• Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Even the prosecution seemed to say that the initial reaction was justified because the other guy was aggressive and hostile in a crowded train, but that the measures taken to subdue him went too far

    From the New Yorker article linked in the posted article:

    “His initial intent was even laudable, to protect fellow subway riders from a man he perceived to be a threat.” But the law does not permit “laudable behavior” when it is also “unnecessarily reckless,” Yoran went on. Her opening statement—in which she described how Penny held Neely in a choke hold for almost six minutes, even after the train doors had opened and the other straphangers had fled to safety—concluded, “The defendant was not justified in these deadly actions. He used far too much force for far too long. He went way too far.” Later, the jury—twelve jurors and four alternates, all hailing from Manhattan—would need to decide for themselves whether the Assistant District Attorney was correct.

    • theangryseal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Yeah, I guess. I don’t think we should be parading this guy around as a villain. Even if he held the dude for too long, it’s a scary situation that he was in and who knows what will happen if you let someone go who has been aggressive. He isn’t a police officer, he didn’t have handcuffs and a taser, he was just a dude on a train.