier, the marine would have been hailed as a hero. I think the fact that two other men were helping the marine subdue the man speaks to the fact that they genuinely viewed his behavior as a threat.

Of course whether they went too far is the question, and it sounds like the force used was excessive.

I ride the NY subway every day, and encounter loud, erratically behaving people regularly. If I deem one of them to be an actual potential threat (and the vast majority are not), I move further down the car, or switch cars. Removing oneself from the threat is the appropriate, and usual, tactic.

The fact that you normalize the necessity to get away from people who pose danger is very telling
It shouldn’t be like that in a civilized country

+1 truly

DP. I think you have it the other way around. In a civilized country, vigilante action is not permitted.

This was not vigilante action, not even close. I'm sure the people on that train felt threatened and they took action, good for them. This sob hit a 67 year old woman in the face, punched her. What a sick individual, and no, he needed to be behind bars hitting himself in the face instead of terrorizing the community. But I'm going to take yours and many other comments, ie AOC, and in the future I will walk/run away and let deviants like this hurt whoever they want to hurt. Not going to be called a vigilante because I'm protecting my personal safety. F society, that's what you want right? Well, you got it.

This most certainly was vigilante action. You are conflating a prior incident with what happened this week. No one on that train knew that he had done this. And yes, please remove yourself from situations like this, I don't want you killing someone and claiming it was on society's collective behalf.

DP. Were you on that subway car? The only person so far on record who was says that the victim was exhibiting frightening behavior. Not saying what happened was right, but you don't know the extent to which his behavior was reasonably interpreted as threatening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of hot girls on social media are asking for the ex-marine’s contact info

They know what's good.

Charles Manson was quite popular among the ladies as well. There are a lot of deeply damaged women out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he was dangerous and needed to be subdued. Why wouldn't someone understand that?

He didn’t do anything dangerous

How do you know? We’re you there?

There have been several statements collected by witnesses, if you have been keeping up. Yes, he was yelling and screaming.

This is not a crime. If it were, I’d be entitled to choke out your brats when they have a tantrum in public. I’m honestly shocked and sickened by the attitudes here. Do we live in Minority Report, where people can be killed for futurecrime?

Not at all surprised it was a Marine who killed him. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

I have read a number of articles about this and watched an interview with the man who took the video. In his interview (in Spanish with a translator), he did note that the man had not assaulted anyone (although you could argue that throwing trash at people might be assault). The witness did, however, note that he was frightened by the man. He also said, in a comment that I found very telling, that if the police had come five minutes earlier, the marine would have been hailed as a hero. I think the fact that two other men were helping the marine subdue the man speaks to the fact that they genuinely viewed his behavior as a threat.

Of course whether they went too far is the question, and it sounds like the force used was excessive.

I ride the NY subway every day, and encounter loud, erratically behaving people regularly. If I deem one of them to be an actual potential threat (and the vast majority are not), I move further down the car, or switch cars. Removing oneself from the threat is the appropriate, and usual, tactic.

The fact that you normalize the necessity to get away from people who pose danger is very telling
It shouldn’t be like that in a civilized country

+1 truly

DP. I think you have it the other way around. In a civilized country, vigilante action is not permitted.

This was not vigilante action, not even close. I'm sure the people on that train felt threatened and they took action, good for them. This sob hit a 67 year old woman in the face, punched her. What a sick individual, and no, he needed to be behind bars hitting himself in the face instead of terrorizing the community. But I'm going to take yours and many other comments, ie AOC, and in the future I will walk/run away and let deviants like this hurt whoever they want to hurt. Not going to be called a vigilante because I'm protecting my personal safety. F society, that's what you want right? Well, you got it.

This most certainly was vigilante action. You are conflating a prior incident with what happened this week. No one on that train knew that he had done this. And yes, please remove yourself from situations like this, I don't want you killing someone and claiming it was on society's collective behalf.

No, this was not vigilante action. This was someone who properly acted to defend himself and others. He did not intend to kill the homeless (there are other adjectives that could be used) person - he may have used too much force restraining him or the homeless person may have been unusually susceptible to injury. That doesn't mean he was less dangerous.

[Anonymous]

Can someone link to witness statements or other recordings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because he was dangerous and needed to be subdued. Why wouldn't someone understand that?

Did you read the article??? He wasn't harming anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he was dangerous and needed to be subdued. Why wouldn't someone understand that?

He didn’t do anything dangerous

How do you know? We’re you there?

There have been several statements collected by witnesses, if you have been keeping up. Yes, he was yelling and screaming.

This is not a crime. If it were, I’d be entitled to choke out your brats when they have a tantrum in public. I’m honestly shocked and sickened by the attitudes here. Do we live in Minority Report, where people can be killed for futurecrime?

Not at all surprised it was a Marine who killed him. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

I have read a number of articles about this and watched an interview with the man who took the video. In his interview (in Spanish with a translator), he did note that the man had not assaulted anyone (although you could argue that throwing trash at people might be assault). The witness did, however, note that he was frightened by the man. He also said, in a comment that I found very telling, that if the police had come five minutes earlier, the marine would have been hailed as a hero. I think the fact that two other men were helping the marine subdue the man speaks to the fact that they genuinely viewed his behavior as a threat.

Of course whether they went too far is the question, and it sounds like the force used was excessive.

I ride the NY subway every day, and encounter loud, erratically behaving people regularly. If I deem one of them to be an actual potential threat (and the vast majority are not), I move further down the car, or switch cars. Removing oneself from the threat is the appropriate, and usual, tactic.

The fact that you normalize the necessity to get away from people who pose danger is very telling
It shouldn’t be like that in a civilized country

+1 truly

DP. I think you have it the other way around. In a civilized country, vigilante action is not permitted.

This was not vigilante action, not even close. I'm sure the people on that train felt threatened and they took action, good for them. This sob hit a 67 year old woman in the face, punched her. What a sick individual, and no, he needed to be behind bars hitting himself in the face instead of terrorizing the community. But I'm going to take yours and many other comments, ie AOC, and in the future I will walk/run away and let deviants like this hurt whoever they want to hurt. Not going to be called a vigilante because I'm protecting my personal safety. F society, that's what you want right? Well, you got it.

This most certainly was vigilante action. You are conflating a prior incident with what happened this week. No one on that train knew that he had done this. And yes, please remove yourself from situations like this, I don't want you killing someone and claiming it was on society's collective behalf.

DP. Were you on that subway car? The only person so far on record who was says that the victim was exhibiting frightening behavior. Not saying what happened was right, but you don't know the extent to which his behavior was reasonably interpreted as threatening.

Sure, it may have been frightening. So I would move cars. I do this semi-regularly. I don't attack people. This seems like a no-brainer to me.

[Anonymous]

"The medical examiner’s office confirmed the 30-year-old died from “compression of neck (chokehold)” on Wednesday and ruled it a homicide. The Manhattan district attorney is investigating."

Why hasn't be been charged? This man had 3 guys on him! This was unnecessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he was dangerous and needed to be subdued. Why wouldn't someone understand that?

He didn’t do anything dangerous

How do you know? We’re you there?

There have been several statements collected by witnesses, if you have been keeping up. Yes, he was yelling and screaming.

This is not a crime. If it were, I’d be entitled to choke out your brats when they have a tantrum in public. I’m honestly shocked and sickened by the attitudes here. Do we live in Minority Report, where people can be killed for futurecrime?

Not at all surprised it was a Marine who killed him. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

I have read a number of articles about this and watched an interview with the man who took the video. In his interview (in Spanish with a translator), he did note that the man had not assaulted anyone (although you could argue that throwing trash at people might be assault). The witness did, however, note that he was frightened by the man. He also said, in a comment that I found very telling, that if the police had come five minutes earlier, the marine would have been hailed as a hero. I think the fact that two other men were helping the marine subdue the man speaks to the fact that they genuinely viewed his behavior as a threat.

Of course whether they went too far is the question, and it sounds like the force used was excessive.

I ride the NY subway every day, and encounter loud, erratically behaving people regularly. If I deem one of them to be an actual potential threat (and the vast majority are not), I move further down the car, or switch cars. Removing oneself from the threat is the appropriate, and usual, tactic.

The fact that you normalize the necessity to get away from people who pose danger is very telling
It shouldn’t be like that in a civilized country

+1 truly

DP. I think you have it the other way around. In a civilized country, vigilante action is not permitted.

This was not vigilante action, not even close. I'm sure the people on that train felt threatened and they took action, good for them. This sob hit a 67 year old woman in the face, punched her. What a sick individual, and no, he needed to be behind bars hitting himself in the face instead of terrorizing the community. But I'm going to take yours and many other comments, ie AOC, and in the future I will walk/run away and let deviants like this hurt whoever they want to hurt. Not going to be called a vigilante because I'm protecting my personal safety. F society, that's what you want right? Well, you got it.

This most certainly was vigilante action. You are conflating a prior incident with what happened this week. No one on that train knew that he had done this. And yes, please remove yourself from situations like this, I don't want you killing someone and claiming it was on society's collective behalf.

No, this was not vigilante action. This was someone who properly acted to defend himself and others. He did not intend to kill the homeless (there are other adjectives that could be used) person - he may have used too much force restraining him or the homeless person may have been unusually susceptible to injury. That doesn't mean he was less dangerous.

Only one person killed another person on that train, and it wasn't the one who was screaming and shouting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he was dangerous and needed to be subdued. Why wouldn't someone understand that?

He didn’t do anything dangerous

How do you know? We’re you there?

There have been several statements collected by witnesses, if you have been keeping up. Yes, he was yelling and screaming.

This is not a crime. If it were, I’d be entitled to choke out your brats when they have a tantrum in public. I’m honestly shocked and sickened by the attitudes here. Do we live in Minority Report, where people can be killed for futurecrime?

Not at all surprised it was a Marine who killed him. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

I have read a number of articles about this and watched an interview with the man who took the video. In his interview (in Spanish with a translator), he did note that the man had not assaulted anyone (although you could argue that throwing trash at people might be assault). The witness did, however, note that he was frightened by the man. He also said, in a comment that I found very telling, that if the police had come five minutes earlier, the marine would have been hailed as a hero. I think the fact that two other men were helping the marine subdue the man speaks to the fact that they genuinely viewed his behavior as a threat.

Of course whether they went too far is the question, and it sounds like the force used was excessive.

I ride the NY subway every day, and encounter loud, erratically behaving people regularly. If I deem one of them to be an actual potential threat (and the vast majority are not), I move further down the car, or switch cars. Removing oneself from the threat is the appropriate, and usual, tactic.

The fact that you normalize the necessity to get away from people who pose danger is very telling
It shouldn’t be like that in a civilized country

+1 truly

DP. I think you have it the other way around. In a civilized country, vigilante action is not permitted.

This was not vigilante action, not even close. I'm sure the people on that train felt threatened and they took action, good for them. This sob hit a 67 year old woman in the face, punched her. What a sick individual, and no, he needed to be behind bars hitting himself in the face instead of terrorizing the community. But I'm going to take yours and many other comments, ie AOC, and in the future I will walk/run away and let deviants like this hurt whoever they want to hurt. Not going to be called a vigilante because I'm protecting my personal safety. F society, that's what you want right? Well, you got it.

This most certainly was vigilante action. You are conflating a prior incident with what happened this week. No one on that train knew that he had done this. And yes, please remove yourself from situations like this, I don't want you killing someone and claiming it was on society's collective behalf.

No, this was not vigilante action. This was someone who properly acted to defend himself and others. He did not intend to kill the homeless (there are other adjectives that could be used) person - he may have used too much force restraining him or the homeless person may have been unusually susceptible to injury. That doesn't mean he was less dangerous.

Only one person killed another person on that train, and it wasn't the one who was screaming and shouting.

Thank goodness for the Marine.

[Anonymous]

Below are some details of the incident as relayed by the witness (Vazquez) who took the video we've seen. The witness estimated the choke hold lasted 15 minutes. Surely that's not a normal amount of time to place someone in a choke hold. The marine persisted, even after a fellow passenger warned him it could be lethal.

"As the train pulled into the Broadway-Lafayette station, Vazquez started recording. The nearly four-minute video begins with Neely already in a choke hold, which Vazquez estimated lasted 15 minutes. Two other men surround Neely as he is choked with one of them holding Neely by the wrists as Neely flails his arms and legs. After two minutes, a man enters the train to warn the choke hold could be lethal. “If you suffocate him, that’s it,” says the man. “You don’t want to catch a murder charge.” One of the men responds, “He’s not squeezing no more,” and the veteran releases the choke hold. By this time, Neely is unconscious."
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/05/jordan-neelys-death-what-we-know-about-subway-choke-hold.html