Police: Guy beats up, spits on elderly man at JFK/UMass T stop

Man getting off train at JFK/UMass

Suspect getting off Red Line train. Surveillance photo via TPD.

Transit Police report arresting a guy they say beat up an elderly man on a Red Line train pulling into JFK/UMass shortly before 10:30 p.m. on Monday.

According to Transit Police, Wayne Wallace, 39, started an argument with a 75-year-old man.

[T]he victim stated he was set upon by an unknown male who instigated a physical confrontation with him. The assailant while standing over the victim, who was seated inside the train car, was struck in the face multiple times as well as spat upon. The assailant then fled. Witnesses corroborated the victim's version of events.

The victim was taken to a local hospital for treatment of "visible wounds to his face," police say.

Wallace was taken to Transit Police headquarters for booking on a charge of assault and battery on a person over 60.

Innocent, etc.

Neighborhoods: 

Topics: 

Free tagging: 

Ad:

Comments

Bill of Rights

By on

This photo just screams "innocent until proven guilty."

up
Voting is closed. 36

Poison dart frog

You know how some animals are colored brightly so it's obvious they should be left alone? This guy is kind of like that but for fighting.

up
Voting is closed. 27

TP need to learn subject vs. object in sentences

By on

The assailant while standing over the victim, who was seated inside the train car, was struck in the face multiple times as well as spat upon.

means that the assailant was struck and spat upon. Somehow I don't think that's what they were trying to say.

up
Voting is closed. 31

Let's worry about things that matter

I'm more concerned about an elderly man being assaulted than the grammar of the transit police. But I guess apologists for thugs and criminals will always find reasons to deflect from the matter at hand.

up
Voting is closed. 57

You probably admire yourself

By on

as a fine person, being against violence towards the elderly and all. Some, like me, think that calling someone who wants clarity in reporting a "apologist for thugs and criminals" makes you a pathetic self-righteous dirtbag.

up
Voting is closed. 55

So the fact that an official statement

By on

from a government agency is so poorly written that it would probably get a failing grade if presented in a middle school writing class isn't important enough to matter?

And we wonder why the average intelligence in this country continues to decline.

up
Voting is closed. 22

Alarmist take on quality of cop report writing

By on

I suspect that it has always been the case that a fair number of police reports contain tortured grammar and syntax and the cited example is not evidence of declining national intelligence.

up
Voting is closed. 13

Will new DA prosecute assault and battery?

By on

The newly elected Suffolk DA was on national Fox TV saying she wouldn't prosecute "minor crimes" like distribution of drugs, shoplifting etc. Since the SJC has ruled no part of the body, (teeth, spit, punch) can be a dangerous weapon and the suspect can easily argue he didn't know the man's age/date of birth, we have a simple assault and battery misdemeanor. Suspect should delay trial until January and likely walk free. Terrible. It will only get worse.

up
Voting is closed. 33

The road to hell

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Rachel Rollins rhetoric appeals to White Guilt liberals and the criminal element. We're due to become the NY of the Koch and Dinkins administrations.

up
Voting is closed. 22

lol

This is exactly what you all were saying when DeBlasio took over in NYC, which now has their lowest crime rate since they started keeping accurate statistics.

up
Voting is closed. 29

Question for you, Fishy

By on

Where do you keep all the dogs you summon with your eternal, truth-free dog whistles?

up
Voting is closed. 37

Rollins

By on

She is not yet the “newly elected Suffolk DA.” She is the Dem. nominee.

up
Voting is closed. 20

You know she actually published a list, right?

By on

I mean, I know doing research is hard and all when you can just make shit up, but she actually wrote up a whole list of charges where the default would be to decline prosecution (and note that the DA can still prosecute if they think it's necessary!). It's just a simple Google away: https://rollins4da.com/policy/charges-to-be-declined/

I know reading's not your strong suit, so I'll make it easy for you and point out that assault and battery is not on that list.

up
Voting is closed. 26

I agree with some of those.

By on

I agree with some of those. But if someone smashes a car window with a rock (malicious destruction), or they also steal the GPS (larceny under $250), they're not going to be charged?

up
Voting is closed. 13

From the link

By on

In the exceptional circumstances where prosecution of one of these charges is warranted, the line DA must first seek permission from his or her supervisor. If necessary, arraignment will be continued to allow for consultation with supervisor. Thus, there will be an avenue for prosecuting these misdemeanors when necessary but it will be appropriately overseen by experienced prosecutors.

I would imagine a combination of these would easily add up to "exceptional circumstances" here.

up
Voting is closed. 15

So just smashing the window,

By on

So just smashing the window, or taking the GPS from an unlocked car, would be ok as long as you don't do both?

up
Voting is closed. 9

Nice

By on

He seems nice....

up
Voting is closed. 15

Rachael knows best!

By on

Rachael Rollins worked for the MBTA and was endorsed by the Transit Police. When she said she wouldn't prosecute minor crimes she meant offenses like fare jumping, bike thefts, graffiti, school fights, trespassing and disorderly conduct.

up
Voting is closed. 15

I hate to say this, but

By on

bike thefts and physical assaults aren't exactly minor crimes, as far as I'm concerned.

up
Voting is closed. 21

It sounds nice but even Rachel knows things don't work like that

She is smart as hell and will a good job. But most people probably don't even know that the current DAs office doesn't prosecute these crimes anyway without "approval" under "special" circumstances. Hell, drug possession cases haven't been "prosecuted" in Roxbury district court for the past 5 years (has been in other courts besides possibly Dorchester).

In fact, almost all these crimes aren't prosecuted for the first couple offenses. Rachel is not promising anything new. Very smart campaign though telling people what they probably don't know what is happening anyway.

Not that these are bad things. The DA's office isn't going to have a choice when the police bring in someone who stole a bike and has 150 previous charges on their record (I'm guessing 90% of those arrested for any crime in Boston have 5+ previous charges for something). These are cases where there DAs office will be pretty much forced to prosecute under Rachel's "special circumstance" cases.

up
Voting is closed. 24