Widow Blasts Manhattan DA

[Valletta]

Fallen Cop's Widow Blasts Manhattan DA in Eulogy: ‘The System Continues to Fail Us'

The re-imagining of law and order by the left is not working. Will the people continue to vote for those who promote violence and havoc upon the people?

 

[tz620q]

Fallen Cop's Widow Blasts Manhattan DA in Eulogy: ‘The System Continues to Fail Us'

The re-imagining of law and order by the left is not working. Will the people continue to vote for those who promote violence and havoc upon the people?

It was very moving to watch her eulogy. Perhaps white hot grief will finally open their eyes.

 

[SkyWriting]

The re-imagining of law and order by the left is not working. Will the people continue to vote for those who promote violence and havoc upon the people?

If housing violent people together where they are surrounded by like minded people is a good idea, then try and make that case.

It's a fact that peer pressure works very well to change people.
It works better than anything.

 

[bekkilyn]

Perhaps we shouldn't have such a large amount of "peer pressure" to attempt to turn police officers into villains and violent and perverse criminals into heroes and saviors in the name of "justice".

 

[disciple Clint]

It was very moving to watch her eulogy. Perhaps white hot grief will finally open their eyes.

we can only hope. Why it was not obvious to everyone that defending the police was a foolish and dangerous idea I will never understand, I remember when this idea started pointing this fact out right here on this site and being rebuked by people who hopefully have now learned a lesson at the expense of others.

 

[Tom 1]

Perhaps we shouldn't have such a large amount of "peer pressure" to attempt to turn police officers into villains and violent and perverse criminals into heroes and saviors in the name of "justice".

Perhaps something other than believing life is a Hollywood movie would help.

 

[iluvatar5150]

It was very moving to watch her eulogy. Perhaps white hot grief will finally open their eyes.

Open our eyes to what? That she was repeating a bunch of fact-free cop propaganda? The guy who killed her husband wasn't out of jail because of bail reform rules and the DA she called out had nothing to do with his case.

Perhaps we shouldn't have such a large amount of "peer pressure" to attempt to turn police officers into villains and violent and perverse criminals into heroes and saviors in the name of "justice".

Perhaps we can work on the peer pressure within departments moving officers to turn each other into villains.

 

[tz620q]

Open our eyes to what? That she was repeating a bunch of fact-free cop propaganda? The guy who killed her husband wasn't out of jail because of bail reform rules and the DA she called out had nothing to do with his case.

You are right. Here is an article from the New York Post on him:
Alleged NYPD cop killer Lashawn McNeil has lengthy rap sheet, was out on probation
What a crazy looking dude! He should have been in prison from any of a number of previous crimes, including assaulting a police officer in Pennsylvania in 2002. Now three people are dead, including Lashawn McNeil and for what reason? The call for tougher sentencing and probation laws is real. It is not based on one incident; but a pattern of violent criminals walking our streets and terrorizing citizens and shooting cops. If you want to compare recent trends in bail and sentencing with recent statistics on crime, I would think it would be instructive for both of us. This isn't a Democrat versus Republican thing. It is an issue that goes across the board in its support.

 

[iluvatar5150]

You are right. Here is an article from the New York Post on him:
Alleged NYPD cop killer Lashawn McNeil has lengthy rap sheet, was out on probation
What a crazy looking dude! He should have been in prison from any of a number of previous crimes, including assaulting a police officer in Pennsylvania in 2002. Now three people are dead, including Lashawn McNeil and for what reason?

He had been in prison for those crimes. 2002 was 20 years ago. The crime for which he was on probation was committed in 2003. How long should he have been in prison?

The call for tougher sentencing and probation laws is real.

We've been down that road already and it didn't work. It ravaged families and neighborhoods and made generations of people unemployable. Unsurprisingly, it hit minorities the hardest.

It is not based on one incident; but a pattern of violent criminals walking our streets and terrorizing citizens and shooting cops.

Is it based on that pattern? Or is it based on fear driven by anecdotes?

 

[disciple Clint]

Open our eyes to what? That she was repeating a bunch of fact-free cop propaganda? The guy who killed her husband wasn't out of jail because of bail reform rules and the DA she called out had nothing to do with his case.



Perhaps we can work on the peer pressure within departments moving officers to turn each other into villains.

Open our eyes to what? That she was repeating a bunch of fact-free cop propaganda? The guy who killed her husband wasn't out of jail because of bail reform rules and the DA she called out had nothing to do with his case.

Did you hear the applause she received from people who know exactly what is causing the increase in crime? Do you know that minorities are by far the largest victim group of violent criminals? So tell me how much BLM benefited the people they claim to represent when they called for defunding of the police and liberal bail policies.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Did you hear the applause she received

yep

from people who know exactly what is causing the increase in crime?

Based on what I've seen cops do and what I've heard their union representatives say in public, I have absolutely zero faith in their ability, as a group, to accurately assess what causes increases in crime. They're not criminologists. They're not sociologists.

Asking cops about the causes of crime is like asking a line cook about the best way to raise chicken: their job gives them some limited insight into the subject but in no way makes them experts, and other incentives can easily overwhelm those pushing them towards doing things "the right way."

Do you know that minorities are by far the largest victim group of violent criminals? So tell me how much BLM benefited the people they claim to represent when they called for defunding of the police and liberal bail policies.

Police weren't defunded to any serious degree or for any real length of time. Most of what we heard never amounted to anything more than noise. And in those places that did try to "defund", it often amounted to accounting gimmicks or "defunding" by attrition.

And it's still too early to tell how the effects of liberal bail policies will shake out. What we do know is that the old systems punished lots and lots of people who were too poor to mount a reasonable legal defense, many of whom were innocent. Is that your idea of justice? Letting lazy cops and lazy prosecutors convict, fine, and jail poor people for no reason other than pumping up some "crime fighting" stats? Because those people tend to be minorities, too. And they don't like being victimized by the justice system.

 

[tz620q]

He had been in prison for those crimes. 2002 was 20 years ago. The crime for which he was on probation was committed in 2003. How long should he have been in prison?

Good question. New York has a three strikes law that is defined as:

"In New York, this concept is referred to as “persistent felony offender” law. This law defines a persistent felony offender as someone who stands convicted of a felony after having been previously convicted of two or more felony crimes."

So it depends on how the charges were tried. We know of a felony drug charge in Pennsylvania in 2003 and a felony narcotics conviction in New York in 2003. He had an outstanding arrest warrant for absconding probation in 2005. So it depends on how the assaulting a police officer charge was settled in Pennsylvania in 2002. The local newspaper had this to say about his criminal charges in Pennsylvania:

"McNeill was charged in 2002 with assaulting a police officer in Pennsylvania, Essig said. In 2003, he pleaded guilty to possession of drugs with intent to deliver in Pennsylvania. He served roughly one year behind bars and was released in 2004, authorities in Lehigh County confirmed."

If this charge led to a felony conviction (which it seems it did not or else he would not have been out in 2003 to get the drug trafficking charge), then the NY felony drug conviction would have been his third strike and he could have been given life in prison, which would have put a cop hating violent criminal behind bars and saved the two officers lives. I know this all seems like perfect hindsight; and I can see the need for better defense for lower income people charged with a crime and better services to handle rehabilitation of criminals. The issue is that this man had been on the streets since 2005 with an active arrest warrant in NY. He seems to have lived in Maryland for some time before traveling back to NY to visit his mother. The issue is that people often avoid local arrest warrants by just moving.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Good question. New York has a three strikes law that is defined as:

"In New York, this concept is referred to as “persistent felony offender” law. This law defines a persistent felony offender as someone who stands convicted of a felony after having been previously convicted of two or more felony crimes."

So it depends on how the charges were tried. We know of a felony drug charge in Pennsylvania in 2003 and a felony narcotics conviction in New York in 2003. He had an outstanding arrest warrant for absconding probation in 2005. So it depends on how the assaulting a police officer charge was settled in Pennsylvania in 2002. The local newspaper had this to say about his criminal charges in Pennsylvania:

"McNeill was charged in 2002 with assaulting a police officer in Pennsylvania, Essig said. In 2003, he pleaded guilty to possession of drugs with intent to deliver in Pennsylvania. He served roughly one year behind bars and was released in 2004, authorities in Lehigh County confirmed."

If this charge led to a felony conviction (which it seems it did not or else he would not have been out in 2003 to get the drug trafficking charge), then the NY felony drug conviction would have been his third strike and he could have been given life in prison, which would have put a cop hating violent criminal behind bars and saved the two officers lives. I know this all seems like perfect hindsight; and I can see the need for better defense for lower income people charged with a crime and better services to handle rehabilitation of criminals. The issue is that this man had been on the streets since 2005 with an active arrest warrant in NY. He seems to have lived in Maryland for some time before traveling back to NY to visit his mother. The issue is that people often avoid local arrest warrants by just moving.

NY's PFO law and "three strikes" are similar, but not the same thing. Three strikes typically covers only certain violent offenses and prescribes mandatory minimum sentences, whereas NY's PFO law covers a broader range of offenses, but only opens up the option of harsher sentencing without necessarily mandating it:

Legislation

in lieu of imposing the sentence of imprisonment authorized by section <snip> for the crime of which such person presently stands convicted, may impose the sentence of imprisonment authorized by that section for a class A-I felony.

emphasis added.

Also from that statute:

(i) that a sentence to a term of imprisonment in excess of one year, or a sentence to death, was imposed therefor; and

So it's not entirely clear that 2003 drug conviction would even qualify.

Assaulting an officer is often a garbage charge that officers trump up because they can, so who knows what that means.

But all of that is a bit moot since the minimum sentence for an A-1 felony in NY is 15 years, apparently eligible for parole before then.
Sentencing Chart | New York Criminal Lawyers The Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo

So, even if he'd done a full stint, he would've gotten out a couple years ago.

 

[tz620q]

NY's PFO law and "three strikes" are similar, but not the same thing. Three strikes typically covers only certain violent offenses and prescribes mandatory minimum sentences, whereas NY's PFO law covers a broader range of offenses, but only opens up the option of harsher sentencing without necessarily mandating it:

Thanks for the research. I do this to learn new things. So I appreciate people who can offer a differing view and back it up with hard data.

 

[disciple Clint]

yep


Based on what I've seen cops do and what I've heard their union representatives say in public, I have absolutely zero faith in their ability, as a group, to accurately assess what causes increases in crime. They're not criminologists. They're not sociologists.

Asking cops about the causes of crime is like asking a line cook about the best way to raise chicken: their job gives them some limited insight into the subject but in no way makes them experts, and other incentives can easily overwhelm those pushing them towards doing things "the right way."



Police weren't defunded to any serious degree or for any real length of time. Most of what we heard never amounted to anything more than noise. And in those places that did try to "defund", it often amounted to accounting gimmicks or "defunding" by attrition.

And it's still too early to tell how the effects of liberal bail policies will shake out. What we do know is that the old systems punished lots and lots of people who were too poor to mount a reasonable legal defense, many of whom were innocent. Is that your idea of justice? Letting lazy cops and lazy prosecutors convict, fine, and jail poor people for no reason other than pumping up some "crime fighting" stats? Because those people tend to be minorities, too. And they don't like being victimized by the justice system.

ignoring the obvious and blaming the police for doing their jobs while attempting to justify the criminals as being victims only proves a bias that is beyond any logic.

 

[iluvatar5150]

ignoring the obvious and blaming the police for doing their jobs while attempting to justify the criminals as being victims only proves a bias that is beyond any logic.

What are you talking about?

 

[disciple Clint]

What are you talking about?

Well since it is a response to your post, do you need to ask?

 

[iluvatar5150]

Well since it is a response to your post, do you need to ask?

You quoted my post but didn’t respond to any of the points I made. Whatever it was the you responded to only exists in your imagination.

 

[disciple Clint]

You quoted my post but didn’t respond to any of the points I made. Whatever it was the you responded to only exists in your imagination.

Oh yes I responded to what you said, here is a sample of what you posted:"Letting lazy cops and lazy prosecutors convict, fine, and jail poor people for no reason other than pumping up some "crime fighting" stats? Because those people tend to be minorities, too. And they don't like being victimized by the justice system." I think it is important that you consider the fact that the "minority criminals" that you seek to protect are victimizing other minorities, black on black murder for example. You do not find people who live or own businesses in minority communities asking for there to be a reduction in police or endorsing letting criminals back on the streets. Now look at where the people behind BLM are living, that should tell you something.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Oh yes I responded to what you said, here is a sample of what you posted:"Letting lazy cops and lazy prosecutors convict, fine, and jail poor people for no reason other than pumping up some "crime fighting" stats? Because those people tend to be minorities, too. And they don't like being victimized by the justice system." I think it is important that you consider the fact that the "minority criminals" that you seek to protect are victimizing other minorities, black on black murder for example. You do not find people who live or own businesses in minority communities asking for there to be a reduction in police or endorsing letting criminals back on the streets. Now look at where the people behind BLM are living, that should tell you something.

Oh ok, so you were responding to my objection to your pointless non sequitor.

To recap, you said:

Do you know that minorities are by far the largest victim group of violent criminals? So tell me how much BLM benefited the people they claim to represent when they called for defunding of the police and liberal bail policies.

I don't know why you said that. It had nothing to do with the post of mine to which you were responding. It was entirely irrelevant, yet you felt compelled to bring it up and I took the bait, by saying:

And it's still too early to tell how the effects of liberal bail policies will shake out. What we do know is that the old systems punished lots and lots of people who were too poor to mount a reasonable legal defense, many of whom were innocent. Is that your idea of justice? Letting lazy cops and lazy prosecutors convict, fine, and jail poor people for no reason other than pumping up some "crime fighting" stats? Because those people tend to be minorities, too. And they don't like being victimized by the justice system.

What I did here was take at face value your expression of concern for minorities. I didn't (and still don't) believe you really cared about those minorities - I believe you only care about them so far as you're able to use them for political fodder - but I figured it would be good sport to engage you as if you did, so I brought up other concerns that minorities tend to have when it comes to interacting with the criminal justice system, i.e. namely that police often trump up charges, prosecutors roll with them, and innocent folks often acquiesce because they're too poor to fight it.

I think it is important that you consider the fact that the "minority criminals" that you seek to protect are victimizing other minorities, black on black murder for example.

I think you don't have any idea what I'm talking about. I specifically said innocent people, but you want to paint them as criminals. Perhaps if you had some clue as to why bail reform is needed, you wouldn't be taking such a stance.