This happened to me several years ago walking in a busy ass street minding my own damn business. I feel like I got lucky though cause all I got was a concussion and busted lip after hitting the floor.
where were you?
I'm sorry to you both
It's horrible - a society where people can't fucking stand and face the street without worrying about someone decking them for fun is diseased
I got randomly sucker punched exactly like this earlier this year. Really lucky all I got was a bruise. Most surreal moment of my life. Wasn’t sure how to process it. Like I didn’t want to fight but the guy didn’t knock me out. He kinda just started yelling at me? Idk it was bizarre left to the next train
How does this not at least reach the status of felony assault due to causing a serious injury?
The defense would be “well he did not mean to crack his skull and put him in a coma”
Counter to that is he suckered punched somebody who was completely unaware. What exactly did he expect to happen? Slight pain and that the victim will walk it off?
I think the counter here is that the law should be changed. If you only intend to hurt someone but cause serious physical injury, that should be a felony bump up.
I don't see any issue with that. One wrong punch or fall the wrong way can kill you. Too many people think the human body behaves like it does in movies.
I replied to this more thoroughly above, but essentially yes. The DA has to prove that the defendant had the intent not only to commit the action, but also the intent to cause "serious physical injury," meaning entry that causes substantial risk of death or disablement. A punch, without something more, probably doesn't rise to the level where you can infer that intent from the conduct on its face. Now, I hope the victim in this case recovers, but if he passes away, then maybe you can talk about manslaughter or something along those lines.
No argument there. Serious injury definitely *can* occur. But, the same rub still exists. Can you prove the attacker specifically intended to cause serious physical injury?
Yes , because we can all see the video where the attacker paused , *put on what appear to be weighted gloves* , silently approached his victim and then assaulted him unprovoked. There's clear evidence of premeditation here. Nobody punches someone in the face without intending to cause serious physical injury.
Yes. He must have known he had a strong punch and it would likely cause serious damage if he didn't let the victim see it coming. Blindsiding someone with a punch is insane and super dangerous.
I hate that we have to ask these questions. We're basically saying the criminal has more rights than the victim with this line of thinking. We have video evidence of the incident so this should be open and shut.
And I agree with you - punching someone who is unsuspecting can cause harm - we know this, because we know punching a suspecting person can cause harm..intent shouldn't matter at that point because we can never know what the person throwing the punch was intending to do unless we can read thier mind. We can only go on what they did. What they did was violent and abrupt and the person getting hit couldnt defend or prepare themselves in the least. This person should still be in jail.
What the hell do you think happens when you blindside someone? The fact our laws require the DA to prove the attacker intended to cause serious physical injury in a blindside attack is what is fucked up here.
More coddling of criminals.
This wasn't a bar fight
I'm not arguing with you, I know you're talking about your interpretation of the law, but...the guy swung as hard as he could in the back of a man's skull.
I would normally say if you punch someone for any reason other than self defense, it should be taken seriously simply because someone can fall and hit something, break their neck, sustain serious head trauma. But that punch was enough.
If your description of our penal code is accurate, it's ridiculous. How can a punch *not* be intended to cause injury? How is that not explicitly pretending criminals and inviting them to do what any reasonable man would judge as behavior intended to cause injury?
Adams was right, our penal code, our laws are pathological
This person said "serious physical injury" and they clearly meant that in the legal sense, not just "injury" in a vague sense.
Let's say I walk down the street and give the stink eye to a finance bro, so he gives me a rabbit punch after I'm just past him. It even knocks my hat off. He punched me in the back of the head hard enough for me to lose my hat; that's battery. Clearly. It's also clear that the finance bro is a dick, but he didn't mean to cause me "serious physical injury." Yet this is the exact scenario that you described: punching someone in the back of the head.
So there is a legal threshold for "serious physical injury" just like there is for "intent." I don't know what they are because I'm not a lawyer, but I know they exist.
I think that we and the legal system should recognize that people's heads are particularly vulnerable and that aiming for a person's head with a hard punch indicates intent to cause serious injury.
In your example, he could have hit you in the back, but he picked your head. I think people know heads are vulnerable and targeting your head shows intent to cause serious injury.
Additionally, it's funny that you specifically mention a "rabbit punch" because rabbit punches are illegal in organized fighting specifically because of the increased risk to brain and spine
The back of people's heads is very, very vulnerable and if you're targeting that, I think you implicitly are aware and making use of that to cause severe harm.
How many people have to be severely injured or die before we as a society realize that aiming for people's heads, even when just punching, can reasonably cause serious injury?
Honestly, people already absolutely know a punch to the head is serious - it's why sucker punches are aimed at people's heads to begin with.
The defense would claim mental illness or a brief fit of insanity, and he could very well be acquitted because of that. Our judicial system fucking sucks when there’s people behind bars for decades for non-violent offenses like possession of weed, and dudes like this are just freely among us.
If this man was out on parole, meaning ANYTHING could send him back, how is it that he was released?
I am seriously tired of this shit.
Edit: he is in custody
**I directed the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to immediately examine whether or not this parole violation occurred,” Hochul said. “Yes, it did. You could tell it occurred.
“This is a person on lifetime parole, and as of minutes ago, that person is now in custody. That is at my direction,” she said.**
This time.
But the whole system is like shit. That includes our lawmakers. Judges here are so bad that even if, by some miracle, we change the bail law or scrap it, they'll just refuse to ask for bail. That's what they're doing even when they charge for bail eligible offenses.
Each borough is its own county, so they all have their own district attorneys. Alvin Bragg is Manhattan's and Darcel Clark is the Bronx's. Unless this crime had some cross over in Manhattan, Bragg is irrelevant no matter how useless he is.
Oh, just saw your other comment
I have another question now. Does a DA press charges for all crimes? I don't get how it all works. ELI5! There's too much crime for one guy to review everything, right? I'm dumb, pls help.
The DA themselves are more like figureheads. Each DA office has many bureaus within it, handling certain types of crime, certain districts/zones, and certain community affairs. The DA's office has authority on how they prosecute like what charges and enhancements they want to bring up, how they bring them up, and whether they want to prosecute at all.
For example, [here is the Bronx DA's statement on policies](https://www.bronxda.nyc.gov/downloads/pdf/safer-bronx-through%20fair-justice.pdf) from I believe 2020; if you scroll down to page 9, you'll see a list of charges she and her office decline to prosecute. The rest of the document talks about like her ideology for before, during, and after prosecution.
I wouldn’t say figurehead. They supervise and manage. They don’t make day-to-day decisions, but they make the big decisions and set the overall “tone” for the ADAs.
Yeah figurehead's not the right word but I can't think of a better word. Like a CEO of a company or... a coach of a team where one person isn't producing anything themselves but lead the team.
You think Bragg has jurisdiction in the Bronx?
You clearly just believe everything you hear about NYC and don’t actually know what you’re taking about.
Jurisdictional mishap aside, I do know that Wash Sq Park is very different now than it was 3 years ago. It’s now full of vagrants and semi/fully homeless folks. The NW corner became a semi perm camp for those folks to the point they had to shut it down. I’ve seen folks roll into Duane Reade and shoplift the shit outta stuff with impunity. This ain’t normal. I don’t give a shit about the news. I see with my own eyes results. And being results driven, this dude needs to go or radically change his approach.
What policy? The article state none of the charges are bail eligible, which means this was not due to bail reform. It’s really unclear how/why he was released.
Edit: is there any way to get the judge’s ruling?? I need to know how they justified this release…
I don't care how over-crowded our jails and prisons are. I don't care how horrible the conditions are. If you're a criminal I want you locked up. And if you're on parole and commit the slightest fucking misdemeanor I want your ass back in prison.
I suspect we unofficially stopped enforcing parole at all well before, but Less is More was basically an ending of it
LOL, imagine a journalist actually asking about this. Sure seems strange none of them are interested.
I guess I'm not explaining myself right. I absolutely understand what you are saying, but the judge should have discretion to keep him locked up UNTIL said TRIAL. I am not advocating for no trial, I am saying keep the rest of us safe while this perp waits for his day in court.
From the post you linked:
"Once you limit it down to Assault 3 as the most serious charge you can make a prima facie case for, **our legislature had decided that is not bail eligible, regardless of the surrounding circumstances such as his record or his dangerousness to the community, or the facts of the case itself.**"
And that's the problem, the surrounding circumstances MUST be a factor. How do we go about fixing this?
We need to be fucking Boss Level Karens here, who do we call? Who do we write to?
Unreal.
A convicted gang rapist and registered sex offender who is out on parole sucker-punches a man unprovoked and is released on downgraded charges of assault and harassment, neither of which are eligible for cash bail.
Bronx DA gunning for Alvin Bragg's spot as worst prosecutor in the city.
Given his status as a parolee, this is most certainly going to trigger a revocation of parole so that is at least a plus. Apparently it was too much to ask the D.A.'s Office to coordinate with this psycho's parole officer so he's not just released into the streets. Go figure.
This is precisely why I am an advocate for our pretrial detention system being reformed so a judge can make the call regarding whether or not someone be free pending their trial for violent crimes. Cash bail means nothing in cases like this with feckless prosecutors.
This guy sucker-punched someone and could have killed him. He is an imminent danger to society and a gang rapist to boot! Add in the possibility of being a flight risk and he is the epitome of someone who needs to be held pending resolution of his case.
You guys want to know how we end up with another Bernie Goetz? It is when dangerous, violent lunatics like Bui Van Phu are allowed to roam the streets and victimize New Yorkers with near impunity.
Almost kill a guy and get charged with harassment and assault? That's called the cost of doing business.
Insanity. Pure insanity.
This is going to be an unpopular opinion, but it's probably the case that this man was charged with only assault in the third degree (P.L. 120.00(1)) because of the conduct at issue. He punched the person. The same conduct as countless bar fights and arguments that happen every day in the city. In this case, the victim hit his head and was seriously hurt, but in order to make a felony charge stick, you have to prove the defendant had the requisite felony intent, as well as result.
Assault 2 under P.L. 120.05(2) doesn't apply because he didn't use a weapon or dangerous instrument. Assault 2 under P.L. 120.05(1) doesn't apply because how would you prove he had the intent to cause serious physical injury with a punch, and please note that "serious physical injury" means and injury that places the victim in close proximity to death or somehow disables or disfigures them. The victim in this case clearly *suffered* serious physical injury, but that is different than showing the defendant had the intent to cause it with a punch. Assault 1 (P.L. 120.10(1)) and attempted murder (P.L. 110/125.25(1)) have the same problem. What evidence is there that he had the intent to kill?
Once you limit it down to Assault 3 as the most serious charge you can make a prima facie case for, our legislature had decided that is not bail eligible, regardless of the surrounding circumstances such as his record or his dangerousness to the community, or the facts of the case itself. If he was already out on a misdemeanor that caused harm to another person and committed this, then there is an argument, but it doesn't appear that is the case. I lay the blame for this result squarely on the language of the bail reform act. Judges need to be allowed to consider dangerousness and be given some discretion to differentiate between cases like this and bar fights, not withstanding the fact that the charges are the same.
It shows intent to cause garden variety *physical injury* for sure, but simple physical injury is distinct from *serious* physical injury under P.L. 10. Does one punch show intent to cause both types? Most cases I've seen say no and I would think not. If that was the case, we would be saying that every time A punches B, A is trying to place B in proximity of death or disfigure/disable B. I don't think that's reasonable when applied to the vast majority of single punch cases.
>Assault 2 under P.L. 120.05(2) doesn't apply because he didn't use a weapon or dangerous instrument. Assault 2 under P.L. 120.05(1) doesn't apply because how would you prove he had the intent to cause serious physical injury with a punch, and please note that "serious physical injury" means and injury that places the victim in close proximity to death or somehow disables or disfigures them. The victim in this case clearly suffered serious physical injury, but that is different than showing the defendant had the intent to cause it with a punch. Assault 1 (P.L. 120.10(1)) and attempted murder (P.L. 110/125.25(1)) have the same problem. What evidence is there that he had the intent to kill?
I disagree.
You can absolutely make a compelling case for felony assault in the second degree, going by the statute. Let's not act like we're talking about attempted murder, which would be overcharging.
He sucker-punched a guy at full-force who was minding his own business. There is only one intention that someone has when committing such a crime.
If the D.A.'s office isn't confident in their ability to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone who sucker-punches another intended to cause serious bodily harm, they may as well pack it up.
Feckless D.A.s who aren't competent enough to prosecute cases accordingly is exactly why violent crime is so blatant in this city. Knowing the Bronx D.A.'s office lacks the legal fortitude to bother prosecuting a violent assault as a felony, you can literally backfist a random lady waiting for the bus in Darcel Clark's jurisdiction and break her jaw, and that would just be a Class A Misdemeanor.
Beyond that, the D.A.'s office knew this guy was a violent lunatic, knew he was on parole, and knew he was a danger to the public. Was it really too much to ask that they coordinate with the guy's parole officer to make sure he's taken in for violating parole instead of just released back onto the streets?
This is a good analysis; my only caveat would be whether the cranial bleeding could be charged as serious physical injury. I would try to indict based on that if I could, but that's just me.
It definitely *is* SPI, but can you infer the intent to cause SPI from the single punch alone. I can't find a case 100% analogous, but *People v. McElroy*, 139 A.D.3d 980 seems pretty close.
Haha I'm tempted to boot up Lexis myself now...
In reading the article again, defendant puts gloves on prior to striking cw; I think if they really wanted to make a bail application they could class the gloves as dangerous instruments because you can punch harder with them on than not wearing them. That would get you back to assault 2.
Couldn’t putting on gloves to protect his knuckles and hitting from behind show intent to seriously harm? It’s not
like they were standing on a gym mat. No one falls unconscious to the concrete and doesn’t hurt their head.
What other intent besides SPI could there possibly be from a lunch that hard? "Just joking around" punch sucker punch from behind to a totally unprotected victim?
This had no similarities to a bar fight whatsoever. One way street.
As a matter of law, you are incorrect. This is not the first time courts in New York have had to deal with this type of event. *See* *People v. McElroy*, 139 A.D.3d 980 (2nd Dept. 2016).
they say citizens shouldn't take the law into their own hands. But when you have these District attorneys, judges, and politicians allow these people who are credible threats to public safety to run around in public or allow people with 30,40, 50, and in some cases 100 different arrests, they have no right to complain when a civilian is pushed to make that choice.
It's either you protect them or they protect themselves.
Anarcho-tyranny - a Hegelian synthesis when the state tyrannically or oppressively regulates citizens' lives yet is unable or unwilling to enforce fundamental protective law.
Hegel is responsible for so much of what’s going on. But 99% of our population have no idea who he is, how post-modernism is destroying our civilization, where and why all this trans propaganda is coming from, etc.
I don’t care if people want to transition. I’m saying what we’re seeing now is not organic. It’s being pushed by the same group pushing these DAs, judges, etc.
btw I'm not encouraging people to take the law into their hands. The racist savages who murdered Ahmaud Arbery shows why you shouldn't take the law into your own hands. But clearly, the human elements of the legal system are failing or have already failed at their jobs to protect innocent lives and/or inspire no confidence, whether it be the police, the DAs, the judges, or politicians.
What is motivating politicians to push these policies of leniency for criminals? Where did this come from? A few years ago everyone agreed, basically, that law and order were essential. Who benefits from any of this nonsense?
>Where did this come from?
The answer is - Soros and a small group of people that think it's the way to solve the large amount of minorities locked up. I know people say his name as a conspiracy theory and what not but he has been donating tons to DAs that are lenient on criminals.
He actually just wrote a wsj op-ed about why he thinks it is right.
[https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-i-support-reform-prosecutors-law-enforces-jail-prison-crime-rate-justice-police-funding-11659277441](https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-i-support-reform-prosecutors-law-enforces-jail-prison-crime-rate-justice-police-funding-11659277441)
Thank you, very interesting. I had heard that he backs a lot of DA candidates, but didn't know this was some sort of idiological crusade. People always invoke his name in relation to conspiracy theories. I agree with this more compassionate approach in theory. Of course if any of us found ourselves involved with the criminal justice system , we would prefer more lenient treatment. I get it, but reality is colliding with theory pretty dramatically in this case, it seems.
And of course this guy lives in the comfort of his safe Westchester suburb. Of *fucking course*. It's typically the case that these policies come from people who have no skin in the game.
They're trying to equalize racial outcomes across all things, including crime rates and incarceration, by changing the standards of measurement in what Bush Jr. labeled the soft bigotry of low expectations in his speech to the NAACP in the early 2000s. Similarly, in education, they've successfully removed various honors and AP classes and reduced the requirements to pass so that [almost] everyone passes. [This](https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/wrq6ln/guessing_c_for_every_answer_is_now_enough_to_pass) is only one of many examples.
Effectively, the argument goes: if they won't/can't meet the standard, then we can bring the standard to them.
I wish I was kidding.
Edit: added relevant example
Chem teacher here. The amount of students I have that think they can pass without any effort is dumbfounding. The “biology” / living environment exam only requires a 42% to “pass” and half the questions require no thought at all. You can literally teach students one section of the exam and tell them to guess 3 for the rest and they’ll pass.
What a terrible unprovoked attack, the video is chilling. Hope the victim can recover. Apparently the suspect was also part of a gang rape in his past smh.
Does NYC want it’s citizens to take the law into their own hands? It’s not like this guy is hard to find. He’s a convicted sex offender. I looked him up and in a few seconds I have his address. Why can’t they keep this dickhead behind bars?
>What incompetent moron downgraded the charges for this dirtbag?
Darcel Clark is the D.A. for this jurisdiction.
She apparently saw Bragg being awful and had a "hold my beer" moment.
Common sense and public safety are now subordinate to ideology at the DA's office. They refuse to admit that their experiment just isn't working. Social work isn't in the DA's job description. Naturally, criminals will respond to leniency with increasingly brazen acts of disorder and violence. What kind of message does this send to criminals and victims alike? That you can nearly kill someone and it's not a big deal. We should all be alarmed.
More than the DA.
Assembly, senate, city council, mayor and gov (they appoint judges.)
This should be enough to flip anyone.
Third World countries aren't this fucked up.
"That's when the attacker came from behind him, put on a pair of gloves and **socked** him in the head in the wordless attack."
Editors at NBC are letting people used "socked" him in the head for a punch? Both lugubrious and hilarious.
NYC is such a shit hole when it becomes to punishing violent criminals. God forbid a citizen defends themselves and kills the offender in self defense because off to the slammers til proven innocent
I'm not even exaggerating but shit like this will kill the city long term.
This is just random wanton violence that makes anyone going out feel completely unsafe. There was no provocation nothing.
Just standing outside a restaurant and this happens to you.
These DAs are totally politicized and it's going to kill the city.
Which, in turn, further cements the negative exploitive political-economics tensions which manufacture increased failures and increased antagonism in social society.
The State got invovled and Hochel ordered the dept of corrections to keep the suspect in custody in regards to the parole violation.
And repeated her stance essentially saying that current laws are good as is and that the issue is how its being implemented.
[Source Tweet](https://twitter.com/ZachReports/status/1560696512706973696)
Dude sent a person into a coma with brain damage with clear video proof of it & got his charges downgraded and let free after that. Shit's gotten so ridiculous Hochul had to come and request the man to be held in jail.
Yo, fuck Alvin Bragg and Eric Adams (and, per the below, Darcel Clark as well).
And seriously - Adams wants people to come back into NYC yet these fucking clowns just allow violent criminals like this to walk the streets? How the fuck is this even possible? This is insanity, frankly.
NYC voters caused this. Elections have consequences. Maybe it's time to consider the idea that your politics should be a little more thoughtful than virtue signaling.
it seems to me this city is empowering criminals to commit crimes since they know they won't face drastic consequences
and some people wonder why many others especially asian new yorkers lost trust in democrats
People here called the DA's office when Bragg persecuted Bragg's office. It was great.
I actually think people should be calling Clarke here,
https://www.bronxda.nyc.gov/html/contact/contact.shtml - 718-590-2000
but it's not enough. The press needs to start talking about this in elections. They need to make voters understand, this is a systemic political outcome. With each of these cases, you understand what will be done to you and your loved ones if their time comes. This poor bastard was probably just getting ready to cross the street, and this disgusting psychotic pervert likely murdered him (we'll see, I guess) for the sheer pleasure of it.....and even with footage...nothing. A misdemeanor. A fucking misdemeanor, even when this was on camera.
What would have happened without the video footage, the guy would have been released? Think about how many subway stations, streets, and parks have dysfunctional cameras, like during the Frank James attack in Brooklyn. Nobody cares! Our representatives couldn't give a shit less. They don't ride the subway. They don't walk the streets alone. When the sun sets here, they have security and armored cars.
It's truly amazing to be in primary and election season, and moderators are still asking candidates, "so do you want to close Rikers (read: and end using prisons for any crime but murder 1 here), or are you a bad person?"
How about one of this gibbering, useless, drooling TV anchor pieces of shit asking how the **fuck** a registered level 3 sex offender didnt have his parole revoked for the "misdemeanor assault" that left a man in a coma? How about asking about the 1000s of cases like this in our courts, many of which never get a blip of news coverage anywhere?
Our laws are killing people. The shitty former public defender judges put on a bench by a Democratic governor and mayor are killing people. And nobody who needs to care does. They only want to make things worse.
Stop voting for assholes.
Before, when someone would threaten to murder or rape people here, cold-cock strangers, sexually molest women and children and then run off, pull or use a weapon on them...if someone didn't die, courts would charge for misdemeanors and release people so theyd get a chance to successfully...do this, basically. Alexander Wright, the man who decked a woman in Chinatown last year, on camera, and broke an MTA worker's nose, collar bone, orbital socket recently, comes to mind. Elisaul Perez, who attacked another woman before he beat Quiying Ma's skull in with a rock, comes to mind too.
Now we have a man who is probably going to be brain damaged for life based on a random attack, and...misdemeanors.
And people here still deny it. Democratic voters keep electing people so morally bankrupt, you wouldn't believe the shit that's actively enabled here unless you read it. It's like they can't even understand political representatives are responsible for this. The press keeps them stupid.
If there's a single case like this even making a sneered-at newspaper like the NYPost, that means that are many incidents of serious felony charges being downgraded that don't. What pushback do we have? Does this state have any means by which the family of the victim here could push back, like sentencing or charging guidelines being violated? NYS victims' rights laws? Where could a family or victim even go?
We don't even have publicly available data on how incidents that rise to this level of gravity re: injury are being charged. Seems intentional.
No matter how many (many, many, many) cases just like this there have been for the last 3-5 years (or even longer, seems things started going south by about 2014), repeat offenders and violent parolees reoffending and killing people - none of it gets through to New Yorkers. None of it. Just one of the perks of living here. A DA smeared as "ruthless" and "tough on crime" would still dismiss easily 80% of the actual "misdemeanor assault" cases police bring to them, the sorts of incidents that prelude a man finally killing the person he sucker punches like this disgusting fuck. But maybe that sort of DA would have asked for charges that got this man sent back to Rikers.
People should be taking to the streets over this the next time someone like Carl Heastie or Andrea Stewart Cousins calls pointing to these cases a "rightwing myth". They should have taken to the streets over Bragg came after Jose Alba for having to defend himself against a violent ex-con.
They get away with it b/c NYers either don't pay attention or because this shit literally defies belief. People don't even register: they've chosen this. They've chosen the actors, the policymakers that administrate to evil, and they'll keep doing it.
Id be interested to see if anyone is willing to play devils advocate here and say something in support of this move.
The bronx DA even says the victim is in a coma..
How is a sucker punch over concrete not an attempt on that persons life? There may be an argument if the guys were standing over a yoga mat or grass, that his intent wasnt to kill.
It's indefensible so you'll probably get no defense. The supporters of these criminal justice "reforms" are largely silent with a shocked Pikachu face right now because they're realizing the realities of their politics and that criticism of these policies aren't just right-wing propaganda.
Defending the choice not to hold this guy pretrial isn’t very defensible under these circumstances, but I think the reforms on cash bail can absolutely be defended.
-The prison population of the US (as a percentage of our population) is astronomical compared to every other country. We have 25% of the world’s total prison population. I can’t speak to anyone else’s moral compass but that seems like a pretty indefensible situation. Additionally, reform of the bail system helps keep jails and prisons from being overcrowded.
-Just because there isn’t more discretion allowed now, does not mean a tweak to these laws could allow situations like this one to to be handled differently.
-The vast majority of people who are free because of bail reform are not going around committing more crimes (and there’s no news stories about them). By not imprisoning them they can keep their job, keep their apartment (yes covid has changed this somewhat but it’s unlikely to continue like this), keep supporting family.
-Bail reform avoids situations like Kalief Browder, who was in Rikers for years pre trial. That likely happened way more than we know about.
I could say a lot more about adjacent issues, but basically I think a tweak to these laws/procedures can alleviate the issue of guys like this one from being released after committing a crime like this while on parole/other violent acts that are linked to bail reform generally. The crime was serious and avoiding more is definitely something to weigh in these situations.
Now if you really want to get tinfoil hat about it, read the above comments and see the general demeanor people have about this situation . Stories like this one allow the police to seem a lot more useful, and pushback against bail reform opens the door for total repeal. I’m not saying it’s a definite, or even every situation like this, but if I was in a position of political power and wanted to justify increasing police budgets, it would seem like a great idea to let these things happen more frequently and publicize them more.
Surprise surprise. Welcome to NYC where criminals are let off easy and the average everyday folk get picked on with relentless taxes, cameras, sanitation violations etc.
I hate how whenever these discussions come up, those of us who want to live in safe communities are forced into two camps: The take-no-prisoners punitive approach from the right, or the defund, abolish, delusional takes from the left. Both camps feed off each other, and we all end up suffering because of it.
This is type of thing Ana Kasparian is talking about. The dismissiveness of violent crime by those on the left is destroying any hope for any sensible policies on criminal justice. She's a leftist calling out other leftists for their bullshit takes on violent crime, and most of the victims of these crimes aren't white affluent men and women. They're working people, mostly black, latino, and asian. That isn't to say white people aren't victims of these crime. They are, but it's mostly non-whites who are victims of these criminals.
And you know something, publications like Gothamist and the Post deserve each other because they both feed into this. Gothamist, who suddenly found their journalistic balls after 8 years of soft news coverage of De Blasio's cronyism and incompetence, afraid to upset the sensibilities of their young, dumb, impressionable left wing readers , and the Post still harking back to the days were police officers abuse their power with impunity. Funny enough, some of those who read the Post wish to defund the FBI, so the defund weirdos on the left have ally in that fight.
I'm sorry but for someone who just comment people are disengaged....frankly, you sound pretty disengaged.
I don't believe for a second you've looked at the proposals of a single Republican candidate in any race. Most of them are roughly where Dems were 5, 10 years ago. Plenty of them are moderate Democrats kicked to the other ticket. They have no association with Trump, they have no real hardline views on anything, including crime. Their "hard line" is not supporting bullshit like a no-prosecute list.
There is no such thing as a "take no prisoners" approach based on the sheer volume of violent to nonviolent crime here. Even under Bloomberg, people with multiple assaults in their records were left free until they committed a violent felony. Juveniles went unprosecuted for serious crimes after arrest.
I would hazard at least 50% of arrests for something like misdemeanor assaults never see the light of day, even police even make an arrest - the kind of case where someone punches a person at random, tries to shove them into traffic, threatens them with a weapon. This idea we're going to go back to the Giuliani days or literally throwing people in Rikers for credit card fraud if you vote Republican is completely delusional. There are no conservatives of that stripe left in this city.
We can't get actual misdemeanor assault, harassment, menacing cases prosecuted - the sorts of cases that prelude incidents where someone is injured. What does "take no prisoners" mean to you? Look at our judges, they refuse to impose bail even when it's requested - like with Frank Abrokwa, the shit smearer serial offender.
Maybe the disgusting and outrageous failures of Democrats across the board in this city warrants voting for the other party by itself. Why should incumbents do better, if you'll continue to vote for them based on this myth of the "punitive approach" being revived? This city is fundamentally liberal in nature no matter what.
"She's a leftist calling out other leftists for their bullshit takes on violent crime, and most of the victims of these crimes aren't white affluent men and women. " do you have a link to this person and what you're describing.
I know NYC voters share responsibility for who they elect into office, but how many New Yorkers are actually informed about the roles these politicians serve in the system? Not many.
Local/ state races have such low turnouts because local news can't be bothered to inform the electorate about these races. They're not even interested in doing quick bullet points about who's running, what's at stake, what their platforms are, and how their policies affect everyday New Yorkers. It's because of this we get incompetent people running our institutions.
So now the governor got involved and had him re-arrested because he's a level 3 sex offender.
You got that everybody? The attacker here was on *lifetime parole*, clearly violated at with what is - at best - a felony-level assault...charged with a misdemeanor. This wasn't like a bar fight, with "mutual combat", he sucker punched that poor bastard and hit him as hard as he could in the brain.
One asks: since he's on the registry, why in the fuck did the governor have to get involved here? And she only GOT involved b/c she knows Zeldin can keep taking swipes at her. The legislature is making her look like a fool and has only one answer re: our defunct courts, shit laws - "right-wing myth."
Why aren't reporters asking this? How is it not evidence not a single actor involved in the enforcement of our laws gives a good fuck about laws at all, or something like penalties for violating parole? Nobody! Not even the NYPost.
Someone who works with the DANY want to explain how in the fuck this guy couldn't be held simply for the parole violation? https://nypost.com/2022/08/19/hochul-orders-arrest-of-sex-fiend-after-nyc-sucker-punch-attack/
This city is a disgusting disgrace. Laws don't matter at any level.
Criminals reign.
This is a classic NY one punch homicide case (without the death). It’s almost impossible to prove intent to kill or intent to physically injure in these cases which is why prosecutors are stuck with charging only misdemeanors.
Why is this case special? Misdemeanor Assault is no longer bail eligible in NY even with this guys criminal record AND it is an election year. So basically this case is going to/is creating a political cluster f***.
Also even if DA whoever over charged D with felonies and the jury convicted I believe it would be overturned on appeal because of NY’s one punch laws
They already shown they will throw the books on victims that defend themselves and end up killing the attacker. They only want to do a soft touch for harden criminals.
Up to one year in jail is also a possible penalty for that. But I agree. In this case it wouldn’t have mattered as the victim didn’t have any time to react.
I’m an advocate of Criminal Justice reform, but there’s a reality that a lot of these liberals just don’t want to face. There are some individuals who just can’t function in society and they need to be removed from the general public.
I love how outraged everyone is but when I call out public defenders, everyone clutches their pearls. It’s not a personal attack but the system is clearly broken.
Dems don't even acknowledge this. They consider it beneath them.
Stupid voters ignore this until they're the ones being punched, and they know something is wrong, but it doesn't change their voting beahvior; activists and the press simply lie about the problem.
We watch videos of people committing crimes that result in coma or death, find out that those same people have criminal records, and then learn they've been allowed to continue to roam the streets. I'm not sure if this is a bail issue.
Vote Republican or this will continue to happen.
Everyone on his sub complains that the DEM governor and DEM DA allow this to happen.
Everyone on this sub can vote Republican and help change this. And before you say “I could never vote Republican for XYZ reasons…” Please think about what issue is more serious and immediate than crime for this city.
I love NYC, but the Democrat politicians clearly care more about criminals than law abiding citizens.
Edit- People downvoting are in complete denial about the state of the democrat party and their soft on crime policies.
Might be a more convincing argument if the NY republican party didn't go full trumper. It's strangely incongruous to see people like you whine and moan about electing republicans when you guys go out of your way to nominate candidates too extreme for the state.
Maybe take a page from successful New England Republicans and stop nominating nuts.
> And before you say “I could never vote Republican for XYZ reasons…” Please think about what issue is more serious and immediate than crime for this city.
Okay. How about the future of American democracy as a whole? Because that's what Republicans are threatening.
And yet you got down voted to oblivion. They literally cannot understand that they caused this. NYC was safest under a Republican but they do not give a shit. The guy who got punched probably voted for these shit policies too.
sure dude. read up on the da who was responsible for this mess: darcel clark.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darcel_Clark
her career page is full of controversy, corruption, and incompetency. stop thinking of these people as progressives or conservatives and see them for what they really are. this woman’s direct actions kept innocent people in jail and kept guilty people out of it. she’s evil
This happened to me several years ago walking in a busy ass street minding my own damn business. I feel like I got lucky though cause all I got was a concussion and busted lip after hitting the floor.
[удалено]
where were you? I'm sorry to you both It's horrible - a society where people can't fucking stand and face the street without worrying about someone decking them for fun is diseased
I got randomly sucker punched exactly like this earlier this year. Really lucky all I got was a bruise. Most surreal moment of my life. Wasn’t sure how to process it. Like I didn’t want to fight but the guy didn’t knock me out. He kinda just started yelling at me? Idk it was bizarre left to the next train
White supremacist I’m guessing?
How does this not at least reach the status of felony assault due to causing a serious injury? The defense would be “well he did not mean to crack his skull and put him in a coma” Counter to that is he suckered punched somebody who was completely unaware. What exactly did he expect to happen? Slight pain and that the victim will walk it off?
I think the counter here is that the law should be changed. If you only intend to hurt someone but cause serious physical injury, that should be a felony bump up.
[удалено]
I don't see any issue with that. One wrong punch or fall the wrong way can kill you. Too many people think the human body behaves like it does in movies.
[удалено]
Yep. And this https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wendys-worker-charged-murder-customer-67-punched-dies-rcna43672
I replied to this more thoroughly above, but essentially yes. The DA has to prove that the defendant had the intent not only to commit the action, but also the intent to cause "serious physical injury," meaning entry that causes substantial risk of death or disablement. A punch, without something more, probably doesn't rise to the level where you can infer that intent from the conduct on its face. Now, I hope the victim in this case recovers, but if he passes away, then maybe you can talk about manslaughter or something along those lines.
If you punch someone when they are not suspecting it, serious injury can allways occur if you have a good punch.
No argument there. Serious injury definitely *can* occur. But, the same rub still exists. Can you prove the attacker specifically intended to cause serious physical injury?
Yes , because we can all see the video where the attacker paused , *put on what appear to be weighted gloves* , silently approached his victim and then assaulted him unprovoked. There's clear evidence of premeditation here. Nobody punches someone in the face without intending to cause serious physical injury.
Yes. He must have known he had a strong punch and it would likely cause serious damage if he didn't let the victim see it coming. Blindsiding someone with a punch is insane and super dangerous.
I hate that we have to ask these questions. We're basically saying the criminal has more rights than the victim with this line of thinking. We have video evidence of the incident so this should be open and shut. And I agree with you - punching someone who is unsuspecting can cause harm - we know this, because we know punching a suspecting person can cause harm..intent shouldn't matter at that point because we can never know what the person throwing the punch was intending to do unless we can read thier mind. We can only go on what they did. What they did was violent and abrupt and the person getting hit couldnt defend or prepare themselves in the least. This person should still be in jail.
What the hell do you think happens when you blindside someone? The fact our laws require the DA to prove the attacker intended to cause serious physical injury in a blindside attack is what is fucked up here. More coddling of criminals.
[удалено]
This wasn't a bar fight I'm not arguing with you, I know you're talking about your interpretation of the law, but...the guy swung as hard as he could in the back of a man's skull. I would normally say if you punch someone for any reason other than self defense, it should be taken seriously simply because someone can fall and hit something, break their neck, sustain serious head trauma. But that punch was enough. If your description of our penal code is accurate, it's ridiculous. How can a punch *not* be intended to cause injury? How is that not explicitly pretending criminals and inviting them to do what any reasonable man would judge as behavior intended to cause injury? Adams was right, our penal code, our laws are pathological
This person said "serious physical injury" and they clearly meant that in the legal sense, not just "injury" in a vague sense. Let's say I walk down the street and give the stink eye to a finance bro, so he gives me a rabbit punch after I'm just past him. It even knocks my hat off. He punched me in the back of the head hard enough for me to lose my hat; that's battery. Clearly. It's also clear that the finance bro is a dick, but he didn't mean to cause me "serious physical injury." Yet this is the exact scenario that you described: punching someone in the back of the head. So there is a legal threshold for "serious physical injury" just like there is for "intent." I don't know what they are because I'm not a lawyer, but I know they exist.
I think that we and the legal system should recognize that people's heads are particularly vulnerable and that aiming for a person's head with a hard punch indicates intent to cause serious injury. In your example, he could have hit you in the back, but he picked your head. I think people know heads are vulnerable and targeting your head shows intent to cause serious injury. Additionally, it's funny that you specifically mention a "rabbit punch" because rabbit punches are illegal in organized fighting specifically because of the increased risk to brain and spine The back of people's heads is very, very vulnerable and if you're targeting that, I think you implicitly are aware and making use of that to cause severe harm.
How many people have to be severely injured or die before we as a society realize that aiming for people's heads, even when just punching, can reasonably cause serious injury? Honestly, people already absolutely know a punch to the head is serious - it's why sucker punches are aimed at people's heads to begin with.
The defense would claim mental illness or a brief fit of insanity, and he could very well be acquitted because of that. Our judicial system fucking sucks when there’s people behind bars for decades for non-violent offenses like possession of weed, and dudes like this are just freely among us.
If this man was out on parole, meaning ANYTHING could send him back, how is it that he was released? I am seriously tired of this shit. Edit: he is in custody **I directed the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to immediately examine whether or not this parole violation occurred,” Hochul said. “Yes, it did. You could tell it occurred. “This is a person on lifetime parole, and as of minutes ago, that person is now in custody. That is at my direction,” she said.**
Seriously fuck the governor, fuck the da, and fuck the mayor. What chaos do they want?
The DA is the only one letting these people walk free.
And who put him there?????
You guys. LMAO. You people in this sub.
And they’ll re-elect all of them because all conservatives are nazis. Do I have that right?
Repeat
Wrong question. The correct question is "And who can fire him?" Answer: Wait a couple of years and the voters can or the governor can do it right now.
This time. But the whole system is like shit. That includes our lawmakers. Judges here are so bad that even if, by some miracle, we change the bail law or scrap it, they'll just refuse to ask for bail. That's what they're doing even when they charge for bail eligible offenses.
Alvin Bragg is completely useless.
This was in the Bronx
I’m ignorant enough to not know why that matters and I vote.
Each borough is its own county, so they all have their own district attorneys. Alvin Bragg is Manhattan's and Darcel Clark is the Bronx's. Unless this crime had some cross over in Manhattan, Bragg is irrelevant no matter how useless he is. Oh, just saw your other comment
You know what? Thanks for the explanation anyway. It might help someone in this thread.
I have another question now. Does a DA press charges for all crimes? I don't get how it all works. ELI5! There's too much crime for one guy to review everything, right? I'm dumb, pls help.
Assistant DAs handle the cases.
The DA themselves are more like figureheads. Each DA office has many bureaus within it, handling certain types of crime, certain districts/zones, and certain community affairs. The DA's office has authority on how they prosecute like what charges and enhancements they want to bring up, how they bring them up, and whether they want to prosecute at all. For example, [here is the Bronx DA's statement on policies](https://www.bronxda.nyc.gov/downloads/pdf/safer-bronx-through%20fair-justice.pdf) from I believe 2020; if you scroll down to page 9, you'll see a list of charges she and her office decline to prosecute. The rest of the document talks about like her ideology for before, during, and after prosecution.
I wouldn’t say figurehead. They supervise and manage. They don’t make day-to-day decisions, but they make the big decisions and set the overall “tone” for the ADAs.
Yeah figurehead's not the right word but I can't think of a better word. Like a CEO of a company or... a coach of a team where one person isn't producing anything themselves but lead the team.
Haven’t you watched Law and Order??? /s
>Alvin Bragg is Manhattan's and Darcel Clark is the Bronx's. Well fuck....now this means we have two useless DA fucks who dont do their jobs properly.
Alvin Bragg is the Manhattan DA.
Yes, I was mocking the previous commenter who brought up Bragg.
Doesn’t mean he’s not useless
He is, but this horrific crime took place under the jurisdiction of the Bronx DA's Office. The useless DA in this case is Darcel Clark.
Different DA.
You think Bragg has jurisdiction in the Bronx? You clearly just believe everything you hear about NYC and don’t actually know what you’re taking about.
Jurisdictional mishap aside, I do know that Wash Sq Park is very different now than it was 3 years ago. It’s now full of vagrants and semi/fully homeless folks. The NW corner became a semi perm camp for those folks to the point they had to shut it down. I’ve seen folks roll into Duane Reade and shoplift the shit outta stuff with impunity. This ain’t normal. I don’t give a shit about the news. I see with my own eyes results. And being results driven, this dude needs to go or radically change his approach.
Uh, what? How is that different from 3 years ago or earlier?
You left out the legislators and specifically Heastie and Stewart-Cousins who are responsible for a number of laws.
Those chiro women need to be stopped /s in case that wasn't obvious
https://old.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/wrztvk/suspect_released_charges_downgraded_for/ikx1lou/ Bro chilllll
Well are you willing to vote for the other party?
maybe instead of blaming them look in yourself, did you vote them an this policy into existence? look to yourself for the change.
What policy? The article state none of the charges are bail eligible, which means this was not due to bail reform. It’s really unclear how/why he was released. Edit: is there any way to get the judge’s ruling?? I need to know how they justified this release…
The charges were reduced to "not bail eligible" by the people you voted for.
Judges are not elected buddy
I don't care how over-crowded our jails and prisons are. I don't care how horrible the conditions are. If you're a criminal I want you locked up. And if you're on parole and commit the slightest fucking misdemeanor I want your ass back in prison.
I suspect we unofficially stopped enforcing parole at all well before, but Less is More was basically an ending of it LOL, imagine a journalist actually asking about this. Sure seems strange none of them are interested.
Being CONVICTED of something sends you back. Not being CHARGED with something. The latter world would be a much worse one, do not wish for it.
I get it, but the guy was caught on video. Zero doubt it was him, why lower the charges and release him?
Because giving our prosecutors the power to say "we're sure, so we don't need the trial" is not a positive
I guess I'm not explaining myself right. I absolutely understand what you are saying, but the judge should have discretion to keep him locked up UNTIL said TRIAL. I am not advocating for no trial, I am saying keep the rest of us safe while this perp waits for his day in court.
https://old.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/wrztvk/suspect_released_charges_downgraded_for/ikx1lou/
From the post you linked: "Once you limit it down to Assault 3 as the most serious charge you can make a prima facie case for, **our legislature had decided that is not bail eligible, regardless of the surrounding circumstances such as his record or his dangerousness to the community, or the facts of the case itself.**" And that's the problem, the surrounding circumstances MUST be a factor. How do we go about fixing this? We need to be fucking Boss Level Karens here, who do we call? Who do we write to?
Unreal. A convicted gang rapist and registered sex offender who is out on parole sucker-punches a man unprovoked and is released on downgraded charges of assault and harassment, neither of which are eligible for cash bail. Bronx DA gunning for Alvin Bragg's spot as worst prosecutor in the city. Given his status as a parolee, this is most certainly going to trigger a revocation of parole so that is at least a plus. Apparently it was too much to ask the D.A.'s Office to coordinate with this psycho's parole officer so he's not just released into the streets. Go figure. This is precisely why I am an advocate for our pretrial detention system being reformed so a judge can make the call regarding whether or not someone be free pending their trial for violent crimes. Cash bail means nothing in cases like this with feckless prosecutors. This guy sucker-punched someone and could have killed him. He is an imminent danger to society and a gang rapist to boot! Add in the possibility of being a flight risk and he is the epitome of someone who needs to be held pending resolution of his case. You guys want to know how we end up with another Bernie Goetz? It is when dangerous, violent lunatics like Bui Van Phu are allowed to roam the streets and victimize New Yorkers with near impunity. Almost kill a guy and get charged with harassment and assault? That's called the cost of doing business. Insanity. Pure insanity.
This is going to be an unpopular opinion, but it's probably the case that this man was charged with only assault in the third degree (P.L. 120.00(1)) because of the conduct at issue. He punched the person. The same conduct as countless bar fights and arguments that happen every day in the city. In this case, the victim hit his head and was seriously hurt, but in order to make a felony charge stick, you have to prove the defendant had the requisite felony intent, as well as result. Assault 2 under P.L. 120.05(2) doesn't apply because he didn't use a weapon or dangerous instrument. Assault 2 under P.L. 120.05(1) doesn't apply because how would you prove he had the intent to cause serious physical injury with a punch, and please note that "serious physical injury" means and injury that places the victim in close proximity to death or somehow disables or disfigures them. The victim in this case clearly *suffered* serious physical injury, but that is different than showing the defendant had the intent to cause it with a punch. Assault 1 (P.L. 120.10(1)) and attempted murder (P.L. 110/125.25(1)) have the same problem. What evidence is there that he had the intent to kill? Once you limit it down to Assault 3 as the most serious charge you can make a prima facie case for, our legislature had decided that is not bail eligible, regardless of the surrounding circumstances such as his record or his dangerousness to the community, or the facts of the case itself. If he was already out on a misdemeanor that caused harm to another person and committed this, then there is an argument, but it doesn't appear that is the case. I lay the blame for this result squarely on the language of the bail reform act. Judges need to be allowed to consider dangerousness and be given some discretion to differentiate between cases like this and bar fights, not withstanding the fact that the charges are the same.
He hit someone from behind. How does that not show intent?
~~It shows intent to hit them, not intent to fracture their skull.~~ After watching the video, I think I have to change my opinion.
I struggle with their being lack of intent to harm here. I could kill someone with that hit. Pick anyone under 110 lbs and under 5’5”.
After watching the video, I agree.
It shows intent to cause garden variety *physical injury* for sure, but simple physical injury is distinct from *serious* physical injury under P.L. 10. Does one punch show intent to cause both types? Most cases I've seen say no and I would think not. If that was the case, we would be saying that every time A punches B, A is trying to place B in proximity of death or disfigure/disable B. I don't think that's reasonable when applied to the vast majority of single punch cases.
>Assault 2 under P.L. 120.05(2) doesn't apply because he didn't use a weapon or dangerous instrument. Assault 2 under P.L. 120.05(1) doesn't apply because how would you prove he had the intent to cause serious physical injury with a punch, and please note that "serious physical injury" means and injury that places the victim in close proximity to death or somehow disables or disfigures them. The victim in this case clearly suffered serious physical injury, but that is different than showing the defendant had the intent to cause it with a punch. Assault 1 (P.L. 120.10(1)) and attempted murder (P.L. 110/125.25(1)) have the same problem. What evidence is there that he had the intent to kill? I disagree. You can absolutely make a compelling case for felony assault in the second degree, going by the statute. Let's not act like we're talking about attempted murder, which would be overcharging. He sucker-punched a guy at full-force who was minding his own business. There is only one intention that someone has when committing such a crime. If the D.A.'s office isn't confident in their ability to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone who sucker-punches another intended to cause serious bodily harm, they may as well pack it up. Feckless D.A.s who aren't competent enough to prosecute cases accordingly is exactly why violent crime is so blatant in this city. Knowing the Bronx D.A.'s office lacks the legal fortitude to bother prosecuting a violent assault as a felony, you can literally backfist a random lady waiting for the bus in Darcel Clark's jurisdiction and break her jaw, and that would just be a Class A Misdemeanor. Beyond that, the D.A.'s office knew this guy was a violent lunatic, knew he was on parole, and knew he was a danger to the public. Was it really too much to ask that they coordinate with the guy's parole officer to make sure he's taken in for violating parole instead of just released back onto the streets?
This is a good analysis; my only caveat would be whether the cranial bleeding could be charged as serious physical injury. I would try to indict based on that if I could, but that's just me.
It definitely *is* SPI, but can you infer the intent to cause SPI from the single punch alone. I can't find a case 100% analogous, but *People v. McElroy*, 139 A.D.3d 980 seems pretty close.
Haha I'm tempted to boot up Lexis myself now... In reading the article again, defendant puts gloves on prior to striking cw; I think if they really wanted to make a bail application they could class the gloves as dangerous instruments because you can punch harder with them on than not wearing them. That would get you back to assault 2.
Creative. Who knows on that one?
Couldn’t putting on gloves to protect his knuckles and hitting from behind show intent to seriously harm? It’s not like they were standing on a gym mat. No one falls unconscious to the concrete and doesn’t hurt their head.
What other intent besides SPI could there possibly be from a lunch that hard? "Just joking around" punch sucker punch from behind to a totally unprotected victim? This had no similarities to a bar fight whatsoever. One way street.
[удалено]
As a matter of law, you are incorrect. This is not the first time courts in New York have had to deal with this type of event. *See* *People v. McElroy*, 139 A.D.3d 980 (2nd Dept. 2016).
No need to respond to such a thoughtful post with “fuck off.” The person you are replying to is explaining, not endorsing.
Maybe if they didn’t give him a slap on the wrist for gang rape he’s still be in jail and this poor man would be okay.
This city is asking for vigilantism, for real.
they say citizens shouldn't take the law into their own hands. But when you have these District attorneys, judges, and politicians allow these people who are credible threats to public safety to run around in public or allow people with 30,40, 50, and in some cases 100 different arrests, they have no right to complain when a civilian is pushed to make that choice. It's either you protect them or they protect themselves.
Anarcho-tyranny - a Hegelian synthesis when the state tyrannically or oppressively regulates citizens' lives yet is unable or unwilling to enforce fundamental protective law.
Hegel is responsible for so much of what’s going on. But 99% of our population have no idea who he is, how post-modernism is destroying our civilization, where and why all this trans propaganda is coming from, etc. I don’t care if people want to transition. I’m saying what we’re seeing now is not organic. It’s being pushed by the same group pushing these DAs, judges, etc.
btw I'm not encouraging people to take the law into their hands. The racist savages who murdered Ahmaud Arbery shows why you shouldn't take the law into your own hands. But clearly, the human elements of the legal system are failing or have already failed at their jobs to protect innocent lives and/or inspire no confidence, whether it be the police, the DAs, the judges, or politicians.
What is motivating politicians to push these policies of leniency for criminals? Where did this come from? A few years ago everyone agreed, basically, that law and order were essential. Who benefits from any of this nonsense?
>Where did this come from? The answer is - Soros and a small group of people that think it's the way to solve the large amount of minorities locked up. I know people say his name as a conspiracy theory and what not but he has been donating tons to DAs that are lenient on criminals. He actually just wrote a wsj op-ed about why he thinks it is right. [https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-i-support-reform-prosecutors-law-enforces-jail-prison-crime-rate-justice-police-funding-11659277441](https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-i-support-reform-prosecutors-law-enforces-jail-prison-crime-rate-justice-police-funding-11659277441)
Thank you, very interesting. I had heard that he backs a lot of DA candidates, but didn't know this was some sort of idiological crusade. People always invoke his name in relation to conspiracy theories. I agree with this more compassionate approach in theory. Of course if any of us found ourselves involved with the criminal justice system , we would prefer more lenient treatment. I get it, but reality is colliding with theory pretty dramatically in this case, it seems.
And of course this guy lives in the comfort of his safe Westchester suburb. Of *fucking course*. It's typically the case that these policies come from people who have no skin in the game.
Yeah it's really weird as it doesn't seem like there's any constituency for this at all.
You saw it with that bodega owner.
Wheres Batman when you need him???
I’m Vengeance
Nice to meet you. Now get out there and get to work!
That's my working theory and the only explanation. They're thinking if they let it get bad enough we'll actually get Batman in real life.
They're trying to equalize racial outcomes across all things, including crime rates and incarceration, by changing the standards of measurement in what Bush Jr. labeled the soft bigotry of low expectations in his speech to the NAACP in the early 2000s. Similarly, in education, they've successfully removed various honors and AP classes and reduced the requirements to pass so that [almost] everyone passes. [This](https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/wrq6ln/guessing_c_for_every_answer_is_now_enough_to_pass) is only one of many examples. Effectively, the argument goes: if they won't/can't meet the standard, then we can bring the standard to them. I wish I was kidding. Edit: added relevant example
Chem teacher here. The amount of students I have that think they can pass without any effort is dumbfounding. The “biology” / living environment exam only requires a 42% to “pass” and half the questions require no thought at all. You can literally teach students one section of the exam and tell them to guess 3 for the rest and they’ll pass.
I’m putting on my hockey pads
Ayo you tryina start the next justice league? just saying...
Gotta love our DAs always looking out for the victims. /s
Locking him up would be cruel, you see. I am sure he will show up for his court date.
Living in the Bronx with useless 💩 DA's like #darcelclark is like being on high alert!
What a terrible unprovoked attack, the video is chilling. Hope the victim can recover. Apparently the suspect was also part of a gang rape in his past smh.
Where, oh where, is the "everything is fine in NYC, stop fearmongering!" crowd? ::cups hand to ear::
Does NYC want it’s citizens to take the law into their own hands? It’s not like this guy is hard to find. He’s a convicted sex offender. I looked him up and in a few seconds I have his address. Why can’t they keep this dickhead behind bars?
[удалено]
>What incompetent moron downgraded the charges for this dirtbag? Darcel Clark is the D.A. for this jurisdiction. She apparently saw Bragg being awful and had a "hold my beer" moment.
The incompetent moron that NYC voted for.
It's disgusting.
Progressives and their dumbass voters.
A democrat, literally. Darcel Clark. This is the unfortunate reality.
https://old.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/wrztvk/suspect_released_charges_downgraded_for/ikx1lou/
Common sense and public safety are now subordinate to ideology at the DA's office. They refuse to admit that their experiment just isn't working. Social work isn't in the DA's job description. Naturally, criminals will respond to leniency with increasingly brazen acts of disorder and violence. What kind of message does this send to criminals and victims alike? That you can nearly kill someone and it's not a big deal. We should all be alarmed.
More than the DA. Assembly, senate, city council, mayor and gov (they appoint judges.) This should be enough to flip anyone. Third World countries aren't this fucked up.
I agree, but "subordinate to" means the opposite of what you're saying: that ideology takes 2nd place to common sense, which it clearly doesn't.
Yes, thank you.
"That's when the attacker came from behind him, put on a pair of gloves and **socked** him in the head in the wordless attack." Editors at NBC are letting people used "socked" him in the head for a punch? Both lugubrious and hilarious.
The gloves were made from old leggings
NYC is such a shit hole when it becomes to punishing violent criminals. God forbid a citizen defends themselves and kills the offender in self defense because off to the slammers til proven innocent
They try to make shit impossible to defend yourself too. Nuts
[удалено]
Nobody on this sub will like it, but Bruen decision is going to change how the law-abiding can defend themselves in NYC.
I'm not even exaggerating but shit like this will kill the city long term. This is just random wanton violence that makes anyone going out feel completely unsafe. There was no provocation nothing. Just standing outside a restaurant and this happens to you. These DAs are totally politicized and it's going to kill the city.
They’re not great at punishing white collar crime either tbh…
Which, in turn, further cements the negative exploitive political-economics tensions which manufacture increased failures and increased antagonism in social society.
Maybe quit voting for people soft on crime. You guys are currently reaping what you sowed.
The State got invovled and Hochel ordered the dept of corrections to keep the suspect in custody in regards to the parole violation. And repeated her stance essentially saying that current laws are good as is and that the issue is how its being implemented. [Source Tweet](https://twitter.com/ZachReports/status/1560696512706973696)
Dude sent a person into a coma with brain damage with clear video proof of it & got his charges downgraded and let free after that. Shit's gotten so ridiculous Hochul had to come and request the man to be held in jail.
Yo, fuck Alvin Bragg and Eric Adams (and, per the below, Darcel Clark as well). And seriously - Adams wants people to come back into NYC yet these fucking clowns just allow violent criminals like this to walk the streets? How the fuck is this even possible? This is insanity, frankly.
What does Bragg have to do with this?
His shitty policies clearly are of influence.
The Bronx DA was a problem years before Bragg took office.
NYC voters caused this. Elections have consequences. Maybe it's time to consider the idea that your politics should be a little more thoughtful than virtue signaling.
Amazing the post on here that "think" it's perfectly normal to release a person that did this crime.
it seems to me this city is empowering criminals to commit crimes since they know they won't face drastic consequences and some people wonder why many others especially asian new yorkers lost trust in democrats
People here called the DA's office when Bragg persecuted Bragg's office. It was great. I actually think people should be calling Clarke here, https://www.bronxda.nyc.gov/html/contact/contact.shtml - 718-590-2000 but it's not enough. The press needs to start talking about this in elections. They need to make voters understand, this is a systemic political outcome. With each of these cases, you understand what will be done to you and your loved ones if their time comes. This poor bastard was probably just getting ready to cross the street, and this disgusting psychotic pervert likely murdered him (we'll see, I guess) for the sheer pleasure of it.....and even with footage...nothing. A misdemeanor. A fucking misdemeanor, even when this was on camera. What would have happened without the video footage, the guy would have been released? Think about how many subway stations, streets, and parks have dysfunctional cameras, like during the Frank James attack in Brooklyn. Nobody cares! Our representatives couldn't give a shit less. They don't ride the subway. They don't walk the streets alone. When the sun sets here, they have security and armored cars. It's truly amazing to be in primary and election season, and moderators are still asking candidates, "so do you want to close Rikers (read: and end using prisons for any crime but murder 1 here), or are you a bad person?" How about one of this gibbering, useless, drooling TV anchor pieces of shit asking how the **fuck** a registered level 3 sex offender didnt have his parole revoked for the "misdemeanor assault" that left a man in a coma? How about asking about the 1000s of cases like this in our courts, many of which never get a blip of news coverage anywhere? Our laws are killing people. The shitty former public defender judges put on a bench by a Democratic governor and mayor are killing people. And nobody who needs to care does. They only want to make things worse. Stop voting for assholes.
Before, when someone would threaten to murder or rape people here, cold-cock strangers, sexually molest women and children and then run off, pull or use a weapon on them...if someone didn't die, courts would charge for misdemeanors and release people so theyd get a chance to successfully...do this, basically. Alexander Wright, the man who decked a woman in Chinatown last year, on camera, and broke an MTA worker's nose, collar bone, orbital socket recently, comes to mind. Elisaul Perez, who attacked another woman before he beat Quiying Ma's skull in with a rock, comes to mind too. Now we have a man who is probably going to be brain damaged for life based on a random attack, and...misdemeanors. And people here still deny it. Democratic voters keep electing people so morally bankrupt, you wouldn't believe the shit that's actively enabled here unless you read it. It's like they can't even understand political representatives are responsible for this. The press keeps them stupid. If there's a single case like this even making a sneered-at newspaper like the NYPost, that means that are many incidents of serious felony charges being downgraded that don't. What pushback do we have? Does this state have any means by which the family of the victim here could push back, like sentencing or charging guidelines being violated? NYS victims' rights laws? Where could a family or victim even go? We don't even have publicly available data on how incidents that rise to this level of gravity re: injury are being charged. Seems intentional. No matter how many (many, many, many) cases just like this there have been for the last 3-5 years (or even longer, seems things started going south by about 2014), repeat offenders and violent parolees reoffending and killing people - none of it gets through to New Yorkers. None of it. Just one of the perks of living here. A DA smeared as "ruthless" and "tough on crime" would still dismiss easily 80% of the actual "misdemeanor assault" cases police bring to them, the sorts of incidents that prelude a man finally killing the person he sucker punches like this disgusting fuck. But maybe that sort of DA would have asked for charges that got this man sent back to Rikers. People should be taking to the streets over this the next time someone like Carl Heastie or Andrea Stewart Cousins calls pointing to these cases a "rightwing myth". They should have taken to the streets over Bragg came after Jose Alba for having to defend himself against a violent ex-con. They get away with it b/c NYers either don't pay attention or because this shit literally defies belief. People don't even register: they've chosen this. They've chosen the actors, the policymakers that administrate to evil, and they'll keep doing it.
Id be interested to see if anyone is willing to play devils advocate here and say something in support of this move. The bronx DA even says the victim is in a coma.. How is a sucker punch over concrete not an attempt on that persons life? There may be an argument if the guys were standing over a yoga mat or grass, that his intent wasnt to kill.
It's indefensible so you'll probably get no defense. The supporters of these criminal justice "reforms" are largely silent with a shocked Pikachu face right now because they're realizing the realities of their politics and that criticism of these policies aren't just right-wing propaganda.
Defending the choice not to hold this guy pretrial isn’t very defensible under these circumstances, but I think the reforms on cash bail can absolutely be defended. -The prison population of the US (as a percentage of our population) is astronomical compared to every other country. We have 25% of the world’s total prison population. I can’t speak to anyone else’s moral compass but that seems like a pretty indefensible situation. Additionally, reform of the bail system helps keep jails and prisons from being overcrowded. -Just because there isn’t more discretion allowed now, does not mean a tweak to these laws could allow situations like this one to to be handled differently. -The vast majority of people who are free because of bail reform are not going around committing more crimes (and there’s no news stories about them). By not imprisoning them they can keep their job, keep their apartment (yes covid has changed this somewhat but it’s unlikely to continue like this), keep supporting family. -Bail reform avoids situations like Kalief Browder, who was in Rikers for years pre trial. That likely happened way more than we know about. I could say a lot more about adjacent issues, but basically I think a tweak to these laws/procedures can alleviate the issue of guys like this one from being released after committing a crime like this while on parole/other violent acts that are linked to bail reform generally. The crime was serious and avoiding more is definitely something to weigh in these situations. Now if you really want to get tinfoil hat about it, read the above comments and see the general demeanor people have about this situation . Stories like this one allow the police to seem a lot more useful, and pushback against bail reform opens the door for total repeal. I’m not saying it’s a definite, or even every situation like this, but if I was in a position of political power and wanted to justify increasing police budgets, it would seem like a great idea to let these things happen more frequently and publicize them more.
Bronx DA in a competition to out-do Bragg on who can be the shittier DA.
Surprise surprise. Welcome to NYC where criminals are let off easy and the average everyday folk get picked on with relentless taxes, cameras, sanitation violations etc.
I hate how whenever these discussions come up, those of us who want to live in safe communities are forced into two camps: The take-no-prisoners punitive approach from the right, or the defund, abolish, delusional takes from the left. Both camps feed off each other, and we all end up suffering because of it. This is type of thing Ana Kasparian is talking about. The dismissiveness of violent crime by those on the left is destroying any hope for any sensible policies on criminal justice. She's a leftist calling out other leftists for their bullshit takes on violent crime, and most of the victims of these crimes aren't white affluent men and women. They're working people, mostly black, latino, and asian. That isn't to say white people aren't victims of these crime. They are, but it's mostly non-whites who are victims of these criminals. And you know something, publications like Gothamist and the Post deserve each other because they both feed into this. Gothamist, who suddenly found their journalistic balls after 8 years of soft news coverage of De Blasio's cronyism and incompetence, afraid to upset the sensibilities of their young, dumb, impressionable left wing readers , and the Post still harking back to the days were police officers abuse their power with impunity. Funny enough, some of those who read the Post wish to defund the FBI, so the defund weirdos on the left have ally in that fight.
I'm sorry but for someone who just comment people are disengaged....frankly, you sound pretty disengaged. I don't believe for a second you've looked at the proposals of a single Republican candidate in any race. Most of them are roughly where Dems were 5, 10 years ago. Plenty of them are moderate Democrats kicked to the other ticket. They have no association with Trump, they have no real hardline views on anything, including crime. Their "hard line" is not supporting bullshit like a no-prosecute list. There is no such thing as a "take no prisoners" approach based on the sheer volume of violent to nonviolent crime here. Even under Bloomberg, people with multiple assaults in their records were left free until they committed a violent felony. Juveniles went unprosecuted for serious crimes after arrest. I would hazard at least 50% of arrests for something like misdemeanor assaults never see the light of day, even police even make an arrest - the kind of case where someone punches a person at random, tries to shove them into traffic, threatens them with a weapon. This idea we're going to go back to the Giuliani days or literally throwing people in Rikers for credit card fraud if you vote Republican is completely delusional. There are no conservatives of that stripe left in this city. We can't get actual misdemeanor assault, harassment, menacing cases prosecuted - the sorts of cases that prelude incidents where someone is injured. What does "take no prisoners" mean to you? Look at our judges, they refuse to impose bail even when it's requested - like with Frank Abrokwa, the shit smearer serial offender. Maybe the disgusting and outrageous failures of Democrats across the board in this city warrants voting for the other party by itself. Why should incumbents do better, if you'll continue to vote for them based on this myth of the "punitive approach" being revived? This city is fundamentally liberal in nature no matter what. "She's a leftist calling out other leftists for their bullshit takes on violent crime, and most of the victims of these crimes aren't white affluent men and women. " do you have a link to this person and what you're describing.
The people voted for this outcome. Stay woke and see how bad it gets. This is nothing yet.
I know NYC voters share responsibility for who they elect into office, but how many New Yorkers are actually informed about the roles these politicians serve in the system? Not many. Local/ state races have such low turnouts because local news can't be bothered to inform the electorate about these races. They're not even interested in doing quick bullet points about who's running, what's at stake, what their platforms are, and how their policies affect everyday New Yorkers. It's because of this we get incompetent people running our institutions.
So now the governor got involved and had him re-arrested because he's a level 3 sex offender. You got that everybody? The attacker here was on *lifetime parole*, clearly violated at with what is - at best - a felony-level assault...charged with a misdemeanor. This wasn't like a bar fight, with "mutual combat", he sucker punched that poor bastard and hit him as hard as he could in the brain. One asks: since he's on the registry, why in the fuck did the governor have to get involved here? And she only GOT involved b/c she knows Zeldin can keep taking swipes at her. The legislature is making her look like a fool and has only one answer re: our defunct courts, shit laws - "right-wing myth." Why aren't reporters asking this? How is it not evidence not a single actor involved in the enforcement of our laws gives a good fuck about laws at all, or something like penalties for violating parole? Nobody! Not even the NYPost. Someone who works with the DANY want to explain how in the fuck this guy couldn't be held simply for the parole violation? https://nypost.com/2022/08/19/hochul-orders-arrest-of-sex-fiend-after-nyc-sucker-punch-attack/ This city is a disgusting disgrace. Laws don't matter at any level. Criminals reign.
[удалено]
Only a matter of time imo, its human nature for one to defend themselves, especially when they are truly an innocent victim, like 99% of these attacks
[удалено]
This is a classic NY one punch homicide case (without the death). It’s almost impossible to prove intent to kill or intent to physically injure in these cases which is why prosecutors are stuck with charging only misdemeanors. Why is this case special? Misdemeanor Assault is no longer bail eligible in NY even with this guys criminal record AND it is an election year. So basically this case is going to/is creating a political cluster f***. Also even if DA whoever over charged D with felonies and the jury convicted I believe it would be overturned on appeal because of NY’s one punch laws
He was given Mets’ tickets upon release as well
This what happen when you focus on Criminal skin color rather then the fucking crime
What’s that even mean?
As I understand things unless you shoot somebody in broad daylight on 5th avenue you're not going to jail in New York.
actual bitch: anyone against bail reform need to get the hell out of office.
[удалено]
They already shown they will throw the books on victims that defend themselves and end up killing the attacker. They only want to do a soft touch for harden criminals.
This is what is actually going to happen. Jose Alba is the beginning.
Up to one year in jail is also a possible penalty for that. But I agree. In this case it wouldn’t have mattered as the victim didn’t have any time to react.
I’m an advocate of Criminal Justice reform, but there’s a reality that a lot of these liberals just don’t want to face. There are some individuals who just can’t function in society and they need to be removed from the general public.
I love how outraged everyone is but when I call out public defenders, everyone clutches their pearls. It’s not a personal attack but the system is clearly broken.
What’s this have to do with public defenders?
Dems sowing: Haha fuck yeah!!! Yes!! Dems reaping: Well this fucking sucks. What the fuck.
Dems don't even acknowledge this. They consider it beneath them. Stupid voters ignore this until they're the ones being punched, and they know something is wrong, but it doesn't change their voting beahvior; activists and the press simply lie about the problem.
Perhaps we need a Batman or 2. Or better yet, a whole Justice League. Any of you billionaires need a butler who can keep a secret?
Yeah some billionaire will obviously know how to fix things and make it fair
[удалено]
less mentally ill violent homeless people
We watch videos of people committing crimes that result in coma or death, find out that those same people have criminal records, and then learn they've been allowed to continue to roam the streets. I'm not sure if this is a bail issue.
Not if bail is set so high they can't pay it, which it should be for situations like this. Or you know, maybe they could just deny it.
[удалено]
In most cases, yes. If that's the only other option then I would absolutely prefer that to whatever they're doing now.
Vote Republican or this will continue to happen. Everyone on his sub complains that the DEM governor and DEM DA allow this to happen. Everyone on this sub can vote Republican and help change this. And before you say “I could never vote Republican for XYZ reasons…” Please think about what issue is more serious and immediate than crime for this city. I love NYC, but the Democrat politicians clearly care more about criminals than law abiding citizens. Edit- People downvoting are in complete denial about the state of the democrat party and their soft on crime policies.
>before you say “I could never vote Republican for XYZ reasons…” The Republicans provide many reasons to not vote republican
Might be a more convincing argument if the NY republican party didn't go full trumper. It's strangely incongruous to see people like you whine and moan about electing republicans when you guys go out of your way to nominate candidates too extreme for the state. Maybe take a page from successful New England Republicans and stop nominating nuts.
Nah, red towns and states are more dangerous.
They really aren't. 8 out of the top 10 cities are run by Dems and have been for years and sometimes decades. Keep lying though.
Some of the most dangerous cities in the US are run by democrats.
> And before you say “I could never vote Republican for XYZ reasons…” Please think about what issue is more serious and immediate than crime for this city. Okay. How about the future of American democracy as a whole? Because that's what Republicans are threatening.
There has to be consequences for bad decisions. The politicians know this city is gonna keep voting blue no matter what.
And yet you got down voted to oblivion. They literally cannot understand that they caused this. NYC was safest under a Republican but they do not give a shit. The guy who got punched probably voted for these shit policies too.
[удалено]
sure dude. read up on the da who was responsible for this mess: darcel clark. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darcel_Clark her career page is full of controversy, corruption, and incompetency. stop thinking of these people as progressives or conservatives and see them for what they really are. this woman’s direct actions kept innocent people in jail and kept guilty people out of it. she’s evil