Grand jury may review NYC subway chokehold killing: Sources

[Auburn85 434]

https://abcnews.go.com/US/grand-jury-review-nyc-subway-chokehold-killing-sources/story?id=99105365

 

 

Quote

 

ByJosh Margolin, Kiara Alfonseca, and Aaron Katersky

May 5, 2023, 10:27 AM

 

The case involving the death of a homeless man on a New York City subway is likely headed to a grand jury next week, law enforcement sources said.

The investigation into John Neely's death is ongoing. A grand jury would determine whether criminal charges are warranted, according to the sources.

Detectives have interviewed more than six witnesses and are still looking to talk to several more.

Neely, a homeless man, was killed by another New York City subway passenger who held him in a chokehold for several minutes, according to witnesses and police. Neely had allegedly been yelling before being subdued by the other passenger, police said. The man seen restraining Neely told police he was not trying to kill Neely.

Police confirmed Neely lost consciousness after the physical struggle. Neely was rushed to Lenox Hill Hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

Neely's death has been ruled a homicide by the medical examiner's office. The 24-year-old involved in the incident has not been charged.

According to police sources, Neely had a documented mental health history. He had been arrested more than 40 times prior for assault, disorderly conduct and fare evasion.

The NYPD has issued a call for public help as investigators review video footage and other material, urging anyone who saw or has any information about this matter to contact Crime Stoppers at 1-800-577-TIPS (8477) or for Spanish, 1-888-57-PISTA (74782).

The Manhattan DA's office encourages anyone who witnessed the incident or might have information to also call 212-335-9040.

 

 

[I_M4_AU 8,143]

I am not surprised.  The Marine is toast.  AOC has already convicted the man, all that remains is the sentencing.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) weighed in on the death of a man in New York who was placed in a headlock by another subway passenger, saying the man “was murdered.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3987741-ocasio-cortez-says-killing-of-man-on-subway-was-murder/

Edited May 5, 2023 by I_M4_AU

[CoffeeTiger 5,305]

15 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I am not surprised.  The Marine is toast.  AOC has already convicted the man, all that remains is the sentencing.

 

 

Luckily AOC's thoughts and opinions have no influence on the outcome. It'll go through the justice system. 

 

From what information is out there it certainly doesn't look 'good' for the marine avoiding any charges. I'd say 2nd degree manslaughter might be a more appropriate charge than actual murder? Though choking him for 15 whole minutes is seemingly pretty excessive and may warrant a higher charge, as harm to Neely WAS intended even if his actual death was not. 

You can't choke a man to death for being obnoxious and yelling at you. 

[icanthearyou 4,465]

59 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I am not surprised.  The Marine is toast.  AOC has already convicted the man, all that remains is the sentencing.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) weighed in on the death of a man in New York who was placed in a headlock by another subway passenger, saying the man “was murdered.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3987741-ocasio-cortez-says-killing-of-man-on-subway-was-murder/

So you support the idea of killing the mentally ill, homeless population?  Repugnant. 

[I_M4_AU 8,143]

3 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

So you support the idea of killing the mentally ill, homeless population?  Repugnant. 

How you get this out of what I said is beyond me.  It must take a judgmental mind to do so.

[icanthearyou 4,465]

4 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

How you get this out of what I said is beyond me.  It must take a judgmental mind to do so.

I apologize if I misinterpreted your post.  So, are you in favor of killing the mentally ill, homeless population?  Or, are you simply against a progressive who is not for killing them?

[I_M4_AU 8,143]

39 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

 

Luckily AOC's thoughts and opinions have no influence on the outcome. It'll go through the justice system. 

 

From what information is out there it certainly doesn't look 'good' for the marine avoiding any charges. I'd say 2nd degree manslaughter might be a more appropriate charge than actual murder? Though choking him for 15 whole minutes is seemingly pretty excessive and may warrant a higher charge, as harm to Neely WAS intended even if his actual death was not. 

You can't choke a man to death for being obnoxious and yelling at you. 

I wouldn’t say All Out Crazy’s thoughts and opinions doesn't have an influence after all this article was a day or so after her proclamation.  The DA would have you believe otherwise.

The Marine, I’m sure, did not know what the man’s background was, he only knew what he was facing at the time.  The Marine did not act alone, he had help. I wonder if all the good samaritans will be charged with him?  It would be similar to the George Floyd incident wouldn’t it?  All those cops standing around not saying a word.

I don’t know the Marine’s training with regard to subduing a threat, but the Marine and others definitely viewed him as a threat, not just an obnoxious man yelling at you.

One would have to ask why this man, with obvious mental problems, was allowed to be so obnoxious after being arrested 42 times and having an active arrest warrant out for him on that day?  One should go back to the root of the cause.

I’m sure he will get a fair trial in NYC.

[I_M4_AU 8,143]

7 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

I apologize if I misinterpreted your post.  So, are you in favor of killing the mentally ill, homeless population?  Or, are you simply against a progressive who is not for killing them?

I’m in favor of people defending themselves if threatened.  The Marine and those that helped him felt they were threatened and acted.  It might have been excessive, I don’t know, I wasn’t there.  The Mayor and his administration are supposed to protect the city.  Letting mentally ill people roam around the subway threatening people is not protecting either the riders or this mentally ill individual.

The crime in NYC is increasing and part of the reason is not enough police and part is letting criminals out with no bail.  If there is not police presence, there is no order.

[CoffeeTiger 5,305]

1 minute ago, I_M4_AU said:

The Marine, I’m sure, did not know what the man’s background was, he only knew what he was facing at the time.  The Marine did not act alone, he had help. I wonder if all the good samaritans will be charged with him?  It would be similar to the George Floyd incident wouldn’t it?  All those cops standing around not saying a word.

I haven't seen any information saying anyone but the marine had a physical altercation with the man on that train. Maybe they did and that info hasn't come out yet. 

No, it would not be anything like the George Floyd incident because none of those civilians were police and had no legal duty to save his life and similarly had no responsibility for what the marine was doing at the time.

 

1 minute ago, I_M4_AU said:

I don’t know the Marine’s training with regard to subduing a threat, but the Marine and others definitely viewed him as a threat, not just an obnoxious man yelling at you.

 

Is it legal to kill anyone you think as being a threat in any way? If someone doesn't have a weapon and is not attacking you, can that person credibly be considered enough of a threat to justify killing? 

 

1 minute ago, I_M4_AU said:

I’m sure he will get a fair trial in NYC.

 

Any evidence that he wont get a fair trial in NYC? 

[I_M4_AU 8,143]

1 minute ago, CoffeeTiger said:

I haven't seen any information saying anyone but the marine had a physical altercation with the man on that train. Maybe they did and that info hasn't come out yet. 

No, it would not be anything like the George Floyd incident because none of those civilians were police and had no legal duty to save his life and similarly had no responsibility for what the marine was doing at the time.

The video clearly shows two other men, one trying to get ahold of the victim’s hands and another standing behind him ready to assist.  Why didn’t the intercede when the victim was close to being subdued?  Why would you say they had no responsibility when they aided in subduing the victim?  If you’re going to charge one, why not all?

7 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Is it legal to kill anyone you think as being a threat in any way? If someone doesn't have a weapon and is not attacking you, can that person credibly be considered enough of a threat to justify killing? 

The first answer is no and the Marine and his accomplices did not set out to kill the man, just control him until the police arrived.  No to the second question, because they didn’t set out to kill this man, just subdue him.  I can’t be more clear.

 

10 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Any evidence that he wont get a fair trial in NYC? 

I’ll tell you after Trump’s trail in NYC concludes.

[CoffeeTiger 5,305]

3 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

The video clearly shows two other men, one trying to get ahold of the victim’s hands and another standing behind him ready to assist.  Why didn’t the intercede when the victim was close to being subdued?

I don't know. I don't believe they have a legal duty to intercede. Maybe they thought the marine was doing a good thing and agreed with his actions? Maybe they didn't? Doesn't really matter in whether the marine himself acted unlawfully or not. 

 

3 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

 Why would you say they had no responsibility when they aided in subduing the victim?

Holding his hands down and standing by 'ready to assist' is not the same action as blocking his airway and choking him to death. Only one person's actions directly contributed to the death. If the man had simply been held down by the arms, hands and legs he would not have died. It was the marine choking his neck that caused the man's death. 

 

3 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

 If you’re going to charge one, why not all?

Because it's not against the law to not save someone's life or some to the rescue when you see someone else is in danger. What law do you believe the other people on the subway may have violated if they aren't the one who actually killed him nor took any actions that could have killed him? 

 

3 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

The first answer is no and the Marine and his accomplices did not set out to kill the man, just control him until the police arrived.  No to the second question, because they didn’t set out to kill this man, just subdue him.  I can’t be more clear.

Which is what would be classified as 2nd degree manslaughter in my eyes. Didn't set out to kill him...but did.  And it's not like he indirectly had a heart attack or medical event related to the stress...he was choked to death by the marine blocking his breathing.

 

The question is were his actions reasonable. I don't know....from the news reports so far I have my doubts that it was reasonable, but ultimately it's up to the police, DA,s and courts to decide. 

 

3 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I’ll tell you after Trump’s trail in NYC concludes.

Sounds like you have pre-determined what you believe the correct outcome of both of these cases should be and will consider the courts/juries to be biased and unfair if they don't come to the same conclusions you have. 

[icanthearyou 4,465]

33 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I’m in favor of people defending themselves if threatened.  The Marine and those that helped him felt they were threatened and acted.  It might have been excessive, I don’t know, I wasn’t there.  The Mayor and his administration are supposed to protect the city.  Letting mentally ill people roam around the subway threatening people is not protecting either the riders or this mentally ill individual.

The crime in NYC is increasing and part of the reason is not enough police and part is letting criminals out with no bail.  If there is not police presence, there is no order.

New York is not even in the top 50 most dangerous cities in America.  You are lying, as always.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/most-dangerous-cities-in-the-us

[wdefromtx 3,159]

18 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

New York is not even in the top 50 most dangerous cities in America.  You are lying, as always.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/most-dangerous-cities-in-the-us

You love calling people liars when you have nothing else.....or disingenuous is another go to for you isn't it.

How is he lying? What he said isn't wrong.......

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/05/nyregion/new-york-crime-stats.html

[TitanTiger 20,572]

The guy was menacing and threatening to people in an enclosed space with no police around to help or even be called upon to help.  Subduing him was a reasonable response and I don't see anything in the video that indicates to me that the Marine who put him in the headlock/chokehold meant to do kill or seriously harm the man.  The fact of the matter is, the second you engage to physically restrain or subdue someone, there is a very small but possible chance of death.  The death was accidental and unintended and my bet is the Marine doesn't end up getting charged.

Also, the hold was only for about 3 minutes.  The 15 minute thing was something Twitter ran with but wasn't borne out by the video.

[icanthearyou 4,465]

23 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

The guy was menacing and threatening to people in an enclosed space with no police around to help or even be called upon to help.  Subduing him was a reasonable response and I don't see anything in the video that indicates to me that the Marine who put him in the headlock/chokehold meant to do kill or seriously harm the man.  The fact of the matter is, the second you engage to physically restrain or subdue someone, there is a very small but possible chance of death.  The death was accidental and unintended and my bet is the Marine doesn't end up getting charged.

Also, the hold was only for about 3 minutes.  The 15 minute thing was something Twitter ran with but wasn't borne out by the video.

I hope you are incorrect.  I do not believe he is guilty of murder but,,, killing other people, particularly homeless, mentally ill people is not how a civil society should function.

[TitanTiger 20,572]

Just now, icanthearyou said:

I hope you are incorrect.  I do not believe he is guilty of murder but,,, killing other people, particularly homeless, mentally ill people is not how a civil society should function.

I would agree, but also based on what I've read and the video I've seen so far, I wouldn't say the guy was trying to kill anyone.  He was just trying to subdue a guy who was screaming and saying things like, "I don’t mind going to jail and getting life in prison. I’m ready to die." 

 

[icanthearyou 4,465]

3 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I would agree, but also based on what I've read and the video I've seen so far, I wouldn't say the guy was trying to kill anyone.  He was just trying to subdue a guy who was screaming and saying things like, "I don’t mind going to jail and getting life in prison. I’m ready to die." 

 

Understood.  I just do not believe these sort of acts of vigilantism should go without some sort of recourse, especially considering how this one ended.

I wish that our country would take a more humane approach to dealing with the mentally ill.

[TitanTiger 20,572]

Just now, icanthearyou said:

Understood.  I just do not believe these sort of acts of vigilantism should go without some sort of recourse, especially considering how this one ended.

I wish that our country would take a more humane approach to dealing with the mentally ill.

I don't think trying to restrain someone is an act of "vigilantism."  It's an act of protection for innocent people around you.  There were women and older people around this guy who's losing his s*** and strongly suggesting he's willing to do something that could result in him getting the death penalty.  You seem to be penalizing a guy for having to make a judgment call on when to step in and that doesn't make sense to me.
 

[icanthearyou 4,465]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I don't think trying to restrain someone is an act of "vigilantism."  It's an act of protection for innocent people around you.  There were women and older people around this guy who's losing his s*** and strongly suggesting he's willing to do something that could result in him getting the death penalty.  You seem to be penalizing a guy for having to make a judgment call on when to step in and that doesn't make sense to me.
 

I understand your feelings.  Still, you should not go around killing the mentally ill.  Accident or not, the man is dead.  The force was obviously excessive.

[TitanTiger 20,572]

5 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

I understand your feelings.  Still, you should not go around killing the mentally ill.  Accident or not, the man is dead.  The force was obviously excessive.

You keep using the word "should" as if he set out to kill the guy or didn't give a s***.  Nothing we've learned thus far from eyewitnesses nor video of the situation warrants such a belief.  He was attempting to restrain a man who was being menacing and threatening in a confined space with no law enforcement. 

I reserve the right to change my mind if additional facts or video come out, but trying to subdue someone acting erratic and threatening until the next stop (this incident lasted less than 3 minutes), but nothing about this so far reads as a guy obviously attempting to respond disproportionately in the heat of the moment.  And if nothing more comes out to change that, he shouldn't be charged with a crime.  Maybe if he'd jumped the guy and started punching him or something you'd have a point here but just "well a man died so the guy restraining him must be guilty of a crime - circumstances, intent and video evidence be damned" is a strange approach.

[CoffeeTiger 5,305]

keep in mind that ‘not meaning to kill someone’ that you do end up killing isn’t a get out of jail free card. 
 

that’s what various manslaughter charges cover. You can still be charged for killing someone even if you had no intention or desire to do so if your actions were negligent in some way. 
 

The central question  investigators and the DA will have to answer is if the marines actions were reasonable and necessary or if they rose to the level of being negligent and overly aggressive given the situation. 
 

I’m not going to be upset or mad in any way of they don’t charge the marine with anything, but at the same time, from the statement the journalist has made about his accounting of the situation, it does not appear to me that deadly or violent force was necessary or needed in this situation. I don’t believe there is any evidence so far that says Neely was a direct threat to anyone else on that train. 
 

 

[I_M4_AU 8,143]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Holding his hands down and standing by 'ready to assist' is not the same action as blocking his airway and choking him to death. Only one person's actions directly contributed to the death. If the man had simply been held down by the arms, hands and legs he would not have died. It was the marine choking his neck that caused the man's death. 

Tell this to the cops that stood around George Floyd.  I know they had procedures to follow, but they thought they were until the administrator in the Minneapolis PD went through the procedure policy to paint them not abiding by policy.  If they want to get these guys they would find a way, but I doubt it will happen.

 

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Which is what would be classified as 2nd degree manslaughter in my eyes. Didn't set out to kill him...but did.  And it's not like he indirectly had a heart attack or medical event related to the stress...he was choked to death by the marine blocking his breathing.

In my eyes it was protecting fellow passengers and himself from a crazed lunatic.  We will see how the DA and grand jury sees this.

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Sounds like you have pre-determined what you believe the correct outcome of both of these cases should be and will consider the courts/juries to be biased and unfair if they don't come to the same conclusions you have. 

If I had a pre-determined sense of what the jury would do I would have give you evidence.   I believe the evidence will come if and when the Trump trial will end.  The justice system of NY under Bragg is questionable. 

[icanthearyou 4,465]

34 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

You keep using the word "should" as if he set out to kill the guy or didn't give a s***.  Nothing we've learned thus far from eyewitnesses nor video of the situation warrants such a belief.  He was attempting to restrain a man who was being menacing and threatening in a confined space with no law enforcement. 

I reserve the right to change my mind if additional facts or video come out, but trying to subdue someone acting erratic and threatening until the next stop (this incident lasted less than 3 minutes), but nothing about this so far reads as a guy obviously attempting to respond disproportionately in the heat of the moment.  And if nothing more comes out to change that, he shouldn't be charged with a crime.  Maybe if he'd jumped the guy and started punching him or something you'd have a point here but just "well a man died so the guy restraining him must be guilty of a crime - circumstances, intent and video evidence be damned" is a strange approach.

He DID kill another human being.  It was an accident,,, doesn't really make it okay.

Please understand, I am not suggesting he be charged with murder but, you cannot encourage this sort of action with this outcome.

I understand that you disagree.  I understand your reasoning.  I hope you understand how far that could go.

[Auburnfan91 1,408]

This video is age restricted but it includes a witness(hispanic who doesn't speak english) who stated that the guy who who was put in a chokehold was wanting food and was threatening passengers:

"I won't take no for answer"

"I'm ready to go back to jail"

"I'll hurt anyone on this train"

 

The justice system is broken. It's unfortunate the guy died but he shouldn't have been able to keep doing this. The public shouldn't have to be in a situation where they have to be threatened and fear for their lives because judges and prosecutors refuse to punish criminals and keep them locked up.

He had 42 prior arrests and had an active felony warrant for assaulting a 67 year old woman in 2021. Why are criminals allowed to terrorize the public over and over without facing firm punishment?

This is the result of the soft on crime approach that results in more incidents of attacks and killings between criminals and regular citizens.

Judges and prosecutors in these cities are creating this chaos.

[TitanTiger 20,572]

26 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

He DID kill another human being.  It was an accident,,, doesn't really make it okay.

No one here is arguing that it’s okay. I am saying that nothing I’m seeing so far makes it criminal.

26 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Please understand, I am not suggesting he be charged with murder but, you cannot encourage this sort of action with this outcome.

I’m not encouraging anything. I’m saying that under the circumstances, intervening seems reasonable. 
 

26 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

I understand that you disagree.  I understand your reasoning.  I hope you understand how far that could go.

Agreed. And I’m not offering care blanche immunity for any action a person attempts to address a perceived threat.