NYPD Search For Teens Responsible For Attack On Car On Fifth Avenue

This has been an awful year for New Yorkers in dealing with the massive costs of the pandemic.  Adding to those costs is the increase in violent crime under Mayor Bill di Blasio with a 41 percent increase in homicides. Now, the city is focused on an attack on a driver on Fifth Avenue by a mob of bicyclists. The attack in broad daylight on a car captures a sense of lawlessness for many in the city.

A 15-year-old boy was arrested in connection with the attack on the bar driven by Max Torgovnick.  He was driving his elderly mother back from dropping off a donation at a nonforprofit organization before heading to his father’s neurology office. He described being surrounded by up to 50 bikers on Tuesday afternoon. The teen smashed his window and dented the BMW at Fifth Avenue and 21st Street.

The sources put the figure at approximately 25 bikers.

What is striking about the video is the length of time and the utter sense of impunity in the middle of the day on one of the most traveled road in Manhattan.  There are obviously many onlookers and people filming the attack but there is little sense of concern.

 

159 thoughts on “NYPD Search For Teens Responsible For Attack On Car On Fifth Avenue”

  1. CK writes: “Geez Louise, you seem determined to kill my lunchbreaks. It seems I must remind you”
    —-

    Dick Tracey or dick for short, what you think is a lack of reading comprehension is the stupidity of one who provides non existent page numbers in what you posted. That is not new, for you also created non-existent quotes of others and lies that you had already posted certain information that everyone could see. We know what you are not, credible.

    In fact, though you pretend to know things about Floyd’s death and can copy phrases provided by another or force fed to you by the left your understanding is near non-existent.

    The only question under discussion from the beginning was whether or not Chauvin should be convicted of homicide. I didn’t think enough evidence existed You did. I have an open mind so I asked you to show what you considered to be proof.

    You flubbed that and flubbed everything else. In order to hide your ignorance of the discussion you diverged all over the place and failed to get things straight about incidents and people. You sounded like a schizophrenic in a crisis.

    You recounted what you said and then what I said at great length, though one cannot trust the quotes you provide, because earlier you created a quote that didn’t exist and also quoted things out of context. Once again I have to remind you that you lack credibility.

    Yet despite all the words you put to paper, you never defend your position that Chauvin is guilty of homicide. Yes, you did bring up the fact that Floyd was in a neck hold for almost 9 minutes but could not provide proof that 9 minutes is too much according to the manual. Nor could you provide proof that he intended to kill Floyd. You couldn’t show proof of neck injury or a direct cause of death from the knee hold. You provided statements about the crowd’s medical acumen but you couldn’t provide proof of that either. You provided several more things but you were unable to defend your positions.

    Instead you sounded like a crack pot or worse one that was out of control. You presently sound better but still run away from proving what this discussion is all about, the reasons you feel Chauvin is guilty of homicide.

    The courts will make their determination but unless the prosecutor has evidence unknown to you eventually that claim will fail.

    1. “Dick Tracey or dick for short, what you think is a lack of reading comprehension is the stupidity of one who provides non existent page numbers in what you posted. ”

      I have no idea to what you are referring. I provided the page numbers here
      Me (January 4, 2021 at 8:15 PM ” https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12951-TKL/Exhibit67807072020.pdf

      There you can see both the page I linked you directly to from the police website (26/35) and the recovery position I referred to shortly after on page 28.”
      Are you still unable to jump to pages 26 and 28 our of the 35 pages in the linked pdf? Learn how to use your computer when you study the law.


      “The courts will make their determination but unless the prosecutor has evidence unknown to you eventually that claim will fail.”

      I’ll ignore the rest of your lunatic rant but can’t help but notice you didn’t answer the basic yes or no question that was asked. Learn the law. Free lessons are done.

      1. “I have no idea to what you are referring.”

        Your rambling prevented you from getting your point across. When you provide a page number most people look for the number on the page not the one that was in your head,

        In any event we can clearly see the procedure manual is not included as one would have assumed from your rhetoric claiming to have posted its link. That is probably the reason you stay clear of important issues such as whether or not Chauvin’s knee hold was technically the same as what he was taught.

        “Free lessons are done.”

        Free in your case were worth what they cost, nothing or better said, less than nothing. I am glad to see that all notion of you teaching anyone has been extinguished. Criminal law will be preserved.

        1. Ah so you claim you have finally read the procedure manual and require no more teaching. Final exam again:

          Having read the manual:

          Is it reasonable to kneel on someone’s neck 5 minutes after they’ve gone unconscious, having previously told you they can’t breathe and are dying as a result of your knee being on their neck?

          Yes or no.

          If no Chauvin is guilty of murder in the 2nd degree beyond a reasonable doubt. If you think the manual explicitly has to tell you that is unreasonable you are not a reasonable person but an incompetent one.

          1. You continue to lie about what another says. No, I did not read the manual having said that numerous times. It is obvious you were being a poseur when it seems you pretended to have read it, had its link and provided its link. That it is one of the major decision makers for a jury in whatever Chauvin is charged with. You are unable to prevail in discussion so you choose blatant lies.

            “Having read the manual: Is it reasonable to kneel on someone’s neck…”

            The manual probably will let us know how long such a procedure can be used (that is one reason I asked for the link). I won’t bother with your emotional ranting. You need facts not your confused hysteria and hyperbole. Facts and truthfulness are not your strong suits.

            1. Answer the question. If you want to use the manual to defend against this:

              https://youtu.be/NcFoi1q9Cf4

              You’ve got to be able to reasonably rely on it.

              Now you say you haven’t read it after previously saying reviewing police procedure is what made you think Chauvin kneeling on a dying and unconscious man’s neck for 5 minutes to be a reasonably inferred part of police procedure.

              If you think that isn’t the ultimate question left on the table then you still need to read and comprehend criminal law. Learn criminal law or stop talking about it.

              1. You have a problem taking each individual action and evaluating it separately in order to understand what actually happened. The video is disturbing but your hyperbole defeats your argument. There are loads of videos that are likewise disturbing but on careful review of circumstances one finds that one’s first conclusions change.

                You are not analytical. You think with your emotions that cannot interpret in sequence the events that happened. You are repetitive indicative of a dull mind. You also bend truth based on what your feelings tell you so you are unreliable. Yet you believe that if you repeat something enough times it will become true, but that doesn’t happen.

                Up your meds and deal with the facts.

                1. “ You have a problem taking each individual action and evaluating it separately in order to understand what actually happened.”

                  I’ve done that. You preferred to argue over whether my use of immaterial words like “beg” and “dug” was proper or if basic crim law terms were meant to impress you rather than address the main issues by disputing the overarching arguments.

                  One last time. The issues in a murder trial are the Actus Reus and Mens Rea.

                  The Actus Reus of Chauvin committing an act of killing of contributing to the killing of George Floyd is proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the video evidence, the dying victims statements, and no less than three separate autopsies concluding the neck compression played a role in the victims death.

                  The Mens Rea of Chauvin intending to kill or acting with reckless indifference to whether he killed George Floyd is proven beyond a reasonable doubt by footage of Chauvin continuing to kneel on Floyd’s neck for 5 minutes after he was unconscious, after being told by Floyd he can’t breathe and hearing Floyd complain of the knee, and being alerted by multiple witnesses he was killing Floyd.

                  As your defense to this Mens area you raised a manual which you hadn’t read as evidence Chauvin’s actions were reasonable as police procedure. Not only does said manual show Chauvin should have placed Floyd into the recovery position the moment he cuffed him, the manual cannot be relied on as a defense when Chauvin far exceeded what was reasonably inferred therein by continuing to kneel on his neck 5 minutes after he passed out. Thus you have no defense

                  I suspect you will continue to blame me for your inability to comprehend the issues but I implore you if you wish to discuss this with someone, go to any law school in America, layout your defense for why you believe Chauvin is not guilty of murder in the 2nd, and be prepare to be laughed out of the classroom. You seem to still think we operate under a principle of guilt being proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in America, as opposed to a reasonable doubt. Do learn the law and stop embarrassing yourself.

              2. No, you are unable to take individual actions and evaluate them separately. You said Chauvin “dug” and I think wiggled or something like that into the neck of Floyd. Your characterization was your typical useless hyperbole intentionally provided because you lack the ability to provide real evidence.

                “The issues in a murder trial are the Actus Reus and Mens Rea”

                You learned that. Now learn what the evidence is in the case being discussed.

                “proven beyond a reasonable doubt”

                In your mind, but a lot of people are much smarter than you.

                No, I wanted the manual that I didn’t have to broaden my knowledge and asked you for it over and over again when you acted as if you took you quotes off the manual rather than off a left wing web site. You kept insisting that you provided the link but you never did. You lied.

                “I suspect you will continue to blame me for your inability to comprehend the issues”

                No. I blame your upbringing, teachers and anyone else that let you get away with this type of cr-p when you were younger. I also blame your medical infirmity.

                1. Okay, you’ve proven your point, that you are an unreasonable lunatic with a poor understanding of the law. Now go home and leave the Capitol.

  2. these street punks are just as brain-washed as NaCHaCha commenting here. Obviously, deBlasio and his mob have considered the principle “divide et impera” – divide and rule, the only hope for the failing party of democRATs that has lost its political ends.

  3. I believe the driver of that car is a physician. NY you will lose one more very needed, skilled person.

  4. Maybe they were just continuing the celebration of the Harris/Biden big steal. There were large street parties in Gotham after the fake news unofficially ‘officially’ declared them winners a week after the election. With ‘defunding’ Dem’s in the WH it will ’empower’ the street hoods & agitators to run wild & target any white passerby at random anywhere. Brace yourself, this is your future, too.

Leave a Reply