Daniel Penny to be charged

[Irv]

100% Self defense.  Glad he took care of that menace.  What a mess.  

[aristocrat]

 

[B-Man]

 

[B-Man]

 

[T master]

On 5/11/2023 at 7:30 PM, Orlando Tim said:

@redtail hawk and @Andy1 why do you think someone has the right to threaten people in a public place with physical harm? And if you don't believe that what should the Marine have done in that situation?

 

I'll bet if it was either of those 2 in the position of that guy coming up to threaten them & their family members such as their children (if they have any) they would be praising the US Marine for standing up for them . YAH THINK ??

[T master]

On 5/12/2023 at 11:52 AM, SCBills said:

Of course Bragg had him do a perp walk.. of course  

 

 

 

 

Then there is something like this but it is okay and the fact that they forgot to mention in the article that the family excepted so many Millions from the man accused of the crime because he had it to give & walks free today . And alls this guy was doing was walking across the street minding his own business .

 

I wonder if Penny had millions to give if the outcome of this would be any different or does Bragg have different motivations to prosecute ??

 

https://www.patriots.com/news/stallworth-pleads-guilty-to-dui-manslaughter-gets-30-days-in-jail-106671#:~:text=Cleveland Browns wide receiver Donte,put the matter behind them.

 

He meaning Bragg has already put many violent criminals back on the streets of NY that have went out after their release and killed others & ran on the premise of doing exactly what he is doing yet this case is different - BECAUSE ??? 

 

So take a US service man that has defended the country & was trying to stand up for another person defending them from a person that was threatening them and prosecute him to the fullest extent .

 

Bragg is a HUGE POS !!! 

 

[Andy1]

3 hours ago, T master said:

 

I'll bet if it was either of those 2 in the position of that guy coming up to threaten them & their family members such as their children (if they have any) they would be praising the US Marine for standing up for them . YAH THINK ??

This is a case of what is appropriate use of deadly force. I don’t think the marine would face any charges if he used force and didn’t kill the guy. This is all a gray area and a slippery slope. In general, most people would have no problem if someone used the minimum force necessary to restrain the offender. Stupid people shouting threats like this happens every day. If a drunk idiot/mentally stressed person starts screaming threats at people, would that justify killing them? When is the answer yes and when is it no?
 

 

Edited May 13, 2023 by Andy1

[aristocrat]

11 minutes ago, Andy1 said:

This is a case of what is appropriate use of deadly force. I don’t think the marine would face any charges if he used force and didn’t kill the guy. This is all a gray area and a slippery slope. In general, most people would have no problem if someone used the minimum force necessary to restrain the offender. Stupid people shouting threats like this happens every day. If a drunk idiot/mentally stressed person starts screaming threats at people, would that justify killing them? When is the answer yes and when is it no?
 

 

if the marine had been black he  also wouldn’t face charges. 

[SCBills]

25 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

if the marine had been black he  also wouldn’t face charges. 

Cali with their 1.2M reparations push.  
 

NYC with the unjust race-injected prosecution of a white guy by a black mayor and black DA. 

 

Totally different makeup, so it will never happen nationally, but pockets of this country are on some South Africa vibes. 
 

Edited May 13, 2023 by SCBills

[Orlando Buffalo]

1 hour ago, Andy1 said:

This is a case of what is appropriate use of deadly force. I don’t think the marine would face any charges if he used force and didn’t kill the guy. This is all a gray area and a slippery slope. In general, most people would have no problem if someone used the minimum force necessary to restrain the offender. Stupid people shouting threats like this happens every day. If a drunk idiot/mentally stressed person starts screaming threats at people, would that justify killing them? When is the answer yes and when is it no?
 

 

He did not intentionally kill him, he restrained a man who was threatening those around him and he happened to die. He was a threat to people around him which is the big difference between him and Floyd, Floyd did not threaten anyone. 

[nedboy7]

15 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

He did not intentionally kill him, he restrained a man who was threatening those around him and he happened to die. He was a threat to people around him which is the big difference between him and Floyd, Floyd did not threaten anyone. 

 

Do you think a marine doesn't know what he is doing when he is restraining someone?  Honest question.  I would guess so.  Marines are some of the most highly trained and capable people on the planet.  I just wonder how his training did not include how long he can choke this guy. 

 

You read my post.  If I was on the train I would have loved this guy.  But this might need a little more attention than just saying oh the dude threatened people so it was ok to choke him.  Unfortunately its not how it works when someone dies.  I feel bad for this marine.  Today as I was walking into Verizon store (in a mostly nice neighborhood) my wife started walking towards the door while a homeless man was literally talking crazy ***** looking at her.  I had to grab her by the arm and warn her she was being stupid by walking towards him.  The dude saw me and grabbed a rock and threw it at the ground saying some crazy *****.  I did not feel hate towards this sick person or hope he died.  I really felt deeply bad for him and how it must feel in his head.  I wondered what happened to him in life to get to that point.  Then I got upset with my wife for not taking his behavior more seriously.  Then I thought about this marine and what a hard situation he must have been in not to mention the others on the train who do not have that training.  I would have ***** my pants if this dude was on a train with me.  I could see myself hurting him to a point where I did not care what the outcome was. 

[T master]

3 hours ago, Andy1 said:

This is a case of what is appropriate use of deadly force. I don’t think the marine would face any charges if he used force and didn’t kill the guy. This is all a gray area and a slippery slope. In general, most people would have no problem if someone used the minimum force necessary to restrain the offender. Stupid people shouting threats like this happens every day. If a drunk idiot/mentally stressed person starts screaming threats at people, would that justify killing them? When is the answer yes and when is it no?
 

 

 

I will definitely say i have to agree with you as far as the use of deadly force but in the moment if that deranged person is resisting which i take it he was because there were more than just the marine helping to keep him down your adrenaline starts flowing & you may have a bit more force than you need to stop the threat .

 

I don't believe that this man meaning the marine intentionally set out to have this person die but like in other recent cases is there the possibility of other things such as a very high level of drugs that could have helped in assisting this mans death ? 

 

If a person has put their selves in the position of being lets say a near over dose state or is on a amount of drugs that would elevate a persons blood pressure to a very dangerous level like cocaine or meth this puts this person in danger that a normal healthy person would not be in & that the restraint method used may not have killed the person not on drugs .

 

Before sending this man to prison for the next 20 or more years they need to take all into consideration which i in no way believe will happen .

 

This DA Bragg is a POS & is using his position to decide who & how these people should be prosecuted .

 

He has let many a violent repeat offender loose more than once and in doing so in one case in particular one of those repeat offenders was released only to go out & kill a women's son because of his life style and that is a fact . So if anything there should be a different DA appointed to this case & probably even of  NYC  .

 

I do not think this will be a trial that will be transparent & will be painted as this man intentionally being a vigilante looking to kill a completely innocent mentally unstable black man & if that is the way it is portrayed it will be a injustice . 

 

I'm not saying there shouldn't be some kind of punishment at all but it should be looked at in it's entirety before the absolute harshest judgement put on this man for trying to help others .

 

 

 

 

3 hours ago, aristocrat said:

if the marine had been black he  also wouldn’t face charges. 

 

I would hope to god that wouldn't be the case but given who the DA is in this case & his history that wouldn't surprise me in the least .

[Andy1]

2 hours ago, T master said:

If a person has put their selves in the position of being lets say a near over dose state or is on a amount of drugs that would elevate a persons blood pressure to a very dangerous level like cocaine or meth this puts this person in danger that a normal healthy person would not be in & that the restraint method used may not have killed the person not on drugs .

Valid point 

2 hours ago, T master said:

Before sending this man to prison for the next 20 or more years they need to take all into consideration which i in no way believe will happen .

I guess I have more faith in the jury people of NYC than you. They ride the subways and have seen the risks there. At this point, we seem to know more about Neely than Penny. We don’t know a lot about Penny’s mental status or his background other than having a good military record. I believe a jury will consider all factors. 

[ALF]

Reported over $1M donated to Penny for defense lawyers. 

 

The fundraiser was started on a free Christian fundraising site, which reached more than $1.5 million Sunday morning and has also received support from politicians, including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/us/who-is-daniel-penny-marine-veteran-faces-charges-in-jordan-neely-death

Edited May 15, 2023 by ALF

[aristocrat]

6 hours ago, Andy1 said:

Valid point 

I guess I have more faith in the jury people of NYC than you. They ride the subways and have seen the risks there. At this point, we seem to know more about Neely than Penny. We don’t know a lot about Penny’s mental status or his background other than having a good military record. I believe a jury will consider all factors. 

bragg brought charges against a bodega owner who was getting robbed and attacked who had the audacity to stab the guy beating him. Guy sat in rikers for a week until the charges were dropped. This Bragg is a piece of work 

[SCBills]

6 hours ago, Andy1 said:

Valid point 

I guess I have more faith in the jury people of NYC than you. They ride the subways and have seen the risks there. At this point, we seem to know more about Neely than Penny. We don’t know a lot about Penny’s mental status or his background other than having a good military record. I believe a jury will consider all factors. 

The problem is, we don’t know what the jury make up will be.

 

If it’s working class New Yorkers that ride the subway, hopefully he’s cleared. 
 

If it’s liberal self-hating whites and aggrieved black women, he’s done. 
 

It doesn’t help when Adams & Hochul are already trying to influence the jury pool with their race-driven comments. 

[Andy1]

1 hour ago, aristocrat said:

bragg brought charges against a bodega owner who was getting robbed and attacked who had the audacity to stab the guy beating him. Guy sat in rikers for a week until the charges were dropped. This Bragg is a piece of work 

The bodega owner is now counter suing the city for wrongful prosecution due to NYPD withholding exculpatory information from the DAs office. This sounds more like malpractice by the cops than Bragg.
 

Despite that, prosecutorial misconduct has been a problem in this country for years. Our justice system has almost no way to hold prosecutors accountable for intentional misconduct. The Innocence Project has been working on this for years. 
https://innocenceproject.org/news/why-holding-prosecutors-accountable-is-so-difficult/
 

From the Innocence Project:

… some prosecutors prize winning a conviction over complying with their constitutional obligations, resulting in error and, in some cases, intentional misconduct. Despite this, there are no reliable systems for holding prosecutors accountable for their misdeeds. Under current United States Supreme Court precedent, prosecutors are frequently granted “immunity” from civil lawsuits (meaning they cannot be sued by a wrongly convicted person) even when they intentionally violate the law, making oversight by public agencies and the courts all the more critical.

In 2013, ProPublica reporter Joaquin Sapien issued a report that focused on New York City prosecutors. Sapien examined New York state and federal court rulings between 2001-2011 and identified 30 cases in which “judges explicitly concluded that city prosecutors had committed harmful misconduct.” In all of the cases Sapien reviewed, however, only one prosecutor was removed from office for misconduct – and even that prosecutor was not removed until he was caught committing a second ethical violation. Although many cases were similarly concerning, the prosecutors were not sanctioned.

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

The Parable of the Good Samaritan ... and Daniel Penny

 

FTA:

 

 

I think the people criticizing the use of “good Samaritan” are missing two important points in what Jesus said. First, there are the two others who chose not to help the man in the road. Jesus mentions them to show that it’s easy to call oneself a good person, then be a hypocrite when it counts. The men who passed by should have helped the man but didn’t for their own convenient and selfish reasons.

 

Then there’s the fact that parables are not meant to be taken literally. They’re a tool Jesus used to teach his followers—us—important principles. So, no, it doesn’t matter what the identity or the occupation of the Samaritan was. It also doesn’t matter the exact good deeds he did for the injured man. What matters is that he did the right thing—and did it when no one was keeping score. That is, he did good because it was the right way to treat another person. You treat him like your neighbor.

 

That’s exactly what Penny did. The passengers on the train were strangers to him, as far as we know. He made a choice to put himself out, to inconvenience himself, while protecting potential victims of Neely. That’s how we’re supposed to act as Christians, and God bless him for doing it.

 

At the time of this writing, the number stands at $1.2 million and change—and it just keeps rising. Penny isn’t the only good Samaritan around our nation, it seems. There’s something everyone can do, though, regardless of their circumstances: Add your prayers to mine for his total exoneration from this farce of a charge by Bragg’s office.

 

https://redstate.com/beccalower/2023/05/13/the-parable-of-the-good-samaritan-and-daniel-penny-n745378

 

.

[aristocrat]

1 hour ago, Andy1 said:

The bodega owner is now counter suing the city for wrongful prosecution due to NYPD withholding exculpatory information from the DAs office. This sounds more like malpractice by the cops than Bragg.
 

Despite that, prosecutorial misconduct has been a problem in this country for years. Our justice system has almost no way to hold prosecutors accountable for intentional misconduct. The Innocence Project has been working on this for years. 
https://innocenceproject.org/news/why-holding-prosecutors-accountable-is-so-difficult/
 

From the Innocence Project:

… some prosecutors prize winning a conviction over complying with their constitutional obligations, resulting in error and, in some cases, intentional misconduct. Despite this, there are no reliable systems for holding prosecutors accountable for their misdeeds. Under current United States Supreme Court precedent, prosecutors are frequently granted “immunity” from civil lawsuits (meaning they cannot be sued by a wrongly convicted person) even when they intentionally violate the law, making oversight by public agencies and the courts all the more critical.

In 2013, ProPublica reporter Joaquin Sapien issued a report that focused on New York City prosecutors. Sapien examined New York state and federal court rulings between 2001-2011 and identified 30 cases in which “judges explicitly concluded that city prosecutors had committed harmful misconduct.” In all of the cases Sapien reviewed, however, only one prosecutor was removed from office for misconduct – and even that prosecutor was not removed until he was caught committing a second ethical violation. Although many cases were similarly concerning, the prosecutors were not sanctioned.

 

 

the DA passing blame is just a pr defense. Let’s see what the actual lawsuit evidence shows. It was the most ridiculous thing and the family of the guy who died is trying to sue as well.  

[LeviF]

Anyone post this yet? Read between the lines a little.