NY Gov. Kathy Hochul defends going to slain NYPD Detective Jonathan Diller’s wake after being told ‘his blood is on your hands’

[Valletta]

Hochul, however, failed to address the Diller family member, who according to a source, confronted her at the wake and said, “We don’t want you here. You’re not wanted here. You have blood on your hands. If you want to do something, change the bail laws.”
Hochul spokesman Avi Small also declined to address the confrontation, only saying in an email that the governor “attended the wake … to mourn the loss of Officer Diller, offer her condolences and hear from his family and loved ones who are dealing with unimaginable grief.”

NY Gov. Kathy Hochul defends going to slain NYPD Detective Jonathan Diller’s wake after being told ‘his blood is on your hands’

Gov. Kathy Hochul said she “understands” why slain NYPD Officer Jonathan Diller’s family is “outraged.”

nypost.com

They'll keep voting her in until things get even worse.

 

[AlexB23]

Hochul, however, failed to address the Diller family member, who according to a source, confronted her at the wake and said, “We don’t want you here. You’re not wanted here. You have blood on your hands. If you want to do something, change the bail laws.”
Hochul spokesman Avi Small also declined to address the confrontation, only saying in an email that the governor “attended the wake … to mourn the loss of Officer Diller, offer her condolences and hear from his family and loved ones who are dealing with unimaginable grief.”

NY Gov. Kathy Hochul defends going to slain NYPD Detective Jonathan Diller’s wake after being told ‘his blood is on your hands’

Gov. Kathy Hochul said she “understands” why slain NYPD Officer Jonathan Diller’s family is “outraged.”

nypost.com

They'll keep voting her in until things get even worse.

It seems like a lot of killing has happened around the world, and in the US over the past decade or so. I do not know much about this news, as I tend to avoid reading the news that often. But, as a courtesy, here is a summary of the NY Post article for those who do not like clicking on newspaper links and getting inundated with ads (ad blockers such as uBlock Origin are your best friend).

Summary below:
New York Governor Kathy Hochul defended her attendance at the wake of slain NYPD Detective Jonathan Diller despite being confronted by the detective's family members who accused her of having "blood on her hands" due to her role in controversial bail reforms. Diller, a 31-year-old father of one, was killed during a routine traffic stop in Queens on March 25, 2024. The prime suspect, Guy Rivera, has at least 21 prior arrests and served a five-year prison sentence.

Hochul stated that she was welcomed by the family and insisted that no one asked her to leave. She acknowledged the anger and outrage of the family regarding criminal recidivism, as well as the complicated factors surrounding bail reforms. The governor has been under fire for her failure to roll back these changes, which many argue contribute to violent criminals being released and endangering police officers and civilians.

At the wake, Diller's family members expressed their anger towards Hochul, with one member stating that she has blood on her hands and urging her to change the bail laws. Despite this confrontation, Hochul's spokesperson only stated that she attended the wake to mourn Diller and offer condolences to his family.

Mayor Eric Adams has renewed his calls for Albany to address criminal recidivism following the shooting, and New Yorkers can support Diller's 1-year-old son through the Silver Shield Foundation, which helps fund education for the families of fallen NYPD officers and FDNY firefighters.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Hochul, however, failed to address the Diller family member, who according to a source, confronted her at the wake and said, “We don’t want you here. You’re not wanted here. You have blood on your hands. If you want to do something, change the bail laws.”
Hochul spokesman Avi Small also declined to address the confrontation, only saying in an email that the governor “attended the wake … to mourn the loss of Officer Diller, offer her condolences and hear from his family and loved ones who are dealing with unimaginable grief.”

NY Gov. Kathy Hochul defends going to slain NYPD Detective Jonathan Diller’s wake after being told ‘his blood is on your hands’

Gov. Kathy Hochul said she “understands” why slain NYPD Officer Jonathan Diller’s family is “outraged.”

nypost.com

They'll keep voting her in until things get even worse.

From what I've read, the shooter had finished a sentence and parole, and as best as I can tell, was free, while the driver was out on $75,000 bail for a weapons charge from last year. It doesn't sound like they'd been let off the hook from their previous offenses. What exactly should be changed here? Longer sentences? Even higher bail? Or is this just a convenient opportunity to twist reality to justify complaining about Democrats?

 

[Valletta]

From what I've read, the shooter had finished a sentence and parole, and as best as I can tell, free, while the driver was out on $75,000 bail for a weapons charge from last year. It doesn't sound like they'd been let off the hook from their previous offenses. What exactly should be changed here? Longer sentences? Even higher bail? Or is this just a convenient opportunity to twist reality to justify complain about Democrats?

The Democrat approach to crime indeed has been highly criticized as resulting in more crime. The defund the police movement, the demonizing of police officers, putting rights of criminals ahead of those of victims, the misuse of public funds to go after political opponents, and the promotion of racism and division and victimhood (starting in the educational system) are currently at the top of the list. Putting victims rights first means longer sentences and stopping youth from goiing into a life of crime. Early intervention is needed, and yes long sentences for violent career criminals to protect society.

"The suspected shooter has been identified as Guy Rivera, a 34-year-old who had been arrested 21 times, the New York Post reported. The vehicle's other occupant, the driver of the car, was named as 41-year-old Lindy Jones, who had 12 known prior arrests, according to Fox News."

Who is Guy Rivera? Suspected NYPD shooter had 21 prior arrests

Officer Jonathan Diller, a married father who had a 1-year-old son, died after he was shot in the stomach on Monday evening.

www.newsweek.com

 

[iluvatar5150]

Who is Guy Rivera? Suspected NYPD shooter had 21 prior arrests

Officer Jonathan Diller, a married father who had a 1-year-old son, died after he was shot in the stomach on Monday evening.

www.newsweek.com

Was that link supposed to answer my question? Because I'd already read it, along with several others, which is how I knew what I wrote in my post.

 

[Fantine]

Let's get real. New York isn't the state with all the guns. NY doesn't respond to gun deaths by "thoughts, prayers, and praise the Lord, pass the ammunition."

Parolees are not permitted to carry firearms--but imagine how much easier it is to find firearms in a state like Arkansas, for example, which has more guns per capita than any other state in the country, than in NY, where only 15% of residents own guns.

Yes, criminals have too many guns in every state, but the reason is supply, supply, supply. They are easy to get when there are way too many of them out there...and in the forty years I lived in New York, when there were gun crimes, the shooters very often obtained their guns in --you guessed it--states where they are as available as chewing gum.

Parolees for violent felonies don't get out without bail when they are rearrested, and he didn't. $75K seems like reasonably high bail--you'd have to put up $7500, as far as I know.

I mourn the loss of Officer Diller. Were I the grieving family, I would be more upset at former president Trump, himself indicted for 91 felonies, turning their tragedy into a campaign stop and sensationalizing this tragedy for his own selfish (familiar theme, isn't it?) ends.

 

[Valletta]

Let's get real. New York isn't the state with all the guns. NY doesn't respond to gun deaths by "thoughts, prayers, and praise the Lord, pass the ammunition."

Parolees are not permitted to carry firearms--but imagine how much easier it is to find firearms in a state like Arkansas, for example, which has more guns per capita than any other state in the country, than in NY, where only 15% of residents own guns.

Yes, criminals have too many guns in every state, but the reason is supply, supply, supply. They are easy to get when there are way too many of them out there...and in the forty years I lived in New York, when there were gun crimes, the shooters very often obtained their guns in --you guessed it--states where they are as available as chewing gum.

Parolees for violent felonies don't get out without bail when they are rearrested, and he didn't. $75K seems like reasonably high bail--you'd have to put up $7500, as far as I know.

I mourn the loss of Officer Diller. Were I the grieving family, I would be more upset at former president Trump, himself indicted for 91 felonies, turning their tragedy into a campaign stop and sensationalizing this tragedy for his own selfish (familiar theme, isn't it?) ends.

The discussion was not about guns, but crime. You have to

Let's get real. New York isn't the state with all the guns. NY doesn't respond to gun deaths by "thoughts, prayers, and praise the Lord, pass the ammunition."

Parolees are not permitted to carry firearms--but imagine how much easier it is to find firearms in a state like Arkansas, for example, which has more guns per capita than any other state in the country, than in NY, where only 15% of residents own guns.

Yes, criminals have too many guns in every state, but the reason is supply, supply, supply. They are easy to get when there are way too many of them out there...and in the forty years I lived in New York, when there were gun crimes, the shooters very often obtained their guns in --you guessed it--states where they are as available as chewing gum.

Parolees for violent felonies don't get out without bail when they are rearrested, and he didn't. $75K seems like reasonably high bail--you'd have to put up $7500, as far as I know.

I mourn the loss of Officer Diller. Were I the grieving family, I would be more upset at former president Trump, himself indicted for 91 felonies, turning their tragedy into a campaign stop and sensationalizing this tragedy for his own selfish (familiar theme, isn't it?) ends.

Through the border policies of the Biden administration the cartels are firmly established and have plenty of money and thus can bring in as many guns to New York as they need. But back to the real soft on crime polices that I mentioned. Releasing repeat violent offenders and demonizing police officers was a mistake and the results were predictable. New York elected a mayor who called whites "crackers" and although a former police officer was anything but a law ad order kind of guy--the Al Sharpton philosophy is not the answer:

NYC Mayor Eric Adams baptized by the Rev. Al Sharpton at Rikers Island

Democrat Eric Adams is facing intense calls by grassroots groups to close the controversial jail facility

www.usatoday.com

 

[tz620q]

From what I've read, the shooter had finished a sentence and parole, and as best as I can tell, free, while the driver was out on $75,000 bail for a weapons charge from last year. It doesn't sound like they'd been let off the hook from their previous offenses. What exactly should be changed here? Longer sentences? Even higher bail? Or is this just a convenient opportunity to twist reality to justify complain about Democrats?

I read Bill Barr's book "One Damn Thing After Another" last year and in it he discussed his first term as Attorney General under George H.W. Bush. The late 80's, early 90's were another time of high crime. The solution implemented at that time was to set up a FBI Task Force to analyze the perpetrators of violent crime in our country. They found that there were around 5000 individuals that did over half the violent crime and that if you kept these individuals behind bars, the violent crime would drop. The federal government though was at the mercy of local prosecutors and state policies that had lessened sentences and bail on these violent criminals. So the Justice Department under Barr enacted federal enhancements that were several times more severe that could be placed on the criminals and give them a longer sentence. In only a few years the violent crime rate had dropped in half. We are in a phase now where the pendulum has swung back to being too lenient. Until we take a lesson from recent history, the crime rate will stay high.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

In all fairness to Hochul, this was a "no win" situation...

She goes, gets criticized for "their blood is on your hands, the audacity of you to show up here!"
If she doesn't go, she gets criticized for not going to Diller's service (like Biden got criticized for not going to it)

Republican pundits were going to bash her regardless of which decision she made.

 

[NxNW]

The Democrat approach to crime indeed has been highly criticized as resulting in more crime. The defund the police movement, the demonizing of police officers, putting rights of criminals ahead of those of victims, the misuse of public funds to go after political opponents, and the promotion of racism and division and victimhood (starting in the educational system) are currently at the top of the list.

Except none of these things are part of the Democratic approach to crime. You just made it all up.

 

[NxNW]

Through the border policies of the Biden administration the cartels are firmly established

There are no such policies. That's just something you made up.

and have plenty of money and thus can bring in as many guns to New York as they need.

You oppose gun restrictions, right?

But back to the real soft on crime polices that I mentioned.

There are no such policies, as pointed out previously.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Except none of these things are part of the Democratic approach to crime. You just made it all up.

While you're correct in that things like the defund "Defund the Police" movement aren't an official part of the national DNC platform, nor is "putting the rights of criminals above that of victims"

In the interest of fairness, some local and state-level Democrats did give lip service to some of those ideas.

Here's an NBC article about it (given that it's from NBC, it's certainly not a right wing bias on this article):

How Democrats went from defund to refund the police

As crime rates rise ahead of the midterms, Black mayors of the nation's largest cities are leading the call to crack down on lawlessness.

www.nbcnews.com

There were quite a few mayors who embraced the idea a few years back, but have since walked it back after seeing their mistakes.


With regards to putting the rights of criminals over victims, while they don't necessarily word it that way... in practice, that's what some cities are doing with policies like the ones being described in this article:

How squatters rights compare in different states

A recent series of squatting incidents has shone a light on what many consider a growing issue in the country.

www.newsweek.com

For instance, if I own property, and I'm on the hook for paying the mortgage and property taxes on it, and someone's squatting, not paying anything and refusing to leave, I'm the victim in that scenarios. And if I try to do something like remove their belongings or change the locks and I get fined for it, then that is, in effect, prioritizing rights of criminals over that of the victimized party.

 

[Valletta]

While you're correct in that things like the defund "Defund the Police" movement aren't an official part of the national DNC platform, nor is "putting the rights of criminals above that of victims"

In the interest of fairness, some local and state-level Democrats did give lip service to some of those ideas.

Here's an NBC article about it (given that it's from NBC, it's certainly not a right wing bias on this article):

How Democrats went from defund to refund the police

As crime rates rise ahead of the midterms, Black mayors of the nation's largest cities are leading the call to crack down on lawlessness.

www.nbcnews.com

There were quite a few mayors who embraced the idea a few years back, but have since walked it back after seeing their mistakes.


With regards to putting the rights of criminals over victims, while they don't necessarily word it that way... in practice, that's what some cities are doing with policies like the ones being described in this article:

How squatters rights compare in different states

A recent series of squatting incidents has shone a light on what many consider a growing issue in the country.

www.newsweek.com

For instance, if I own property, and I'm on the hook for paying the mortgage and property taxes on it, and someone's squatting, not paying anything and refusing to leave, I'm the victim in that scenarios. And if I try to do something like remove their belongings or change the locks and I get fined for it, then that is, in effect, prioritizing rights of criminals over that of the victimized party.

You're right that some of it is being walked back at local levels. But the leadership, the hard left that has taken control of the Democratic Party and the major media, continues to try and fundamentally change America. The destruction of the family, the victimhood, the and the race warfare.
There seems little concern for those who do not display the same politic, the rights of everyone under our Constitution seem to be only an occasional afterthought. People need to be concerned every time there is an injustice no matter what the political alliances of the people involved.

 

[JustOneWay]

But the leadership, the hard left that has taken control of the Democratic Party and the major media, continues to try and fundamentally change America.

The hard left? What is that? This sounds like an opinion, and it is wrong.

The destruction of the family, the victimhood, the and the race warfare.

Destruction of the family - empty words. Victim-hood is Donald. Race warfare? What is that? All of this is meaningless

There seems little concern for those who do not display the same politic,

Just like how the MAGA rightists think Donald did nothing wrong and is a victim.

the rights of everyone under our Constitution seem to be only an occasional afterthought.

The rights of everyone under the Constitution are different depending on how much power and money they have.

People need to be concerned every time there is an injustice no matter what the political alliances of the people involved.

We are trying to show the MAGA rightists the concern that Donald is destroying the country, but they don't listen.

 

[tz620q]

In all fairness to Hochul, this was a "no win" situation...

She goes, gets criticized for "their blood is on your hands, the audacity of you to show up here!"
If she doesn't go, she gets criticized for not going to Diller's service (like Biden got criticized for not going to it)

Republican pundits were going to bash her regardless of which decision she made.

I actually thought it was both courageous and compassionate of her to go. If you agree with me on that but don't see a similar compassion on Trump's part, then I think you may be viewing this through the tainted lens of our modern media. Both of these people have very busy agendas now and it would have been easy to ignore this funeral; but they choose to spend their time trying to console a grieving family. To me that is commendable and shouldn't be besmirched by cheap shots from either side.

 

[Arcangl86]

It seems bizarre that people are blaming Hochul for this. The bail reform law wouldn't have effected anything in this case.

 

[iluvatar5150]

It seems bizarre that people are blaming Hochul for this. The bail reform law wouldn't have effected anything in this case.

When was the last time conservatives took the time to build a cogent, substantiated argument when hurling mud at Dems?

 

[Valletta]

I actually thought it was both courageous and compassionate of her to go. If you agree with me on that but don't see a similar compassion on Trump's part, then I think you may be viewing this through the tainted lens of our modern media. Both of these people have very busy agendas now and it would have been easy to ignore this funeral; but they choose to spend their time trying to console a grieving family. To me that is commendable and shouldn't be besmirched by cheap shots from either side.

Sure, if people go for the right motives and not just political motives that's wonderful--I don't read hearts. I hope it get through to politicians that their policies have real life and death consequences.

 

[Arcangl86]

Sure, if people go for the right motives and not just political motives that's wonderful--I don't read hearts. I hope it get through to politicians that their policies have real life and death consequences.

And which policy would that be in this case?

 

[tz620q]

Sure, if people go for the right motives and not just political motives that's wonderful--I don't read hearts. I hope it get through to politicians that their policies have real life and death consequences.

My mind boggles at the illogic of our media at times. They thumped Trump for going as a purely political stunt, while salivating at the troves of cash Biden brought in that same day. Trump going to this funeral could only be seen as purely political in opposition to what Biden was doing that day. If Biden had not been pulling in the Democratic machines elite and putting on a high priced concert/confab, Trump's attendance wouldn't have made the news at all. I am not trying to fault Biden for fundraising, since the event was planned well in advance of the funeral; but it seems like there is no dirty deed left untouched by the left-leaning media to disparage Trump. Painting a past president as heartless for attending a funeral is a new low.