Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Harry and Meghan Car Chase Catastrophe...Nearly, Ex-Marine's Deadly Chokehold

Episode Date: May 17, 2023

On tonight's episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored, Piers looks into the latest on Harry and Meghan's near catastrophic car chase. Piers delves into why the US are divided over former marine putting a homeless man in a deadly chokehold on the subway. Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8 pm on TalkTV on Sky 522, Virgin Media 606, Freeview 237 and Freesat 217. Listen on DAB+ and the app.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

All good uncensored tonight, Harry and Megan say paparazzi photographers subjected them to a near catastrophic. Their words, two-hour their claim, car chase in New York, but their story, not for the first time, is already unraveling. We'll have the latest. Also tonight, the shocking subway killing was bitterly divided America, ex-marine, placed a homeless black man in a deadly chokehold on a subway. So why are so many people now calling him a hero? Live from the news building in London, this is Piz Morgan Uncensored. Well, good over you, London. Welcome to Piz Morgan Unsensor. We have breaking news tonight. Prince Harry, his wife, Megan, and her mother, Doria Ragland, were in New York last night for the Women of Vision Awards.

Megan was honoured for her lifelong advocacy for equality. We'll come to that later. And regardless of what you think about that, and I have my views, all the two of them in general, it's clear that they were involved in an incident last night that caused them distress. But just how much went down last night and what exactly happened is now becoming a contentious issue. The couple say they were involved in a, quote,

near catastrophic, close quotes, two-hour car chase at the hands of paparazzi in Manhattan from 10 o'clock to midnight. Sources close to them said they were followed by half a dozen blacked-out vehicles which mounted pavements and skipped race. red lies. Tonight, the Times reports, the Harry told friends it's the closest he's ever felt to understanding what happened to his mother, Princess Diana. A couple for the spokesman,

a special of the couple said, last night the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Miss Ragland were involved in a near catastrophic car chase at the hands of a ring of highly aggressive paparazzi, this relentless pursuit. Relentless pursuit lasting two hours resulted in multiple near collisions involving other drivers on the road pedestrians and two NYPD officers. While being a public figure comes with a level of interest from the public. It should never come at the cost of anyone's safety. But by contrast, the New York Police Department's statement was, well, it was singularly less dramatic. On Wednesday evening, they said, May 16th, the NYPD assisted a private security team protecting the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. There were numerous photographers that

made their transport challenging. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex arrived at their destination and there were no reported collision, summonses, injuries or arrests in that regard. And then the taxi driver, who at one stage transported the couple for about 10 minutes, has now told the Washington Post he wouldn't call the incident a chase and said he felt safe during the ride. Recollections, as the late Queen once said, appear to be varying. Well, joining me now, journalist and author Petchen and O'Wiret, Princess Diana's former Royal Protection Officer Ken Woff, talk to the Royal Editor, Sarah Houston, and editor- Editor-Dictor of the Paysix column in the New York Post, Emily Smith over in New York. Welcome to you, a stellar panel.

All right, Sarah, what do we know? I mean, what we knew was the first thing we knew was the statement from the Sussex is very dramatic. Well, I took a sharp intake of breath when I saw that there was a near catastrophic car chase. And I think many people will have done. Last night, they were in New York for a very well publicised event, the Women of Vision Awards, which Megan was presented with an award. They left. We've seen footage of them leaving. They got into a black SUV at around 10 o'clock last night.

Apparently they were on just to be clear about the geography they were on 57th Street in midtown Manhattan yeah and they were traveling to a private residence on the Upper East side now at that time of night i've lived on the Upper East side of Manhattan for years uh that's a that's a five 10 minute journey so what is baffling me is how this ends up taking two hours well wait one say let's just they drove up and down FDR for an hour and a quarter apparently trying to evade the photographers they were staying at an address on the Upper East side that had been lent to them by friends they didn't want them to know my question now is who who were they staying with and didn't want us to know where they were so trying to

evade those photographers they then ended up at a police station on the night the 19th precinct where they changed vehicles and they got into a taxi and as you said the taxi driver who picked them up quite extraordinary said he was hailed and asked do you want a fare and he took them for 10 minutes he said they seemed scared he said there were two cars in pursuit at that stage. He didn't feel it was a chase. And weirdly, he goes off for 10 minutes over a few blocks and then he comes back to where he picked them up. And then we don't really know what happened. Did they get into another taxi?

They got somewhere safely at the end of all this. They did. So we've got a map. This is a map of Manhattan there. And you see the southern tip of Central Park is pretty much where they were at this event, getting an award. And then they kind of zigzag up and down. for the next two hours for reasons that completely baffled me because I don't know why you would do that. I mean, they've got a security team, just go where you're going. You're there in five, ten minutes. All right. You're determined to get in here. I am determined because I think it is utter torture.

I also lived in New York in the Upper East Side and I've spoken to 20 New Yorkers and they're laughing their heads off. It is impossible to have a two-hour high-speed car chase in New York. The traffic is gridlocked. It's impossible to get a vehicle to go more than nine miles an hour. It's also impossible for an alleged paparazzi blacked-out car to drive on the pavement without being stopped, arrested or noticed. The weird thing is that there are no witnesses to this. New York...

Well, I would put one caveat in here, is that Harry was seen filming out of the car. So we're probably going to get... Wait, wait a minute. But there are no witnesses to what he's describing as a two-hour... We know the police were witnessing, but the police version is not as dramatic as that. The police are saying there were no reports of collisions. No one was arrested.

If it was, as Harry said, with two or three more paparazzi cars illegally driving on the sidewalk, they would have been arrested. Well, that would be a crime. Exactly. I mean, just off the top, since the death of his mother, and I completely understand his path. his pathological hatred of paparazzi after what happened to his mum. I get it, okay? I'm not going to question his right to feel that way about paparazzi generally. It's about what really went on, though, last night.

And bearing in mind the context of his court case here at the moment to try and get better protection when he comes over here with his family at the taxpayer expense. There are cynics out there, and they've already been saying it on social media. Is this just him over-egging an incident, which happens probably most nights of the week in Manhattan, with celebrities to try and get what he wants over here.

Well, I think that may be the case, Pierce. I mean, but what I'm confused with is this sort of near catastrophic. Yeah. I mean, to me, what I see is quite normal for that sort of event. I mean, here he is, you know, a major A list of whatever he is in New York being pursued by the preparality, which is normal. I think what I have to be. And it has to be said legal.

So under the First Amendment, they're allowed to do this. Now, the question is, if the way they were drawn, driving was illegal. That's a different issue, but the police have made clear no arrest. Yes, but the story is... The point again, Ken, unlike here, the laws got pretty well tightened after what happened with Diana. You couldn't do this in this country legally, but you can in New York.

Well, no, you can't drive on the pavement. No, no, I know. And they're claiming that the paparazzi... I understand that, but I'm saying that... Yeah, but I think... To actually pursue celebrities as paparazzi in New York is a legal thing to be doing. Yeah, but Harry and Megan must have expected this thing. to happen. I mean, you know, he's got this sort of private security business or company, whatever now,

who clearly this is something new to them because they, from what I observe, they weren't able to deal with this problem. Now, you know, in the UK, I mean, for many years when I work with him. They put them in a taxi, a yellow cab. What, I mean, what security team in the world put the guy who, fifth in line to the throne of England in a random yellow cab with his wife and his mother-in-law, and off they go. I found that. That is surely a second will a fence. This is where he may have a point. Well, it's insulting, actually.

You wouldn't put Tom Hanks in a yellow cap. I wouldn't get a one. Why then? Why then do they put him in a yellow taxi? It's obvious to me that the security company looking after him there really don't have the experience to deal with someone. At all. With him. Now, you know, he knows more than anybody else, you know, the role of the paparots.

He know that they will pursue him. And they know that they are what I will say is a nuisance. factor at worst. Look, the paparazzi don't kill people. You know, I'm not going to say that, you know, we know what the judgment was in the case of Diana's inquest, you know, where Scott Baker said that the she died as a result of a driver over the drink drive limit and a contributive factor and a participatory. But they actually don't kill people. Look, I could be very careful what to say here, but, you know, all the years that I looked after Diana and other members of the royal family, never once did we find a problem with the paparazzi. Yes, they're a nuisance factor, but they have to be dealt with. What happened here is they didn't get dealt with. Let me bring in Emily just quickly here. Emily, I think the issue is in New York, the paparancy can be pretty full on. I've seen them. They've done it to me, right? Which I was actually quite pleased about.

But, you know, you go to L.A. and go to New York or even some other cities in America, they can be much more aggressive than anything you get over here now. And that's what made me chuckle when I heard they were going, leaving the dreadful, intrusive media in the UK to go to Hollywood and go to New York all the time. Because it's like, trust me, if you think you're going to get an easier time there from the media, forget it. You're not, you're not. And, you know, what's happening today is their story is just completely unraveling.

You know, the police are now saying it wasn't two hours, it was an hour. And they drove around New York, and you know, peers, that, you know, you can walk faster than you can drive around New York at that time of night. And why on earth did they put them in a yellow cab? It's just beyond belief. I mean, no security team would put them in a yellow cab. And also, we know that they've got a lot of, you know, friends in hotels. in New York. I mean, they could have just driven to the Carlisle, walked in the front entrance,

said, can we stay here for an hour, whatever, and then go when the Papps had left. That's what I just don't understand. They could have gone anywhere like that. They stayed at the Carlisle many times, and they could have just gone there, being completely safe until it all died down. But for some, this is why I'm slightly cynical. I am slightly cynical about the motives of all this and the timing, just given the fact that he's over here waging a legal battle to get better protection when he comes. This, of course, is the, in a way, the perfect story that he can say, there you go.

Now, I would, again, the caveat, we haven't seen any footage. And Harry, we know, was taking some, as were his security people. Maybe he will produce footage, which looks terrifying. We don't know. So there's a caveat there. Yes, there is. And I suppose it depends whose eyes you're looking at this through, and he is looking at this through the eyes of someone who has said repeatedly,

he fears history is going to repeat itself. He's very protective over his wife. We know he's very protective over his security. But you're right to raise the backdrop of this. He has multiple court cases going through on press intrusion, but also on his security, fighting the home office to get met police protection when he's over here. My understanding is when you're in New York, you can hire NYPD officers to protect you when they're off duty,

which is effectively what he's looking for over here. But it didn't work last night, did it? No, it didn't work last night. And Emily, what is the reaction? What is the reaction of Americans to this? Because Harry and Megan are now basically their celebrities. All celebrities that go to New York, I've seen it. They all get the same treatment.

It's not like they're getting anything different to people like Beyonce and the others. They were in a public event. They would expect to have photographers there and they would have expected to have been followed. But, you know, they could have just driven at the speed limit and gone to their destination and posed up before they went in. And then that was that. But there's some theories emerging.

You know, one is, of course, what you said is their war, their battle to get tighter security to protect them and their family, which, you know, I can understand why there was a stalker arrested outside their house in Montecito today. But also, it has to be said, and this is my theory, and I haven't proven it yet, that they, you know, they've got this $100 million deal with Netflix. And they've just produced that documentary, which, you know, we've all opined on. And they haven't actually managed to come up with any other shows. So, you know, right there, whatever Harry filmed last night will be his next Netflix special. And I'm not saying that... I'm afraid, like a lot of people,

I am very, very cynical about everything these two do. I'm also cynical about the way they describe things that happen to them. Because the truth is they exaggerate, if not, laterally lie. We're talking about almost everything. Yeah, because they issued a statement in which they were specific about six black tap paparazzi cars driving, on the sidewalk of New York, pursuing them for two hours,

causing near catastrophic multiple crashes. Now, it turns out that if there was an incident, it was so minor compared to this, and there were not six. Well, I don't think we know exactly what we... The NYP didn't make any arrests, so they clearly didn't see anything which constituted to them a region of law.

One of their security detail has spoken and has said he'd never experienced anything like, and it could have been fatal. You know my response to that, Sarah, Rabin, this is the same, well, no, it's the same, A, he's on the payroll. But secondly, they're the security detail that put their three very prized charges into a random yellow black, yellow cab, right? I'm sorry, but.

With the NYPD, though, on board with that, because that was taking place. I just, that's the part of the story I don't get. Apparently, the yellow cab went around for 10 minutes and then brought them back where he bit them up. If anyone was seeing anything illegal or dangerous, They would have been arrested. But I think what this shows, actually, is the ineffectiveness of the security that he's employed. And we mentioned there the NYPD. I know from my own experience that if there was a potential problem of being attacked by the paraproise,

all they do is speak to the NYPD or any police service with it. And that advice would be forthcoming. But I mean, this is the problem. And to put somebody in a yellow taxi is just sort of against all security ideas. And that's where maybe he has a case. But coming back to here in the UK, the government. and rather have been quite adamant that he is not eligible for security. What they've done in the past.

There's no reason why the British taxpayer should be paying for any of his security. But they will provide him with a liaison within broad of protection to make it work. And that's all that needs to be done. I've got to leave it there with this Stella Pack. Thank you all very much indeed. Unsensored next Harry and Megan were in New York of their own volition of course, attending an awards gala at which the entire point was to be the centre of media attention. Did they confuse relationship with privacy,

play a role in the subsequent drama. We'll debate that. Well, welcome back to Piers Morgan on Sensor. We now have a little exclusive because we are joined by the man who was the taxi driver in this, well, part of this wild car chase with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Sonny Singh, he was driving his yellow cab last night and picked him up and went off for 10 minutes and then brought them back, it seems. joins me now live from New York. Mr. Singh, thank you very much indeed for joining me. Anovalh, how are you doing? Could you tell me exactly what happened last night? So I was crossing on 67th Street, going west on 67, by the prison, there was security standing there.

They held me, and they said, are you empty? I said yes. And they told me to pull aside as I pulled to aside. Prince Harry and his wife and another lady jumped into my cab, and they seemed very nervous. And as we went a block, we will block by a tristruck, and then all of a sudden hopped around. just came out of nowhere and just flashes just went off. How many paparazzi would you say there were when you had them in your cab? Six, six that I seen. And there were about two cars following us as we, at the trash truck moved,

and there was two cars following us. And where did they want to go? Well, they were just about to say the location where they were going to go, but then the paparossies came and the security guard said, hey, listen, just circle back to the precinct. So they had a security guard in the cab as well? In the cab, yes. And you see him in one of the pictures he's sitting next to me.

Were you surprised that they were in your cab? You know, not so much. You know, we get celebrities in the city all the time, you know, so not so much. We know that the paparazzi... In New York City, you don't know who you're going to pick up in New York, right? Right, and that's true. But, I mean, in your experience, was the paparazzi attention any more or less than it would be for other major celebrities? No, for them it was more.

It was a lot more because I had other celebrities in my cab as well, but this one, they would because they surrounded the car and just went crazy with the camera. And how would you describe... Yeah, go ahead. How would you describe how Harry and Megan were about this? They were nervous. They were nervous.

You could see the look on their face. Did they talk to you at all directly? No, not as much. I mean, when they were exiting, they say, what's your name and I said, Sunny, and I said, have a good night and then say, I did it, and then they went back into the SUV again. It's been categorized that there was a two-hour, wild car chase through the streets of New York. Well, that must have been, that must have happened before me.

So there was no, like, car chase when you were there? Not when they got into my cab. We just went around the block and the car, two cars were tailing us behind us with a cab. And that was there. And then you went back to where you'd actually picked them up? Yes, we went back to the precinct, and then they exited and they thanked me, and I thanked them as well, and then they exited my car. Did they remember to pay you, Sonny? Yeah, they paid. They paid. They paid well. They paid well.

So what's your view about this? You've become the most famous cab driver in New York tonight. What's your view about this incident? I don't know. I don't know about that. There's another one that's on TikTok. He has a bunch of celebrities in his cab, and he usually got pictures with them. Do you think it's been overblown, this incident, or not? You know, I don't know what they went through last night, right? Because I only had an interaction with them for 15 minutes, and they seemed very nervous while they were in my camp. Okay, well, Sunny, listen, I appreciate you joining me. The man at the center of the storm, quite literally.

I appreciate it. Thank you very much. It was a pleasure talking to you, too. All the best. Okay, well, joining me now is the Sunday Times columnist, Charlotte Ivers, the associate editor of the Mirror, Kevin McGuire. From New York, Fox News contributor and former bodyguard to Snoop Dog, amongst others, Tyrus. Well, Tyrus, let me start with you. You're in New York. You've been a bodyguard

to a major star. What do you make of this story? Man, you know what? It sounds much to do about nothing. You know, if it was anybody else, it's just that, you know, the, I don't know, are they still the royal family or they still don't want to be a part of it, but want to be a part of it, whatever their issue is. They just come across so thirsty all the time. time they drink seawater. But it sounds like it didn't sound to me like it was that big of a deal. You're in New York. It's going to be crowded. Maybe have your publicists stop calling paparazzi and tell them where you're at. To get in a cab to go around the corner and come back seems silly. When I was with Snoop and we were approached by paparazzi or he was ever made

to feel nervous, I would have got out of the cab and confronted them and typically make an example out of one guy with the camera, and the rest would follow. So it just seems like it was more staged than anything else. And, of course, a two-hour car chase in New York, where were you going? 15 miles an hour, it's New York. You can't move. Well, I think it's pretty clear that it wasn't two hours. They seemed to divert a police station for at least, it looks like half of that time.

Sounds like South Park has got a sequel. All right, Charlotte, have you only sympathy for them? I mean, you've got to a bit, haven't you? Even the history behind this, of course, Harry's mother died in such a car chase. And I can sort of imagine if I was him, you'd think it's happening to me. And even if it wasn't that bad, your brain would start to work itself up, probably not to the extent that you'd then put out a press statement saying that something like this had happened. You'd hope that some publicists would get in the way and say, hang on, let's talk through,

maybe let's put this a little bit further down. But in the moment, absolutely, I think I have sympathy with him. But Kevin, it's tricky, isn't it? Because as Tara has said, they've been spectacularly thirsty for media attention. They've done the Netflix series with every spit and cough of their private lives. They've done the book, obviously, Harry, 420-odd pages about his private life. They've sold their private lives to the highest bidders now for the last two, three years. There will be a lot of people, I've seen it all over social media today, pretty cynical, saying,

look, if you want to play that game, if you want to work the media that hard for personal gain, for money, for profile, then this comes from the territory. Yeah, it's very different to people who are very famous, but shun publicity. They don't keep going to awards dinners. They don't keep searching for the limelight. They want their privacy. It's very hard to imagine this happening in London,

and I'm not aware if it ever happened when they lived here. He used to go on with Diana. And in fun of I checked an interview I did with Diana when I was at the mirror. And it was just before she died, actually, a few months before she died. But I'd had lunch with her, and she told me how the paparacts were a certain rogue paparactos. They weren't attached to newspapers.

But they were deliberately upset her by being abusive. And when she reacted emotionally, they'd get the footage they wanted. And they would sell that as Diana's tears over marriage or whatever. And she said, please understand that's what they're doing. And I said, okay, we're not going to use those pictures anymore. We announced it in the mirror, actually, at the time. And she thanked me when I did this interview for what we had,

tried to do. No, unfortunately, you can't control the world's paparazzi. Many of them are good, hardworking, decent people. I've worked with a lot of them over the years, and some are complete rogues. So we don't really know yet. You know, it may be last night was a pretty chastening experience. Yes. The question then becomes, how much of that do you bring on yourself? Yeah, and I agree the sympathy for him, the way his mother died.

And he said every time he sees a flash or hears the click of a camera, he goes back. and he's clearly a troubled young man. And you could say, yep, they've made themselves celebs, so you're going to get attention. They want to conceal where and who they're staying with. Why do they want to do that? But I also understand why some of the people would want to know where and who they are staying with.

But that wouldn't excuse any... If you stay in a major hotel in New York, you've got complete privacy. Yeah. You know, we had the Met Gala recently. They were all at the Carlisle. no one got inside. It's completely walled off.

Taras, let me just also ask you about the fact that they were there at all was that Megan Markle was receiving this award from Gloria Steinem for being an inspiring example of equality and feminism. Do you see the... Do you see the Dupties in that way? The Virtue Siggling Award? You know, first of all, as the more we talk about this, my bodyguard instincts just kicked in,

and I just have another question. And I remember there was one time where me and Snoop were in the Sanctro Page. And I mean, it was Usher, it was birthday party or something with some craziness. And when we came out and we saw the mob, I literally said, you know what, we're going back in and we're going to wait out. I don't understand why they would come out of a thing, see the paparazzi coming for them. And their bodyguard wouldn't just say, look, we're going back in. Because taking them back in is the safest place to be. And then the mom, when you just wait them out of you get a back entrance.

So the more I think about it, the more it seems like, especially if you truly have that type of fear or a horrible memory, the last thing you would do would be constantly putting yourself around cameras. That's what I just can't get my head around. It's like, why would you go? Well, I can because it's not him. We need to stop blaming him. The poor, as we would say, a poor guy, he married an individual who runs him rampant. It's about her. She's receiving a ward and she's not known for.

It's not like she's going to Calcutta and feeding orphans. She's literally one of the most selfish people. The things that she said about the royal family and the things that she says about people is not someone that should get an award for inspiration. But again, it's virtue signaling. And of course, to get more attention after she received a reward that none of us even know about, the paparazzi chased him. So, I mean, and now we're all talking about it.

So she did her job. And it just feels like, like I told you, every time I look at the poor guy, It looks like he's sitting on a chair of broken glass, and he's constantly being put in the mix. I still say he didn't write that book. She did. And he's just caught up. And eventually, I hope that he will stand up for himself because he seems like a decent guy. Yeah, I wouldn't go that far.

Charlotte, the interesting thing is she made this speech, very gushy, typical Megan speech, but it was all basically about her feminist credentials. It was about being kind to people. It was about equality. Is there anything less equal than being a Duchess who uses royal titles to make hundreds of millions of dollars? And when it comes to feminism, did she really represent the feminist icon

that young women should look up to? I mean, not for me personally, to be honest. I think, look, she was a reasonably successful actress. I sort of don't necessarily buy the idea that every time a woman is in the public eye doing anything that must in some way be a huge kind of feminist. moment and actually I was thinking listening to that about Taylor Swift. She's lived in North London for six years now and she's kind of a bit I would say

responsible at times in her career for doing the whole I'm a woman existing therefore that must be feminist thing too but you never saw any photos of her because it is possible to hide if you are a celebrity and if you've got enough money and there's no question I know massive stars you just walk around Tom Hanks came into a cafe I was in New York Upper East actually a few years ago on his own, no bodyguards, no one bothered him. He asked if you could join me, we had the best breakfast I've ever had.

But that's New York. You can do that in New York, that's the point. This idea, though, of Meghan Markle being an inspiring example of equality, Kevin. Yeah, well, it's so much equal about... No, no life. And you know my view on all of that. No, I mean, they want the royal titles,

the Duke and Duchess, because they can monetise it, how they make their big money. I don't... There's no equality there whatsoever. But I don't think she is entirely bad, and I can see she will inspire some people, perhaps young girls of colour in particular. Tyrus is very much against her.

I see that, but they could actually hire him as a body card. He sounds like he'd be pretty effective, and there would have been no trouble last night with him around. Okay, we're going to take a short break. Taras, if you don't mind staying just for a little bit, Taras. I'd like to talk to you about this story about the ex-marine who did the choke cold. Oh, absolutely. I would love to. Yeah, so stay with us and we'll talk to you after the break about that.

Thank you, Torres. Welcome back to Piers Morgan on Sensor. We'll have another story coming out of New York. Jordan Neely, a black 30-year-old homeless man, boarded a northbound subway train in New York City on the afternoon and May the 1st. What happened next is shocked and bitterly divided America because after making threatening movements and noises saying he was portrayed to kill. kill himself. He was then held in a chokehold by another passenger, helped by two others.

The passenger was an ex-marine. The footage I have to warn you is quite distressing. So that went on for several minutes. Now, Jordan Neely was mentally unwell, schizophrenic, it appears. He'd been arrested 42 times before, including four times for assault. His killer, of course, couldn't have known that. By killer, I mean, the ex-marine who did the chokehold, he did end up actually killing Neely, who died in his arms from the chokehold. After boarding the train, originally, Neely had begun shouting. He said needed food and money. He didn't care if he went to jail, didn't care if he died.

Well, the person that put him in the choker was Daniel Penny, a 24-year-old ex-marine. And after Jordan Lilly died, Penny has now been charged with manslaughter and faces up to 15 years in jail, if convicted. Besides being, obviously, shocking. The case is ignited debate about everything from race to justice to out-of-control urban crime and the way a society should treat its most vulnerable people. Daniel Penny's critics say he's a violent vigilante who killed a mentally ill man. His legions of supporters lionise him as a hero who act to defend fellow passengers.

More than $2.6 million has now been donated to AID's defence. Well, joining me is a talk to the contributor Esther Cracker, Black Lives Matter organiser activist Imman Aiton, Aiton, the Professor of Race Relations at University of Pennsylvania, Chad Dion Lasseter, and from New York. I've still with Tyrus, the Fox News contributor and former bodyguard. Taras, let me start with you because it's an emotive story this. You know, when I first heard about it, I was like, okay, this is going to blow really big because it ticks almost every incendiary box you could imagine of debate in America right now.

Do you see this as a killing? Or do you see this as somebody trying to do the right thing by putting somebody who thought was a threat in a chokehold and trying to subdue him? Taras, can you hear me? Okay, Torres can't hear me. Okay, let me go to Chad Dionne. Chad, what do you feel about this story? Where do you come at this story from? I think, Paris, that it's both and.

On one level, we want individuals who are on subways to be secure, to feel safe, whether they're commuting into work, commuting home, or just catching public transportation. The other aspect is the way that we sometimes have individuals who engage in white digital anteism, with regards to black bodies. A lot of things come to mind for me. One, this was a person that was in distress.

This was a person that was emotionally unraveling. This was a person that, of course, individuals who were on that subway platform did not know he had mental health issues. But we need to do a better job of making sure that our transit systems have people who are trained in mental health first aid. We need to also look at the way that we treat individuals and not making sure that we don't stigmatize. them. And so once again, we know that in our democracy here in the United States, a lot of people are going to be seduced by the black, white binary. A chokehold is a very dangerous tactic. So for this ex-marine, he's trained in skills and techniques on how to de-escalate certain conflicts that may arise. Okay, we've got Tara's back, I think. I mean, Taras, my view of this, and obviously I want to wait

now for the proper court trial and see what happens. on what emerges. But my view is very hard to say that this ex-marine was acting malevolently. I don't think he meant to kill this young man. I think he wanted to subdue him and protect other passengers from what he thought was a threat. Well, no, he was a threat. And first of all, you don't want to see anyone lose their life. That part is tragic. But let's not forget where this took place and what's been going on in the subways in New York City and a lot of the cities across this country. Our police departments are defunded, devalued.

Our criminal element is emboldened. They understand now that they can do things. They're not going to be kept in jail. There's no cash bail. Guys are released within the hour. And then, of course, you have the spin. Unfortunately, the reason why this is such a big case is the worst part. Had this Marine been a man of color who was the one who had him in the chokehold,

we wouldn't even be having this conversation right now. the two men who were holding his arms because it was a fight, it was a struggle. Let's not forget that. Let's not forget that 90% of the victims that we see in the subway are women. And there's enough videos. And I, for one, was glad to see men showing up again instead of holding camera phones and video recording, women getting the life beat out of them in the subways or people being shoved and attacked. And he was walking up and down. And the subway basically is a human lunchbox. There's not a lot of room in there. And he's walking up and down saying he's going to hurt. He doesn't care. if he goes to jail. Does he care if he hurt someone? He's basically threatening everybody. And it wasn't like the Marine was like, hey, I'm going out to attack a person of color today.

He was a citizen who had enough. So is everybody in the, is everybody in the subway a co-conspirator? Right. It's a good question. Well, let me go to Iman. I mean, it is an emotive one. Nobody wanted this person to die, but nor did those passengers want to feel threatened by what he was doing before that. And the Marine, I think, was trying to do the right thing by executing. something he was able to do from his training. Well, irrespective of intent, if your actions result in death, then you should be charged, irrespective of the intent.

And the charge will determine the level of intent. So I think it's safe to say someone died. So therefore, they should be charged. If you were on a train here, we call it the tube here, the subway, if you were on one and somebody got on and was threatening people and talking about, I don't care if I die and talking about bullets and so on, and somebody stepped in, of any colour,

and stepped in to hold them back and protect you and other passengers. What would you feel? Well, it comes down to two things. I want to kind of connect the two things. Firstly, he's a Marine. He is trained to kill, and he should understand reasonable force. In that instant, he didn't, so therefore he needs to be held to account. In terms of vigilanteism, for me personally, I believe it's stepping stones to anarchy.

So there's a fine line between stepping in to do the right thing and killing someone. I do think something we have to bear in mind is this man has been homeless for a decade. He's struggled with mental health issues. He's been in and out of prison for 42 times. He shouldn't have been out in the public. That's something we can all agree on. But also I'm also thinking, you know, this is someone who's clearly unhealthy. If you're struggling with a mental health condition and you've been in and out of prison and you're homeless,

your physical constitution is not as strong as it would be. So there's an argument to say that while the Marine executed this move in the way that he knows how, he was probably dealing with someone who was weaker, who was less healthy. He might have used exerted force on someone who wasn't built to do that. But there's that argument because if he's doing it on someone that he thinks is of a certain stature. But he's a Marine. Yes, Marine. But bear in mind, but bear in mind.

I'm not defending him, but it is a brain. All right. He was worn. He was worn by another passenger, the Marine. He was warned, look, be careful you don't kill him here. You'll be on a charge. This was after about two and a half minutes. And he stopped, but he was waiting.

He asked him, call the police, call the police. He was waiting for help to come to take him. So, you know, I don't think it was a deliberate act to kill this person. No one's just speaking that way. No one's to speak to that. Well, Alexander Ocasio-Cortez, the Democratic congresswoman, she came out immediately and tweeted this was a public execution. But was intentional.

But that's different to being intentional. But I thought that was unbelievably stupid. But that's a, that's a bit. different to being intentional. Yes, it may have felt that way to people, but there's a difference between intentional. Exactly. And I think obviously that's irresponsible. I do think what we have to be careful of is not racializing this because I often say that when you racialize something like this, you have, you know, victims of black victims in someone like the southern side of Chicago that are thinking my black son was killed last week by a black perpetrator. Why isn't he making

national news? But also, this is not like George Floyd, where we all watch for eight and a half, nearly nine minutes, a clearly racially motivated white police officer snuff the life out of George Floyd. This is a quarter. This is a quarter of that time. It was actively engaged. Yeah, I just don't, I mean, we bring terrorists back in here. I just think people are always very quick.

First of all, they're always very quick to make it as I can. How many people in this panel have been in a fight? How many people in this panel have actually been in a fight? Because I've been in one. I've been in, I've been in braw's. We're there. We're there. We're there.

We're there. And if he was so weak, I don't know if the issue, I don't know if the issue is whether not a person has been in a fight or not a fight. All the, you're armchair quarterbacking real life situations. This is like people always telling police what they should do in the middle of an emergency. I think it's more, I think it's more complicated than that. If I can just jump in here. It wasn't like he was weak.

All right. We can't finish what you want to say. No, if I could finish, you can have the rest of the second. Okay, what I wanted to say. It was a question. The Taurus finished. What he said, then, Chad, you read. response. Thank you. Because armchair courting back what someone does in the moment in a minute of

battle, now let's not forget that he was he had mental issues. It also wasn't just the Marine. Two other men had to hold him down while he fight and struggle, which means that one man could not keep him down. Again, it's tragic that he died. But let's not sit there and pretend like it was the interstate. Until you've been in a real life situation where you have to make split second decision. And a Marine should know better. Then you have the right to criticize. Okay. Chad, do you respond to that? Okay. So, so, so we heard you. So one, the question of whether or not people have been in fights or not, to me, is insignificant because a lot of us have not been able to be in fights because we practice.

Let me finish. Let me finish. Let's have a level of civility. Answer the question, bro. On one level, there are individuals who are nonviolent. That's number one. Individuals who are nonviolent and they practice nonviolence, that's number one. Number two, it doesn't matter what the data is as it relates to how many times he could be arrested. It could be an individual that's dressed like me or a number of us that are on this panel who could be in distress because of a trigger, because of vicarious traumatization, because of a form of post-traumatic stress disorder. We're supposed to know that. The issue is we need to make sure that our transportation centers, mental health first aid, can help people with that.

And once again, it's a structural thing. From a structural standpoint, from a macro standpoint, we want people to be safe. We want to make sure that it's not over-savillance of a police state, which New York is. we want to be able to have transit people in place and professionals, community interventionists, nurse practitioners, social workers, that if something happens, we want to make sure that we call the proper person. The truth is, a lot of New Yorkers, the truth is a lot of New Yorkers do not feel safe on the subway with good reason. So do you want to kill them?

Well, no, I don't think any. No one should be unnecessarily killed, but they should also be protect. People should be able to use the subway safely. And that is at the center of this. I've got to leave it there. Taras, thank you for. Always a pleasure, Pierce. Straddling so many debate divides.

I appreciate it, Chad. Thank you very much. Oh, I don't care. I'm on Esther, why don't you stick around? We haven't heard from you about Meggin and Harry. Why don't we get your view about that after the break? I think you probably both got views on this. Well, welcome back.

Let's get more on those claims by the Sussex system. Subjected to what they claim was a two-hour paparazzi car chase in Manhattan. That was merely talked of you, contribute to Esther Cracko and Black Lives Matter, organized an activist, Imman Aiton. Okay. Imman, what do we make of this? I'm upset for them because these types of incidences validate your opinion and others' opinions

in terms of Harry not kind of getting over the past and incidences that really resonated with him. Actually, that's not how I feel. And I said earlier in the show, I actually have always had sympathy with his hatred of paparazzi given he blames paparazzi of killing his mum, right? I don't think that's true. I think a drunk driver killed his mum

because he was speeding unto an underpass. There's no doubt the paparazzi were following. And there was also no doubt because I had lunch with Diana and William was there and she talked about the paparazzi how much it hurt her, how much it hurt him. So I'm on no illusion about that. I just feel with this, the trouble with these two is they turn everything.

There's a phrase that I like which is over-egged the souffle, right? They're always over-egging the souffle. Whatever went on last night, it wasn't a two-hour high-speed chase around Manhattan. It was probably at least half of that was spent, it seems stationary or in a police station. And what was really going on? Because it's perfectly legal for Pamparazzi in New York

to follow celebrities. Nobody got arrested. The police said there was no specific incident. Nobody got hurt. There was no collision. In the end, it's just Harry and Megan complaining about press intrusion, having been in an event

where they invited the world's media to come and pay homage to them. But they have the right to complain about press intrusion during certain incidences in their life. So if they do... But have they still got the same right? They have the right to say. I don't want the press to follow me.

And I have the right to get into a cab and do whatever I need to do to avoid them. I know. But when we first heard the story, the both of us were like a two-hour car chase in the pattern. It's like a two-hour car chase in London. You'd end up in Kent. And that's, and that's, by the way, that's their statement. But is that accurate? No, it's not accurate.

They didn't have a two-hour. So their statement is untrue. And they say near catastrophic. But actually, there was no collision with anybody. Nobody got hurt. Yeah. It's not a catastrophe. It's not a near catastrophe.

What it is is them being pursued by paparazzi. People may have a view watching this about paparazzi should never do that. I think that paparazzi are part of the oxygen of celebrity. And if you caught the media as aggressively and as thirstily as these two have done, you are going to get a lot of paparazzi attention. Well, I mean, I felt bad because initially I just, my immediate reaction was sadness, obviously, but also doubt because a two-hour car chase in Manhattan didn't. Well, it's not true.

And that's in their statement. So you know half of that immediately is not true. At the same time, can they, where did they draw the? because if you're going to complain about media intrusion, you've intruded into your own life so much. Where do you draw the line? And I think that's what I really struggle with. I feel like these are people that,

especially with regard to Harry, they are troubled. They are genuinely troubled. I think that's right. And I think about here's the thing with them, that they constantly suing, obviously, I'm involved in a case at the moment with the mirror, which I can't talk about until it's over, so I won't talk about it. But there are lots of battles. There's like six lawsuits on the moment with Harry suing all the media, right?

And it seems to me that they just occasionally, they do a book, invading their privacy over 400 pages. They do a Netflix series. And then in between, they're raging about media intrusion. And I'm not sure the public are wearing that anymore. And I appreciate that point. Clearly, I was one that definitely supported them. I don't in the same way that I initially did. So you're right on that point.

But I can happily say that I don't actually think that they are conflating the two things. I think privacy is one thing and defending yourself as another. And so if you write a book and you're trying to defend your name, you're trying to defend all the stories that have written about you, that's one thing. And then making sure that you have privacy when you're on your way to the shop is another. That's two separate things. So that's what you're talking about.

I remember when Diana died and in the aftermath, everyone hated the paparazzi. And I remember there was, I think it was a Premier in London. I think it was George Clooney. I don't want to speak out of turn about him. If it wasn't, I think it was George Clooney. and he came out and he'd been very disparaging about paparazzi and he came out and all the paparazzi turned their backs of him

at his film premiere and it was a real moment where actually a major celebrity major celebrity went wow hang on what happens with the oxygen of publicity for what I want my premieres my what if that disappears well yeah but they like each other or not they're all part of the same celebrity pie And Netflix wouldn't have been paying him $100 million if it wasn't for the paparati, if it wasn't for all the noise that they've created around them.

So he had an opportunity to defend himself and therefore he was paid as a result. Because I think defense, you have, again, you have to draw the line somewhere. I agree, I agree. Defending yourself is not Oprah and then a series and then a book. No, no, I'd actually, I'd actually contest you on that point. The first opportunity for him to defend himself, he, I think, I don't want to put words into their mouth, but they would arguably say it was Oprah. And then the kind of second defense was when we had a new defense was when we had. the kind of entourage of EPR and then they decided to write.

We've got to leave it here. But I think the thing about them is, nobody should be subjected to the way they've categorized what happened last night. The issue is have they categorized it accurately? If there were paparazzi bombing down the pavements, you know, endangering people at 80 miles and out, that's one thing. If that didn't happen and they've oversold it again, then that's a different issue. I think we'll find out. We'll probably see some videos. Thank you.

to both if you appreciate it, whatever you're up to. Keep it on sensitive. Good night.