Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

frodosdream t1_j60e1f2 wrote

>Sayfullo Saipov was found guilty of murder by a federal jury for using a rented truck to fatally strike eight people on a New York City bike path on Halloween Day in 2017.

About time; this was a particularly cruel attack on innocent people.

410

sweetplantveal t1_j60kgva wrote

God the justice system is slow. Isis was doing this in Europe, then this, then the far right was running over protesters weekly. Then it basically stopped happening and now we have a conviction for the first case. Jfc.

110

POGtastic t1_j61iazv wrote

I'm indifferent to the justice system's speed in cases like this. Dude murdered 8 people, he's not going anywhere.

35

DukeOfGeek t1_j61fnm4 wrote

Didn't some other guy just get his conviction last month for ramming a crowd last year?

25

PuraVida3 t1_j618bg3 wrote

No, it isn't. Care must be taken to not overlook anything that will leave room for doubt. Understand that it is the job of the defense to sow any doubt. A jury can be dissuaded.

21

sweetplantveal t1_j619red wrote

Five years and change for someone caught in the act is NOT slow in your opinion. Gotcha.

45

HugeFinish t1_j61h0oy wrote

I mean do you think the person was free and still running people over until the sentencing?

33

[deleted] t1_j62fae6 wrote

[removed]

18

WTF_goes_here t1_j62h38l wrote

He waved his 6th early on. Defense attorneys ask their clients to do this regularly.

19

klipseracer t1_j62xzqf wrote

Since I'm ignorant can you explain why?

3

melthevag t1_j63bgdb wrote

It gives them more time to prepare for a trial

15

jusmellow t1_j657fzc wrote

If your life is on the line you want your attorneys to be prepared. You can waive your right to a speedy trial.

3

Cicero912 t1_j639p9y wrote

You only have the right to a speedy trial if you dont waive it, which is very common especially in big cases.

9

Crixxa t1_j64cwgs wrote

That is an unusually long wait for a criminal case. Civil cases often drag out for years but criminal trials don't typically make it half that long without delays sought by the defendant.

When I worked as an ADA, the longest trial that dragged out while I was there took 3 years and mainly because the defendant knew he was going to have a very bad time in prison and we had enough evidence that no jury would fail to convict him. So he was constantly trying to find creative ways to cause delays.

3

dittybopper_05H t1_j63kmbs wrote

> then the far right was running over protesters weekly.

Do you have a cite for that?

8

Crixxa t1_j64bw4p wrote

Here's an article covering a handful of them. I had a student who was at one of the fatal ones and he sent me a video he took of the car plowing through the crowd. He could have reached out and touched the vehicle without taking a step.

https://apps.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2021/10/vehicle-rammings-against-protesters/tulsa/

3

dittybopper_05H t1_j64obmd wrote

I would take that with a grain of salt.

I looked at some of the incidents, including one that allegedly occurred not that far from me, and a lot of them are basically based on one or two eyewitnesses with no other information available.

And almost all of them are "0 injuries, 0 fatalities".

That suggests to me that they weren't actual attacks. You can't outrun a car or a truck. If someone wants to run into a protest on purpose to kill and injure people, there isn't anything you can do about it, they're going to hit somebody.

This case is a perfect example of that. It was an actual attack by a person intent on killing people, and he did. People who were running or on bikes* were killed (8) and injured (11).

I think it's more likely that most of those so-called "attacks" in your link where there were no injuries or deaths were people who were minding their own business, driving somewhere, and found themselves in the middle of a protest blocking traffic. Car gets surrounded by an angry mob, the people in the car get scared (we all remember what happened to Reginald Denny), and they try to carefully drive away without hurting anybody.

And it gets counted as an "attack" by people with an ax to grind.

​

​

*As a side note, I'm willing to bet a lot of the people killed or injured in that attack were wearing headphones and listening to music. That's a bad habit to get into, because it lowers your situational awareness.

6

Crixxa t1_j64u7n0 wrote

The one my student was at was a protest and the car arrived on the scene navigating at that point against the flow of traffic away from the blocked street, then plowed straight through barricades, and the center of the gathered protesters and drove away.

I have never seen a protest with even a third of the ppl in attendance wearing headphones. That is such a weird point to try to make. It seems like you're reaching to justify violence.

3

Maleficent_Tie4767 t1_j659v6p wrote

“So-called attacks” he says. Methinks he’s the one with an axe to grind…

2

dittybopper_05H t1_j6hw44v wrote

Not really. I don't really have a dog in that fight.

But I did notice a lot of those incidents at that site (probably a majority, but I didn't count) were 0 injuries, 0 fatalities, which again suggests that they weren't really attacks. If they were intentional attacks, I would expect a injuries and fatalities. But we don't see that.

I mean, it's not like there is room for misinterpretation when you're really mad about something, mad enough to be protesting in the streets. You're probably totally calm and detached and an impartial observer.

That last paragraph was sarcasm, in case it wasn't completely obvious.

That's not to say there aren't any vehicle attacks, of course, but I think actual, for-real vehicle attacks are far less common than that site says they are. Most if not all of the incidents that are 0 injuries, 0 fatalities are likely to be misinterpretations of what the drive was trying to accomplish.

1

[deleted] t1_j60f10b wrote

[deleted]

−14