[zaroth]

No, they were responding to reports of a man with a gun, the man fled the cops into the subway, they followed him there when he managed to jump on a train and evade the cops.

This video was them picking him up at the next station. They just stated the charge for arresting him was not paying the fare.

You have a man that officers tried to question who fled into a subway train and who is reportedly armed. You’re picking him up at the next station from a loaded train on a crowded platform.

Please with 20-20 hindsight spitball how you think this should have gone down?

https://twitter.com/DMoritzRabson/status/1188216667127476224...

https://twitter.com/DMoritzRabson/status/1188553063738548227...

[mattacular]

That account (in the linked tweets) makes absolutely no sense. It actually brings up more questions than it answers. Since it's very vague we will just have to assume never once was the alleged gun found on the person they finally arrested or anyone else. It's of course unclear if he was actually the person "described" (as male, no further details given) in the report. And of course you'll also have to take the NYPD at their word in a prepared statement to the press as to the veracity of this report they allegedly received about "man with a gun." I wonder how'd they find this unrelated man without gun they ultimately arrested based on such a thorough description ... ?

[zaroth]

If you want to make a summary judgement based on incomplete evidence, the only reasonable course of action is to assume the best of the person you are ruling against.

That’s how it works in a court of law, but I find it’s a good way to catch yourself when drawing conclusions based on speculation.

The video clearly shows a train with closed doors and large contingent of police corralling a specific train car and cornering a specific suspect. That seems to correlate well with an identified person who fled and got away at the prior station; they knew who they were going after, and had time to assemble a force to confront the person. Obviously the size of the force and the rapidity of response supports the notion that they thought the person was a danger and wanted to very quickly subdue them in a crowded area.

All in all it seems like a professional operation designed to be prepared for a worst case scenario and to try to control a situation with potentially deadly consequences if it got out of hand.

When someone is fleeing from the police and was reported to be armed, I would absolutely expect that they are going to take extreme precautions especially in a crowded space.

[ironchest]

no, you're right. I was a bit too fast on judging. If they had reason to think he was armed, then I'm less uncomfortable. Thanks.