By Gus Saltonstall
A local man was indicted on Tuesday for allegedly slashing a tourist on the Upper West Side in November, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office announced.
Joshua Zinberg, 25, was charged with attempted murder and multiple counts of assault, according to the DA’s office.
Around 10:20 a.m. on November 20, Zinberg left his parked car and ran across Columbus Avenue and West 86th Street in pursuit of a 55-year-old man who was walking on the same street, according to the DA’s office.
Zinberg, who grew up and still lives on the Upper West Side, then slashed the man, a tourist from Denmark, on the side of his face, the DA’s office said; the wound went through the tourist’s ear and into his neck. Police said Zinberg then fled the scene in his car but was apprehended the next day while driving on the Upper West Side.
Before his apprehension, Zinberg had been identified to police by his mother, who recognized her son from news coverage of the attack. It remains unclear why Zinberg attacked the man.
“Joshua Zinberg allegedly slashed an international tourist who was walking on the Upper West Side in an unprovoked and brazen daylight attack,” Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said in a news release statement. “When tourists visit New York, they should not have to fear for their safety.”
Subscribe to WSR’s free email newsletter here. And you can Support the Rag here.
People with mental illness cannot be housed in the community. This experiment has been a failure for decades. Some of the failed policies are court mandated and must be litigated. Some are the result of the very lucrative business of government contracts to “non-profits”. The entire system needs to be blown up for the safety of the ill and the citizens of NYC. https://youtu.be/7B-okvAO1tM
In addition to the Frontline youtube link, I would urge UWSers to familarize themselves with the story of Larry Hogue who terrorized West 96th Street for years. His story illustrates not only how broken the system is but also how LONG the system has been broken.
This statement and the sentiment behind it is (a) based on demonstrably incorrect assumptions and (b) perpetuates damaging stereotypes of people with serious psychiatric illness. The incidents of violence that make the papers are horrendous. They often reflect poor care of a troubled person, or poor supervision (or both). It is true that anyone showing impulsive behavior that could harm others (or themselves) may need to be deprived of some or all freedoms.
However, please note that- something like 1/100 people suffer severe psychiatric illnesses of one kind or another. These illnesses are often very challenging but they are also common, and treatable. If your family and friends don’t include people with who suffer these illnesses, you know someone who is in that situation, even if it is not much spoken about. With good management and support of family, workplace and community, sufferers can often manage their lives successfully.n These illnesses are often as surprising and unwanted as a heart attack, warrant prompt and continued care (tho often receive delayed and/or inadequate care) – and cause great suffering to patients and their families alike. People who suffer these illnesses are NOT generally violent. They are FAR more likely to victims of violence than to cause violence. They face challenges of stigma, basic functioning in social and work situations, and huge economic and life management hurdles – – most have plenty to deal with and avoid conflict assiduously. Successful management of their illness often requires a balance of medical treatment, support for housing, peer and social support, family support, etc. Housing “in the community” should be the norm for most people with mental illness, just as for all of us. Yes, special care must be taken as for any vulnerable or ill people. Rejecting supportive housing or work in the community is just wrong and misguided,
We have to be able to make some basic distinctions. People who are delusional, acting out, or psychotic absolutely do need urgent help, if and when they are frightening or threatening others, harming themselves, etc. That isn’t the situation most people find themselves in.
There is no “failed experiment.” There are too many human and system failures, sure. But blanket statements about excluding people stricken with illness don’t help support any solution.
You have no basis or right to assume the perp’s actions were motivated by mental impairment or disorder. I’m tired of this knee-jerk ultra-liberal reaction from people who have no first-hand knowledge of the crimes and show total disregard for the victims.
the “knee jerk” reaction was by Bill Williams, who made the assumption that the slasher is mentally ill. Connie, who is obviously well-informed on the issue, was responding to several generalizations he made in his short posting. RCP has it backwards.
Earlier reports on this slashing said that Zinburg is mentally ill.
Since European standards of caring for people will never work in America, what if New York paid countries like Sweden, Norway or Germany to house criminals and those with difficulties instead. It is pretty clear Americans do not have the patience to deal with people’s struggles. At least German society has a cultural expectation of German collective guilt and will at least try to help people in a way Americans won’t.
I don’t know whether Bill Williams meant to speak about all mentally ill people or only those with a history of violent behavior. Regarding the latter group, one problem is what you refer to as “when they are frightening or threatening others, harming themselves, etc.” Too often we are told about someone with a history of attacking others, even with multiple prior arrests, being released “into the community” after 72 hours’ observation during which the person didn’t meet the “violence” threshold that s/he had met many times before. Sometimes the person’s family begs that the person be held longer but are ignored by professionals who invoke law or something else. Later the person attacks yet again.
“Joe Schmoe, a mentally ill person with 10 prior arrests … last released from psychiatric observation on [date], is being sought by police for stabbing … No prior connection is known between Schmoe and the victim …”
We need to change this system that keeps releasing repeat violent mentally ill people after they are brought in as “emergency” cases and just because they aren’t violent during the 72 hour observation period.
The Frontline story, “RIght To Fail” Included at the bottom of the post and nbcluded here again https://youtu.be/7B-okvAO1tM demonstrates that the mentally ill are dying because they do not get the exact support you say they need. This system does not work for anyone and it hasn’t for decades. Watch and learn.
You are dramatically over-reacting. I do not think the original poster was saying that every person with any mental illness should be institutionalized. Perhaps their language could have been clearer. But I don’t think it deserved this response. Your response was as much a “blanket statement” as theirs.
Everyone should be evaluated independently. But we have gone way too far in the opposite direction. We all encounter on a daily basis people who clearly cannot care for themselves, need help, and could potentially be a danger to others. Let’s do something about this.
Also, as one who is frequently censored here for no apparent reason, what happened to the 100 word limit? Thanks.
Agreed. We need to change the laws to allow for more authorization to commit involuntarily mentally ill people with recent history and active propensity to commit violence (not just during a 72 hour observation period) , or mentally ill people whose history (going back before a 72 hour observation period) shows that they cannot care for themselves. Yes, providing more institutional “beds” will cost money, but there are many indirect costs to society of the present system.
There are so many things wrong with this. First, you have the District Attorney who is charged with prosecuting crimes saying that Zinberg “allegedly” slashed a tourist. This is the DA, he shouldn’t be using “allegedly”, if he didn’t think that Zinberg did it he should have indicted him. And, the fact that it took months to get this indictment is a problem. I truly hope that folks are waking up to the fact that the elected officials in this city are simply not serious about the significant problem we have with crime. Vote ’em out. . .
You’ve watched Law & Order, right? The DA said “allegedly” because in our system, people are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. He could damage the case or open himself or his office up to a defamation suit if he just flat out announced that the guy is guilty before a trial has happened. Even the New York Post knows this and uses that term.
You can replace the DA, but the next one will use that term or a synonym for pending cases, regardless of whether they have a D or R next to their name on the ballot.
Adam…. public law enforcement officers (which the DA is one) say allegedly for indictments (correctly!) because the individual has not yet been convicted. It has nothing to do with whether the DA thinks he did it, he obviously does but the case needs to be proved out in court.
They always say “allegedly” or “is charged with” before the perp is convicted, since determining the facts is up to a jury.
Regarding the DA’s use of the word allegedly: It is the term *always* used in these situations because we have an official policy in the US that people are innocent until proven guilty. Perhaps you’ve heard of it?
We cannot allow perfect to get in the way of progress. We have learned so much in terms of how to care for those who are afflicted with severe mental illness. We may never have a perfect solution but we can try for something more humane than exists now. And I like the idea of learning from countries who seem to have adopted good solutions. Severe mental illness is not unique to the US.
Good to see that the DA at least started with an attempted murder rap. He could’ve killed him.
We need more cops, more cameras, more arrest son the UWS.
At the time of the incident in November 2024, ABC news reported:
“….Zinberg was taken into custody at around 2 a.m. Thursday morning when officers spotted his car. Police say Zinberg’s mother came to them after recognizing his picture on the news.
He has a long criminal history and is known to have mental health issues.”
Per PIX 11 reporting in November: “She told officers he suffers from mental illness, sources said.”
Also in WSR in November, a reader commented:
“This is a very sad situation. This young man has been suffering with mental illness for a very long time. I am sure his mom was at her wits end. They have been trying for many years to get him the help he needs.”
Last nite 9 ish a wildly out of control man
was freaking out the police were there I assumed they would restrain this person
I was told they could not fo anything unless
he committed a crime. I said the msn is out of control don’t wait for something bad to happen. Restrain him as he is clearly out
of his mind literally
z the police did nothing i realized how poorly
trained our police are.
Hasn’t our Mayor said if someone is completely out of control the police can
step in to control this person. Right?
These officers did nothing and did not know
this???
What a horrible decision for his mother to have been forced to make. Brave lady