Jennings Case: No Charges for Cabbie [UPDATE]

Police documents, including statements from both Darien executive William B. Jennings and cabbie Mohamed Ammar, answer some of the questions about the unusual incident that led to the arrest of the Darien man.

Editor's note, 11:54 a.m., Friday:

Update 1:21 p.m., Wednesday:

Darien Police have closed their investigation into the incident which resulted in William B. Jennings' arrest and don't plan to press charges against cab driver Mohamed Amman, a spokesman for the department has announced.

Jennings and his lawyer, Eugene Riccio, have said the taxi driver took Jennings in his taxi against Jennings' will during the Dec. 21 dispute over cab fare.

Captain Frederick W. Komm, a department spokesman and commander of the investigative services bureau, said in an email:

"A few media outlets have inquired as to whether the investigation is ongoing and if the cab driver might also be the focus of further police investigation. The answer is that as a result of the arrest of Jennings, the Darien Police Department considers the case closed."

Update 10:53 a.m., Tuesday (headline: "Exec-Cabbie Fight Details in Court File [UPDATE]":

All of the document images attached to this article have been enhanced for clarity. They should be easier to read, now.

Update 5:54 p.m., Monday:

Late at night, according to William B. Jennings' lawyer, Eugene Riccio, during a heated dispute with a cab driver over the fare, the cabbie tells Jennings that he's driving him all the way back to New York City.

Soon, the car is speeding through Darien toward I-95 with the passenger door open, Riccio continues.

"This is not a situation that permits detached reflection about what you ought to be doing," he said.

That's Riccio's answer to the question, "Why didn't Jennings call the police from his cell phone?"

Riccio also said: "At that point, my client was in an extremely dangerous situation, and his first instinct—and I think it was a proper one—was to protect himself. He only had a matter of minutes to escape from that cab before it would've been on the turnpike"

Police say Jennings had both his cell phone and his 2 1/2-inch pen knife in his hands during the Dec. 21 incident. According to police, Jennings should have used the cell phone to call them. Instead, during a struggle with the cab driver, Jennings cut Ammar's finger and palm of the same hand. The cab at that point stopped, and Jennings ran off.

with assault, larceny and intimidation by bias or bigotry. The last charge is related to an alleged bigoted statement Jennings denies making. Released on $9,500 bond, he is scheduled to make his first appearance Friday in state Superior Court in Stamford. The cab driver, Mohamed Ammar, was treated and released at a hospital with six stitches in one hand.

Riccio also didn't think there was much of an opportunity for Darien police to come to Jennings' assistance since the cab was about to get on the highway.

When asked whether or not state police would have been called to a reported abduction in a car on Interstate 95, Riccio said: "My client sought to extract himself from the cab. He was in an emergency situation and sought to extract himself from that cab as best he could. He didn't have the opportunity to consdier what combination of enforcement agencies could rescue him."

Asked why Jennings didn't call the police after the incident, Riccio repeated what his client told police—that he was fearful the cabbie would target his family if he knew who made the complaint.

When asked the question police asked Jennings—why, if he was concerned for his safety, wasn't he even more motivated to call police later— Riccio added, "He did escape from the situation and wanted to leave it at that."

Riccio declined to say just where in the cab Jennings held the pen knife he showed the cabbie as the cabbie was driving. "We'll address all of that in court," the attorney said.

Detective Chester Perkowski  said in his affidavit that it was "virtually impossible" for Ammar, while he was driving the taxi, to have reached into the back seat to struggle with Jennings.

Riccio said he didn't want Jennings to take a polygraph exam because police refused to agree that if he passed the test they wouldn't charge him. There was to be no polygraph test for Ammar, Riccio added.

He also said the test would be a combination of interrogation and testing, and he, Riccio, would not be allowed to be present when his client was questioned. "I'm not going to have him submit to a test and an interrogation when I'm not present."

Update 4:55 p.m.: An interview with  William B. Jennings' lawyer, Eugene Riccio, will be posted shortly.

Original article:

Both the Darien executive and the Queens cab driver who took him home from Manhattan on Dec. 21 told police they feared for their safety in an extended confrontation over the cab fare—a dispute which later resulted in

Those and other details are in statements to police and other court documents in the case file in state Superior Court in Stamford.

Darien police later charged Morgan Stanley executive William Bryan Jennings, 47, with second-degree assault, sixth-degree larceny and second-degree intimidation by bigotry or bias in a case widely reported by New York metropolitan news organizations and the financial news media.

Papers in the court file clear up some questions about the case that were raised after the earliest news reports, such as the extent of the cab driver's cuts, and bring into sharper focus other questions, such as whether or not Jennings, who didn't call police until weeks later, had his cell phone out when he held the pen knife that cut the cabbie.

"I felt like I was going to die that night," Mohamed Ammar, the cab driver, said in a statement given to police Dec. 28 and neatly hand-printed by a police officer.

"I saw him try to stab me in the head, and I put my hand up. He tried to stab my neck, but cut my right inner finger," Ammar's statement said. "I continued driving and stoped at a red light, where he got out of the car. He headed up the street and went into a park. I was yelling for help, for someone to call 911."

Ammar told police he had tried calling 911 earlier, but bad reception for his cell phone didn't allow the call to be made.

Jennings, in his own statement to police, wrote, "I feared that he now had my knife and that he had the opportunity and intent to harm me physically [...]"


According to Darien Police Detective Chester Perkowski's arrest-warrant application, Ammar was "bleeding profusely" when police answered his call and found him on Squab Lane on the south side of the Darien Metro-North station.

Perkowski reported that Ammar said "the suspect stabbed at him and he put his hand up to block the attack. Ammar felt that the suspect tried to stab him in the neck. In the process of blocking the attack, Ammar sustained a cut to his right index finger and palm. Ammar stopped the cab at this point, at which time the suspect fled, running through a park before disappearing. Ammar tried to follow the suspect but could not locate him."

A New York Post article quotes Ammar saying: "He got out of the car and he walked into the park. I didn’t follow him ... I didn’t want to imagine what he would do in an empty park at night." The park was apparently the small triangular park between the Darien Sport Shop and the intersections of the Post Road and Leroy Avenue.

Ammar told police he received six stitches on a finger when doctors at Roosevelt Hospital in Manhattan attended to the cuts on his finger and palm. (One erroneous news report said the cabbie received 60 stitches.)


Jennings, 47, of Knollwood Drive, was arrested on a warrant this week and released on $9,500 bond. Morgan Stanley reportedly suspended him last week  from his job as one of two heads of its North American fixed-income capital markets division.

Charged with second-degree assault, theft of Services/sixth-degree larceny and intimidation by bias or bigotry, Jennings is due March 9 in state Superior Court in Stamford, according to Darien police.

The dispute starts

Jennings, in a statement dated Jan. 20, told police the dispute over cab fare began when the taxi was parked in his driveway. This is part of his account:

"After arguing about the fare for another minute or so, he became frustrated that I would not pay his suggested amount and he told me that I was not going to be allowed to get out of the taxi.

"I tried to open the sliding door on the right side of the taxi but I could not open the door as it was locked. I told him to unlock the door and he told me that, if I was unwilling to pay his suggested fare, we were going back to New York City."

The New York Post quoted Ammar saying in an interview last week that “We drove up his driveway ... He slides open the door and asks, ‘How much do I owe you?’" The Post also quoted Ammar recalling that he told Jennings, "'Would you close the door?’ He refused. He sat in the seat as I drove with the door open.”

Jennings' account continues

In his statement to police, Jennings' said: "At this point, I began to become afraid that he intended to take me back to New York—and the fear of potentially being dropped in any number of dangerous places began to concern me as well.

"He backed out of my driveway at an aggressive reverse speed and turned the minivan so as to begin travelling back down (east) Knollwood Lane towards Mansfield Avenue. A few seconds after reversing out of my driveway, I found the unlock feature on the door and slid the door open with the hope that I might be able to jump out of the minivan once he stopped at the stop sign at the intersection of Knollwood Lane and Mansfield Avenue.

I never had the opportunity to exit the vehicle as the driver went through the  stop sign (turning right/south on Mansfield and Sedgewick) and the driver continued through the intersection without any regard for the blinking light, the law or my safety as he proceeded toward the southern end [of] Mansfield Avenue (at the intersection of Route 1 by Post Corner Pizza)."

Jennings said the driver whipped through the intersection, onto the Post Road, ignoring traffic signs and signals and driving too fast for the passenger to think it was safe to jump out of the car.

"Our verbal argument also began to become more heated as well, with me screaming at him to pull over the car. I told him that I thought what he was doing was against the law, as I had repeatedly told him I wanted to be let out of his car, and he was holding me against my will. The sliding door on the right-hand side of the taxi had remained open since I managed to get it open after leaving my driveway on Knollwood Lane. [...]

"At this point we were getting uncomfortably close to the entrance ramp of I-95, and the driver reiterated his intent to take me back to New York City, since I had not paid his demanded fare. Fears about my personal safety increased as he was obviously quite serious about his intent to take me back to New York City—and to potentially drop me anywhere he wanted to at a very late hour.

"At this point, I told him that I was going to call the police and began to reach to find my phone in my briefcase. As I searched for my phone in my bag, the driver made several threatening movements with his right arm towards me, and I was becoming increasingly certain of his intention to take me back to New York City.

"At this point, we were just a few more seconds away from the entrance ramp to I-95. In the search for my phone in my briefcase, I found a small pen knife that I had been keeping in my briefcase to open various packages that had begun arriving in the weeks leading up to Christmas.

"I told the driver that I had a knife in my possession and that I expected him to pull his car over and allow me to get out of it at this point. He again refused, and I showed him the knife so it was clear to him that I had one in my possession. At no point did I attempt to make contact with the driver (with the knife or otherwise). The driver reached toward my hand in an aggressive manner and attempted to grab the knife from me. I released my grip on the knife and, at this point, I believed he had the knife in his hand.

"He immediately stopped the taxi in the middle of the Post Road and got out of the driver-side door. I feared that he now had my knife and that he had the opportunity and intent to harm me physically, so I grabbed my belongings and ran as fast as possible up Leroy Avenue.

"I was now becoming increasingly fearful that the driver, given that he had just turned around in my driveway and therefore, in all likelihood, knew where I lived, would retrace his steps and return to my home. I managed to get to my home quite quickly (retracing my path up Leroy, over McLaren, up Mansfield and onto Knollwood Lane). I got to my home and waited for the possibility that he might return to my house, and he did not."

Not calling police

What Jennings next said in his statement would be questioned by police as hurting Jennings' credibility:

"At this point, I should have called the Darien Police, and I regret not doing so. Once I managed to get home (or, at the very least, the next day). , the best course of action would clearly have been to contact the police. I was afraid that the driver would somehow be made aware of who I was and, potentially, where I lived. I feared that if he was crazy enough to take me away from my home in his car against my will, there was probably little else he wouldn't do. Most importantly, I worried about the future safety of my wife and two children."

Jennings soon left town on a vacation. After news reports about the incident appeared in Darien, a friend of Jennings told him about the incident, Jennings contacted Eugene Riccio, a criminal defense attorney, who contacted Darien Police on Jan. 3. When Jennings returned to town, he spoke with police and initially agreed to take a lie detector test, although Riccio later retracted that offer.

Describing the point at which Jennings took the pen knife, Perkowski wrote in his arrest-warrant affidavit that Jennings already was holding his cell phone, and described other details related by Jennings that were not in Jennings written statement to police.

Perkowski wrote:

"Jennings stated that at this time he took his cell phone from his briefase to call the police, and while doing so he realized he had a small pen knife with a 2 1/2 inch blade with him. He said the cab driver then reached back through the partition trying to grab the phone. Jennings told him not to reach back again, and that he had [a] knife with him. At this point, the driver grabbed the knife and cut his hand. he stated the driver said, 'you cut me,' and pulled over to the side of the road, about 30 yards away from the Darien Sport Shop."

Concerns about safety, yet no call to police

At another point in Perkowski's affidavit, he wrote that Jennings' concern for his and his family's safety seemed to be contradicted by the fact that Jennings never called police, either during the incident or afterward:

"At no time did Jennings make any attempt to contact the police when this incident occurred, nor any time thereafter. He only contacted his attorney after his friend told him the police were looking for the suspect in the stabbing inciddnt. When questioned as to why he never contacted the police, he replied that he was afraid the taxi driver would come after him, as he knew where he lived.

"If in fact that was the case, I asked him, wouldn't that [have] been more of [a] reason to call the police, seeing that you were afraid this man was going to come after you? Jennings reply to that was he didn't know what to do, he just wanted the whole thing to go away. Jennings claims that he never threatened to kill Ammar, nor did he make any disparaging remarks to him."

Credibility and the struggle with the knife

Perkowski found another reason to disbelieve Jennings' account of the incident:

"My investigation discredits Jennings' statement that Ammar reached into the back of the cab while he was driving. In inspecting the cab, Ammar would have had to reach through a [sic] 11 x 14 1/2 inch opening into the back seat, which was virtually impossible to do while driving the cab, as Jennings claims. For Ammar to have been able to reach back to the right rear passenger seat, he would have to leadn through the opening to do so."

Perkowski wrote that Jennings agreed to take a polygraph exam—that is, a lie detector test—but "Attorney Riccio called to cancel the test on 2/10/12, citing other court obligations on that date. Attorney Riccio also stated he saw no benefit to his client by taking the polygraph."

Correction: Jennings is accused in court documents of making a single bigoted statement, not statements, as Darien police initially announced in a news release.

Editor's notes:

See also: ""

This article originally was published Monday, March 5. The time stamp has been changed for layout purposes on the Home page of Darien Patch.

sebastian dangerfield March 23, 2012 at 04:57 AM
eagle The problem with you --is that you are so far gone, its impossible for you to listen to reason. How many times does one have to tell you that I dont think jennings is innocent, for you to understand that fact? Seriously? You need to obtain some balance in your life. You dont know how to listen.
Skipaway March 23, 2012 at 02:00 PM
The real issue here is that since 2008 all bankers in this country have come to expect a free ride.
sebastian dangerfield March 23, 2012 at 03:27 PM
skipaway Again--you are ignorant....(the dictionary definition) What is a free ride? If you borrow money to buy a house, or use a credit card, did you just receive a free ride? The banks were loaned money--many against their will--forced to take loans--then the Federal Government would not let them pay the money back, until a deal for giving money to GM was in place. I think they allowed the banks to pay the money back in March of 2009. They were "allowed" to exit Tarp. If you google tarp profit, you will see that this country is not owed anything by banks.... the government, in fact so far, made roughly 30 bio dollars. So , while you listen to Obama and his rhetoric and demogoguery about how banks owe this country---they received emergency loans that lasted less than a year--and they paid them back. Now, GM will never pay the money back--but Obama's voter base is union workers--so he wont villianize them....he needs to keep the myth alive that banks got our money.... technically true--but they paid it back--so maybe you need to come to grips with reality....not the b.s. that media and politicians will have you believe. That is-unless you think if you use a credit card, you just ripped someone off. Or took a mortgage---borrowing money is not stealing...its borrowing. Taxpayers are not paying banker bonuses. we are , however, paying for huge UAW benefits to retirees. If you want to get mad--get mad at the right people.
Siwanoy March 23, 2012 at 04:56 PM
What was the point of that post? Skipaway is referring to how the banks (as you put it, of which some were forced to take bailout.. which means some WANTED/NEEEDED the bailout) didn't do well, and instead of all getting fired and the company closing down like a regular business they were able to borrow money from the taxpayers to stay in business and keep their jobs. They absolutely paid it all back and then some, I totally agree, however its hard to say that they deserved to keep their jobs more so then any other company that was mismanaged and basically failed.
sebastian dangerfield March 24, 2012 at 12:46 PM
Siwanoy... Whatever. The point is they dont owe. If the issue is that the government should never assist people or companies who need short term help...lets make that rule. If you however are ok with the govt lending money...then dont single out banks, who paid back the money w interest...and pay hundreds of billions in taxes each year. its demogoguery Consider this. Malloy gives ubs 25-30 million to stay in ct for 2+3 more years. First, why? Same reason as the bailout. But also please consider the way media influences. If malloy were a republican, this move would be " giving to his rich banker friends." Right? Arent you tired of the manipulation? Banks paid back....but those who control the info want you to think taxpayers got screwed. How are we scrwed? Its all lies.
Be Investigative July 11, 2012 at 02:48 PM
Take a good look at the motion David posted on the patch website from Jennings' lawyer. Contains a bunch of new information that does answer some of the debated questions in above posts. Most important new piece of information is that the cabbie did NOT code the fare (that he says they agreed) into the meter, casting substantial doubts about the driver's credibility and/or memory. Also is very clear that driver admits to holding Jennings in the car against his will, yet no charges for the cabbie. If Jennings wins all of this, he's gonna take the DPD for a wild ride of his own. The more information that comes out, the more it looks like the cabbie is the one who manufactured/changed his story out of necessity.
Tall Tale July 11, 2012 at 04:50 PM
Certainly for the cabbie to receive his due justice it is always hoped the police didn't overly and unforgivably botch their duties. Keystone cops do not secure just convictions. So besides botching the fare what else did the DPD botch? Let us count the ways. Personally I suspect the DPD also botched the chain of custody for the knife. Which evidence should most certainly already be publicly presented. Or the issue then becomes pandering. Where it is clear the DA is pandering. Is the DPD also pandering? So far it looks so. Can the DPDs handling of the knife help exonerate them from due suspicion?
Tall Tale July 11, 2012 at 07:25 PM
Also if it turns out the DPD botched the chain of custody for the knife then what can people expect them to botch in the future. Thankfully this incident is likely the most newsworthy but least injurious event in years. But what if something truly serious were to happen. Would the DPD cut the mustard? Doubtful.
Siwanoy July 11, 2012 at 07:33 PM
Is there any history of the DPD being sued?
Be Investigative July 12, 2012 at 12:44 PM
That's a good/operative question Siwanoy. Don't know the answer. I have to imagine that they have been sued before and a quick Google search does turn some things up, but I can't really give you a good answer to the "has this happened before?" question. Remember as well from the beginning of this story... Jennings went into the DPD voluntarily when the DPD had no idea who he was or who to find him. They would not have found him had he not voluntarily shown up. So, clearly, Jennings wasn't expecting this story to play out as it has or he might have just waited to have the DPD come find him knowing they could not. The bottom line is that they have botched several crucial elements of this incident and everything I am hearing suggests if/when Jennings extricates himself from this whole situation, that Jennings will be training his sights on Bussell and Perkowski. If I were those guys, I'd move now...
Tall Tale July 12, 2012 at 11:39 PM
Cabbie got six stitches on the one cut on his index finger and no stitches on the one cut on his palm. He must have used his index finger like a sword. As he described to the NY Post: “I put my hand out to protect, and that is when I saw the penknife. He went for my neck first but ended up slashing my hand many times as I was fighting him off." - How does the DPD explain what happened to the knife? Did they give the knife a proper chain of custody? Or are they Keystone Cops?
Concerned Citizen July 14, 2012 at 10:30 AM
Better yet, how does the DPD explain why they believed the cabbie's story when he tells the NY Post "He went for my neck first but ended up slashing my hand many times as i fighting him off." Yet, and very importantly, his hand didn't have a single scratch on it. Not one cut. It's in Riccio's motion if you haven't read that yet. So, agree with Tall Tale... Where is the knife and why couldn't our Keystone Cops figure out the the driver's one cut was entirely inconsistent with a stabbing attack?
Tall Tale July 14, 2012 at 07:48 PM
Yes, where is the knife? And can we see it? Along with its documentation and provenance?
Tall Tale July 17, 2012 at 01:35 AM
Also there isn't even the need for a cab to prove the bio-mechanical impossibility of reaching through the partition. All you need is a swivel desk chair and a light weight to test arm strength and coordination. What you will discover is that the arm retains almost all of its strength as long as it is forward of the plane of the body. But quickly weakens in back of that plane. Additionally the elbow will easily pull forward. But has almost no backward dexterity or strength at all. Now... F Lee Bailey like... realize that the cabbie can reasonably turn on cruise control or not and turn close to sideways a full 90 degrees and still retain a full 180 degree view encompassing both the road and the hostage. Plus reach close to perfectly forward through the partition. Offset by only 45 degrees. For quite a good distance. With both full arm strength and full hand dexterity. What this means is that similtaneously driving and stripping a knife is not only not difficult but indeed fairly easy. Did the cabbie con the detective? If so the detective got conned willfully. And even willfully helped out in the deception.
Chris Noe July 17, 2012 at 02:05 AM
There was a time when many Darien cops lived in town, that has changed along with their ability to judge what happens to residents who are basically... targets. We live with our defences lowered because we can. By the time we figure out we are in trouble we react swiftly and appropriately. I like your use of the word hostage. Mr Jennings was exactly that, a hostage.
sebastian dangerfield July 17, 2012 at 06:56 AM
Didnt we read a 6 or 7 months ago -how 86% of people pulled over for traffic violations are white --but the town is 94% white -so therefore darien cops are biased? Maybe the DPD was told to err on the side of arresting white guys over people of color, in order to address this ridiculous theory that darien cops pulling over 85% white people must be bigots... who knows...
Tall Tale July 17, 2012 at 07:23 AM
One last thought. Does the knife even exist in evidence? According to the DPD - "The taxi driver stated that as he was driving Mr. Jennings pulled a small pen knife from his coat pocket and began stabbing him through the open partition that divided the front and rear of the taxi’s interior." But what happened to it after that? According to the police and DA. Did the driver grab it or did Jennings flee the cab still in possession of the bloody knife?
Concerned Citizen July 17, 2012 at 11:57 AM
Tall Tale is right about it not being physically impossible. Riccio's amended motion says that he and the DA reenacted this scene and it was determined that not only is it not impossible, it isn't difficult at all? So why then did the "we are not biased" DPD (according to Bussell) conclude it was impossible. Second, Jennings was the hostage the minute the driver took him away from his house. While there is a rule allowing yellow cab drivers to allow to take passengers to the nearest precinct when they are having a fare dispute, there is no such regulation or allowance for this in Connecticut. It automatically turned into unlawful restraint at that point. Third, if the DPD were truly not biased and looking for Darien resident "targets", then they would have taken the safe route and arrested both me just in case. Instead, they allowed the driver to change his story four times, including very important lies about how much he wanted to charge Jennings and whether he forcibly took Jennings from his house. Lastly (for Tall Tale), none has the knife. Jennings said the driver wrested it out of his hand and the driver says he does not have it either. Noone knows where it is now.
Concerned Citizen July 17, 2012 at 12:09 PM
One last obvious comment. If Jennings was able to successfully stab the driver in the hand several times, why is there not one single mark on the driver's palm. He has one very small cut on the inside of his right index finger and NOTHING on the rest of his hand. How is this possible if jennings was stabbing him and he defended himself with his open hand (as he claimed)?
Chris Noe July 17, 2012 at 01:23 PM
"No good deed goes unpunished". Earlier that evening Jennings was at a fundraiser or holding a fundraiser. To spin Lyca's point of political motivation. Was there a need to arrest Jennings because the cabbie union would retaliate against Darien residents.
Tall Tale July 17, 2012 at 02:18 PM
Reviewing the bio-mechanics again, which anyone can do easily enough, if the driver were seated at any angle less than around 45 degrees and was protecting his neck he would be most vulnerable on the back of his hand and outer edge of his little finger and palm. Meanwhile his index finger would be mostly blocked by his hand and other fingers. Plus any possible cuts to his index finger would most naturally be sustained on the back of the index finger, not the inside. Indeed any cuts to the front of the index finger would naturally seem to be close to impossible. Additionally his hand would be completely awkward and he would hardly be able to even defend his neck. But once he passes the 45 degree angle the front of his index finger and palm become a more prominent defense. So it now becomes fair to say the driver was turned at least 45 degrees. Which would seem to put his neck completely out of reach, provide good access to close the partition window and also enable him to reach through the partition to grab the knife. Which he presumably denied possession thereof that very same evening.
Tall Tale July 17, 2012 at 05:04 PM
Per bio-mechanics, one more natural explanation for the inside cut to the index finger. Driver is barely turned 45 degrees and can barely close the partition window. Presumably the bankster then threatens the neck and muses into the driver's ear. The driver naturally turns clockwise to flee his neck from the blade. In process he can better try to close the partition window. Bankster tries to pull back on the partition while similtaneously holding the knife and fairly naturally and inadvertently or even accidentally-on-purpose he slices him up. Who is to say exactly what the bankster is thinking. Besides worry he has to become a beached white whale in a few moments. But certainly the law sees self-pumping as a ruse. From the bankster. The law also naturally sees any perported threats to the victim as evidence of intent and purpose. Even if the next step in the ruse is in fact accidental. What the law sees is - "You made your bed. Now sleep in it." Also assume the partition closes toward the driver. Which bodes better for the bankster. If the partition closes away from the driver, that bodes worse for the banker. Since it puts the driver's index finger out in the open and vulnerable. With the bankster tempted to shut-down the lockout by shutting down the finger.
Margot Sullivan July 17, 2012 at 06:33 PM
Consider this...if Brian were a she rather than a he...with the exact same circumstances, except "she" pulled out her nail file to defend herself and jumped out of the cab ... What would have been the reaction of the police...self defense? I think so...
Concerned Citizen July 17, 2012 at 07:04 PM
True, true Margot, but alas... Actually, a nail file is probably a good bit bigger than whatever "penknife" Jennings apparently had that night. Chris' comment above is interesting as well. Jennings hosts a huge fundraiser for the Morgan Stanley Children's Hospital. The fundraiser raises $50,000, quite a lot of which was donated by Jennings himself. Spot on with "no good deed". Something here doesn't make sense. The same guy doesn't do these two very different things on the very same night...
Margot Sullivan July 17, 2012 at 08:03 PM
I agree....in my opinion, the case reeks of reverse discrimination. It's easy for people to dislike bankers these days. So sad for the Jennings who are caught up in the middle...they have exhibited so much grace through this ordeal.
Be Investigative July 19, 2012 at 11:38 AM
That's an interesting argument Margot and I think I agree with you. The bottom line is that there will be people (perhaps even jurors or a judge) that will agree that Jennings was kidnapped and, therefore, was entitled to do whatever it takes to free himself. Establishing that he was kidnapped isn't the controversial in the least given the driver's admissions on this point. So, nor should the establishment of the self defense argument. Frankly, the driver is very fortunate that all he got is a tiny little cut on a finger. If he had kidnapped someone bigger, angrier, etc., he probably would have taken an enormous fist to the head from the passenger to make the driver stop. Damage could have been far worse. As for establishing where the driver was going ... it doesn't matter. He could have been taking Jennings to the DPD, to church, to the grocery store, whatever. If he was taking Jennings anywhere against Jennings will, then Jennings had every right to defend himself.
Chris Noe July 19, 2012 at 12:10 PM
"Stop the car" did not work as the cabbie sped toward tge highway. The next level is to display the knife and say,' I have a knife, stop tge car'. Thus us when the driver turned 45 degrees in the seat and snatched the knife from Jennings hand cutting himself in tge process. Realizing he cut his hand he stopped Jennings jumped out and ran fir his life.
Be Investigative July 19, 2012 at 12:26 PM
How is it, then, that we aren't having any difficulty figuring out what could/may have happened here, yet the DPD all had the heads up their a-ses???
Chris Noe July 19, 2012 at 12:46 PM
The cab driver had painted a criminal. The cops for two weeks had salivated probably had wet dreams if being a hero and important (never justify their existence) probably fantasized about how 'the perp' would go down peacefully or in a blaze of glory right here in Dsrien. The cops fantasies dashed when a banker walks in and admits to it. You need to understand how pitful It is to be a cop in thus town The "preppy rapist" case is long fir gotten everyone has moved on with their lives except the cops are still there stagnating. Jennings showed up without a lawyer expecting to tell his side if tge story and go back home. The cops need to feed their egos, they were ready to make the ultimate sacrifice instead they did home work with their kids. Jennings got beat up on by the cops. He is a banker he no experience with union labor. Now he has a great lawyer to protect him from our police department.
Be Investigative July 19, 2012 at 01:03 PM
If Jennings has charges dismissed or gets acquitted across the board, those cops are gonna wish this never happened as they ruined the life of one our town's residents. They had no right to do that. And, given what I'm sure Jennings has already lost in terms of legal fees, career damage, and countless other issues, he is surely smart enough to know he has an enormous case against the DPD. This is gonna be fun to watch.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something