By Carol Tannenhauser
The alleged “lookout” in the assault and attempted robbery of a 57-year-old woman, in a scaffolding tunnel on Amsterdam Avenue between 68th and 69th Streets, on October 17th, was arrested Monday morning at 12:02 a.m., according to an NYPD spokesperson and Deputy Inspector Timothy Malin, commander of the 20th Precinct.
22-year-old Jose Ortiz, of the Bronx, was taken into custody and charged with two counts of robbery. Police are still looking for two other people in connection with the attack.
Capturing people after the fact of a crime via cameras does not protect people. We need crime PREVENTION not post-crime capture.
Cameras act as a deterrent as do patrol officers. This isn’t the movie Minority Report. You can arrest someone before they commit crime in most cases.
capturing the criminals is preventing them from committing further crimes.
Good. Get’em all!
So let’s see ,these mutts committed ROBERY IN THE 2nd punishable by 3 1/2 to fifteens years in jail.Let’s see how the liberal court system handles this case.
Just recently a man was arrested for pushing a woman into a subway car. The news reported that the guy had 18 arrests within the last 2 yrs!
Jimbo, good point – worth watching – hope they get what they deserve, but I agree that it’s unlikely.
Could you please explain the difference between ‘physical injury’ and ‘serious physical injury’ as it appears to be the differentiating factor between robbery in 2-nd and robbery in 1-st? From earlier reports, it appears that the victim ‘suffered broken bones in her face’.
Not sure–but I think that 3rd degree robbery is when someone uses force/weapon to take someone else’s property (I don’t think the victim has to actually suffer any injuries). Second degree is the same, but when an accomplice is involved. First degree is the same, but when the victim actually suffers an injury as a result of said robbery.
Well first of all how can you commit somebody for a crime that he had nothing to do apart of how did he attempt to rob someone if he was a look out come on guys this doesn’t make any sense how can he get charge with 2 counts and the alleged puncher get charged with one count
This person can be charged under Section 20.00 of Article 20 of the Penal Law — Liability Through Accessorial Conduct — also known as “acting in concert”.
I hope WestSideRag will follow up and show how quickly those charged are out on bail (or with no bail at all) and then further what, if any, sentence behind bars they receive. With the current approach to crime by the City, I doubt these two will spend any time at all locked up where they belong.
Agree with BJK. Crime is starting to go steadily up with the new bail reform laws. So sad to see all the good work that has been done in crime reduction since the ‘70’s/80’s go to hell in a handbasket in the name of “criminal justice reform”. When you look at the uptick in street crimes day to day, it’s clear that the trend has begun. What a shame.
I thought bail reform was to remedy inequality? Requiring bail for release is not rationally related to the nature of the crime, only to the financial situation of the accused. Two people commit a crime: one walks because they can pay, the other stays in jail (possibly losing a job) because they cannot pay. Here, there’s a video that persuades me personally that these particular defendants are probably guilty. But that’s not always the case and the standard is “innocent until proven.”
Good news keep us posted.
Good riddance.
We need more police officers in places that are dark or poorly lit