Seven Indicted in Times Square Attack Amid Bail Controversy

In a dramatic turn of events, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg announced on Thursday that a grand jury has indicted seven men allegedly involved in the January attack on two NYPD officers in Times Square. The announcement comes amidst a storm of criticism aimed at Bragg for his decision not to request bail, allowing the alleged attackers’ release.

The five individuals previously arrested last week—Darwin Andres Gomez-Isquiel, Wilson Juarez, Kelvin Arocha, Yorman Reveron, and Yohenry Brito—were all charged with obstruction and felony-level assault. Additionally, Brito and Juarez face charges of tampering with evidence. Notably, Brito remains the sole individual still in custody.

However, the grand jury has also indicted two other individuals whose identities remain under seal, as they have not been previously arrested or arraigned, according to Bragg. Additionally, Bragg revealed photos of four more suspects who have yet to be identified.

The attack, which occurred on January 27, has reignited debates surrounding New York’s migrant crisis, as it reportedly transpired outside a migrant shelter. While law enforcement sources have previously described the suspects as migrants in news reports, officials at Thursday’s press conference refrained from delving into whether the charged men were asylum seekers.

In response to recent reports linking migrant criminal activity to the incident, Mayor Eric Adams emphasized that the actions of a “small minority” do not represent the majority of law-abiding migrants striving for the American Dream.

The assault, captured on video, depicts a confrontation between two police officers and one individual escalating as more individuals join in, striking the officers. This footage has become a focal point in discussions about New York’s migrant crisis and bail laws.

Governor Kathy Hochul weighed in on the matter, suggesting that deportation should be considered for individuals who commit crimes against police officers in New York without legal status. Hochul’s stance echoes sentiments expressed by State Attorney General Letitia James, both of whom criticized Bragg’s decision not to request bail.

Bragg, however, defended his decision, asserting that caution was necessary to ensure the correct individuals were charged amidst complex evidence. “This assault, as it did to many of you, sickened me and outraged me,” Bragg declared at Thursday’s press conference.

Patrick Hendry, President of the New York Police Benevolent Association, expressed skepticism regarding the impact of the indictments, stating, “These indictments won’t mean anything unless these individuals show up in a Manhattan courtroom.” Hendry raised concerns that some suspects may have fled, potentially thousands of miles away.

Reports surfaced alleging that four men arrested in Arizona by immigration officials had connections to the case in New York. However, Bragg categorically denied any link between these individuals and the Times Square attack, despite conflicting reports.

The indictment represents a significant development in the ongoing investigation into the assault on NYPD officers. As the legal proceedings unfold, questions linger about the effectiveness of bail decisions in cases involving alleged perpetrators with uncertain immigration status.

In the wake of heightened scrutiny, Bragg faces mounting pressure to ensure accountability while navigating the complexities of New York’s criminal justice system and immigration landscape. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for law enforcement, immigration policy, and public safety in the city.

As New Yorkers grapple with the aftermath of this brazen attack, the pursuit of justice takes center stage, underscoring the delicate balance between upholding the law and protecting the rights of all individuals involved.