After Jean Blain, a disturbed Brooklyn man, stabbed three New York City police officers violently with a machete, a grand jury decided not to be indicted for attempted murder. Because of Blain’s mental health problems, the ruling has sparked questions about how the legal system handled a situation that might have resulted in death.
Indicted for Attempted Murder: Machete-Wielding NYC Man Spared Charges Despite Attack on Cops (Photo from: ABC7)
Indicted for Attempted Murder – A Controversial Decision
The grand jury’s decision not to indict Blain for attempted murder, despite the violent caught-on-video confrontation, has ignited controversy. Blain, also known as “Insane Blain” and “Peter,” was apprehended on January 22 after assaulting three officers responding to an “emotionally disturbed person” call in his East Flatbush apartment.
During the court appearance this week, Blain, who was initially held without bail, received a break from the grand jury due to his mental health issues. Although not indicted for attempted murder, he may still face charges related to assault and weapons offenses stemming from the machete attack.
The tension captured in bodycam footage escalated when Blain, wielding the machete, attacked the officers. A sergeant suffered a slash to the side of the head, while two other officers were cut on the wrist and shoulder during the arrest. The grand jury’s decision has left law enforcement and union officials questioning the safety implications of releasing a potentially dangerous individual. Blain’s troubled history, including a prior machete attack less than two weeks before the incident with the officers, adds complexity to the case. The earlier attack left a man fearing for his life, raising questions about the adequacy of the legal system in addressing repeat offenders with a history of violence.
READ ALSO: Uncle And Nephew Arrested In Connection To 2022 Dumpster Stabbing Case
Potential Consequences and Public Safety Concerns
The decision not to indict Blain for attempted murder has sparked concerns about potential consequences and the safety of the public. Vincent J. Vallelong, president of the Sergeants’ Benevolent Association, criticized the unbalanced justice system, emphasizing that the officers involved could have faced a deadly fate.
Vallelong questioned why the case is not eligible for remand and highlighted the danger posed by releasing a deranged individual who, if not for a dull machete, could have caused fatalities. The controversy surrounding this case raises broader questions about the justice system’s responsibility to ensure public safety.
Amidst the outcry over this decision, Vallelong also criticized the City Council’s focus on rejecting Mayor Eric Adams’ veto of the “How Many Stops Act.” He urged a reevaluation of priorities, emphasizing the need to address the city’s catastrophic mental health issues rather than demonizing the police.
READ ALSO: 87-Year-Old Man Attacked In San Francisco , Decides To Return To China
