Was this a justified homicide? Maybe self-defense in an odd way?

[Anonymous]

Like this:

If it was OK for Daniel Penny to kill Jordan Neely because he disliked what he said, then was it ok for Luigi Manchione to kill Brian Thompson, given that the proxy murders Thompson did were far worse than anything Neely said?

[lightbulb27]

it's a slippery slope isn't it.

One was... apparently... unintentional and the other was premeditated. that is a big difference.

As it is, Penny was looking to protect others from a hazard... and apparently, Luigi... was doing the same. He could claim the same. That's your point...

Then we decide... ya know, Biden was so dangerous given all the bad decisions he made, so it's ok to end him off... that's what some did with Trump. Some tried to kill hitler, if they had succeeded, woudl have saved many lives. Hitler didn't agree with that... and so had them all killed.

It's same logic... to some extent, the issue at hand, is power... but there's more to it of course

Im one of few that found Penny went too far, at least on camera. I wasn't there. E. g. Neely he didn't do anything but use words, without any evidence of weapons. But go screaming into a crowded building about "people gonna die, I've had it..."... and find out what happens next.

Ideally the answer for Neely was... compassion. People of ny are poorly trained and Penny was wrong guy to jump up first. Next time, our socialist trained, social worker rich nyc people need to jump in to care for the distressed. Problem avoided next time.

Healthcare... good luck solving that one... and all the other collapsing businesses... most are not profitable.

This is a slippery and dangerous slope we are on, and you know it... history does not bode well for the outcomes.

Time to return to a better viewpoint, before this goes really bad. Greed... is going to have to die...

[NaultD]

It's a extremely deep nuance thinking we both have in common. While two makes buddies, it does take 12 for a jury.

This has been the argument for "puch a nazi" in public universities taken to the ultimate conclusion.

On paper he's definitely guilty. A jury of peers can still recognize a Robin hood for better and worse. It's still 12 peers with a universal verdict. That is an earth shattering history in the making monument. It's absolutely insanity but equally possible.

[NaultD]

If you ever felt powerless in America you don't understand the power of jury duty.

While this case is on legendary levels. It's everyday jury duty defining our society.

[Asker]

I know we both understand the argument here. I certainly hope others and most importantly the jurors do. I am not a lawyer, but I think an acquittal would require a jury nullification (?)

[Asker]

Exactly - the inherent power and consequences of an NG verdict are immense.

[NaultD]

At the same time deep nuance thinking isn't good for a jury of peers. It's 12 EVERY DAY PEOPLE of peers for a reason. This is why there is 12. I've had jury duty and it can be herding cats leading to a misstrial. Also hearing cats there's only one what to comprehend what happened.

That's why we have 12 jurys.

So it's all the more important we all need to chill out. A person did die and needs justice but it's not impossible they a victim of our society.

[Asker]

Yes. I've never done jury duty and always avoided it as an inconvenience. Maybe next time I should do it.

[NaultD]

Law makers we elect can buy as much air time to get votes. Jury duty is where rubber meets the road.

[NaultD]

George Washington said if he had to trade voting rights over a jury of peers he'd choose jury of peers.

That's what the judge said last time I had jury duty. I should double check but it did reshape my relationship with our usa government.

[Asker]

Now I really *must* do Jury duty - thank you!

[D_Bone_Steak]

He put him in a chokehold while another black dude (might of been two black people, but I forget) held down Neely's hands. Still alive when the police showed up. Kneely did die later and it's believed to be a combo of the drugs he was on (bath salts) and the choking. Neely's past shows he was probably going to hurt someone.

Luigi shot someone... that's simply not justified in that scenario. If Thompson caused harm... was it legal harm?

[Asker]

I don't think there is ANY way that Neely's killing was justified. Thompson, maybe so.

[D_Bone_Steak]

Did you look up Neely's criminal history? I'd kill him myself if he got near me. Or you just like dudes that beat women on the train or something?

[Asker]

He would need to lay hands on me for me to do anything. Words are not enough.

[D_Bone_Steak]

Well... you only have to be threatened according to the law. Not just for yourself either. For your property, someone else, or anyone else's property.

The key words in court is "I feared for the safety of _______. ... and just name any or all of the above that I stated. That hogties the judge in your favor, but since it was a jury of peers... shit shouldn't of ever gone to trial at all. He should've just got an award and celebrated in the papers. ... but it's New York and in strange political times.

You looked up Neely's priors right? He sort of has a habit of bashing the shit out of women with 48 priors of crimes. I'm pretty sure if you were there you'd know he was fucking serious about hurting... or his words "killing someone today."

Maybe you'll take the stance of 'tough guy' because you wouldn't feel like he was dangerous, but if you do... bro... the guys that stepped up to put an end to Kneely's rampage are the real tough guys in that situation. ... not the selfish guy who doesn't care just because he doesn't fear his own personal safety. Daniel Penny is one of three heroes that day, but because he was the white one, he got sent to the courts. Then painted as racist by liberal media despite the other strangers who helped or the people of color telling the cops how grateful they were of him.

[Asker]

@D_Bone_Steak I see that we have different points of view regarding this. I think it is pointless to debate this as I also think we will just annoy each other.

[D_Bone_Steak]

Agreed🤝 It's nice to meet people on here that can still just agree to disagree. I thank you for that good sir.

[Asker]

Thanks - nice hearing from you.

[KostasKouvalis]

Those are two completely different cases. Jordan Neeley wasn't killed because the soldier guy disliked something he said. Jordan Neeley was literally threatening to kill people.

Thompson's policies may have lead to people's death, but he didn't threaten or murder anyone. I can't believe you're even comparing the two. The Thompson was just a small part of a much larger broken system. Neeley had a criminal history, was mentally ill and was literally threatening to kill people on a crowded subway

[Asker]

Threats are verbal, and you make them using speech. That is ALL that Justin Neely did and he was killed for his speech which is actually illegal. Penny could and should have ignored him, not assaulted and killed him.

Thompson murdered people by denying them insurance coverage they had already paid for. His affliliation with a larger organization is irrelevant since he was in charge of that organization as the CEO.

[KostasKouvalis]

They're only threats until they become actions. You're saying he was just supposed to wait for him to stab someone. He had no way of knowing whether his threats were serious or not. Better be safe than sorry.

[Asker]

He was supposed to wait until he at least inappropriately touched someone. There is no evidence that he had any sort of weapon.

[KostasKouvalis]

That's split seconds. It would've been too late. Would you have the same opinion if Neeley was a White or Asian guy? Or if the soldier wasn't White?

[Asker]

Yes, same opinion. Race was and is irrelevant except if he had not been black I don't think Penny would have assaulted and killed him. He had NO weapon - do you understand that?

[KostasKouvalis]

That's only speculation. We don't know that, but you're entitled to have that hypothesis.
Penny didn't know though that he didn't have a weapon. You can't be threatening to kill people.

[Asker]

Ok, you are also entitled to your opinion. Please don't ever assault someone based on their speech as you may get in serious legal trouble if you do. Threats are not enough.

[KostasKouvalis]

I might if it was a girlfriend, close friend or family member, but I sure as hell ain't gonna stick my neck out for a complete stranger.

[Asker]

Good.

[Twalli]

I don't know of any time Thompson actually talked to someone denying thrm coverage where that denial directly led to the person's death. That is the only way he can be considered responsible for the deaths, and since he probably didn't personally deny coverage, he's not a guilty party.

[Asker]

Medical information is confidential so you would not know about it in any event, but that does not mean it didn't happen. He was responsible for suggesting and managing the AI system that denied claims and he did this knowing what it did.

[Twalli]

And it can be proven that without the denial of coverage a person would have survived?

[Asker]

If someone is pushed in front of an oncoming train there is always a chance they might survive, but most people prefer to be rescued and not forced to take the chance. Most people prefer medical care to taking their chances and rightfully so considering they paid for it ahead of time.

[Twalli]

There are some things that insurance shouldn't cover.

[Asker]

like what?

[Twalli]

Plastic surgeries that are just for astatic reasons. That's one example.

[Twalli]

*asthectc

[Asker]

They already aren't covered.

[Twalli]

You asked for an example of something that shouldn't be covered, not something that is and shouldn't be.

[Asker]

So - what is your point here?

[Twalli]

I gave an example of a service that shouldn't be covered, and you said that it already wasn't. I knew it wasn't, I agree with it not being covered.

[Asker]

ok. So what?

[exitseven]

who ever heard of a proxy murder. Can you get pregnant by proxy too?

[Asker]

A proxy murder is when you hire someone to kill another person.

[MarjorieJ]

Jeanine Pirro interviewed Penny. She said there were a lot of people in that room and not one of them had a dry eye while listening to Penny's story. There was a two-year-old on that train scared out of his wits. Penny said if he had to do it again he would do the exact same thing.

[Asker]

A proxy murder is one that is committed by somebody you have hired for that purpose. Doesn't take too much imagination to figure this out.

[exitseven]

oh yeah, somehow I doubt that anybody paid this whackjob to kill that guy. He would be spilling his guts now that he is going to get old behind bars.

[MarjorieJ]

How much money would it take for you to spend the rest of your life in Sing Sing?

[exitseven]

@MarjorieJ Maybe enough to buy my own country with no extradition.

[Asker]

@MarjorieJ well sure. We all know that wet eyes and upset 2 year olds both justify murder.

[MarjorieJ]

@exitseven
Good idea

[Pterodon]

He was threatening to kill people. That in my state is a reason to draw my weapon and blow him away. It would’ve never went to trial in my stand your ground state

[Asker]

What state is that?

[Pterodon]

Oklahoma

[Asker]

You can shoot someone if they are in your house and threatening you. Anywhere outside your home probably not if it is just threats, particularly general ones not directed at anyone in particular as was the case here. This is the Castle Doctrine and it is specifically directed at home invasions. A train is not a home.

[Pterodon]

Not here. It’s expanded to anywhere you are threatened. This is the reddest state in the union and constitutional carry

[Asker]

I don't think it is.

[Anonymous]

difference is Luigi planned out his murder. the same can't be said for Daniel Penny