Daniel Penny

[ken_sylvania]

Hold on - the "not guilty" finding by the court means the jury didn't find evidence beyond a reasonable doubt whether Penny committed criminally negligent homicide. I don't see how that is proof that Penny didn't kill him. Some killings are considered justified under the law.

That being said, I agree I should have phrased my comment in a way to avoid accusing Penny of killing the man.

"Killing" is not the name of a criminal charge. "Criminally negligent homicide" is, and he was found not guilty of this charge.

Is there any doubt that he killed him?

to be clear, Daniel Penny didn't kill anyone... the cops who arrived refused to do lifesaving care because they were concerned they might get a contagious disease like Hepatitis B from the now-deceased.

Maybe the police could have saved his life despite what Perry did, but that doesn't mean Perry didn't kill him.

I'm not saying Perry should have been found guilty, but I don't think we should make a martyr or a hero out of him. Especially as Mennonites ...

Nor should we imply that any Mennonites involved in this conversation have been making a martyr or a hero out of Penny.

[Bootstrap]

I certainly don't have enough information to know for sure. I wouldn't count on the media to tell use if there was, and the government for sure wouldn't. Some government prosecutors have no compunctions at all about spinning the facts and claiming they prove something that no reasonable person would agree they prove.

Maybe you have been there and seen enough evidence in person to know what the facts are, but I have not been. That is why I say I should have avoided accusing Penny of killing the man.

Offhand, I would say:

1. There was video.
2. The jury doesn't seem to have questioned whether he killed him.
3. News sources are saying he did kill him, and Daniel Perry could make a lot of money by suing them if that's not true.

[ken_sylvania]

I certainly don't have enough information to know for sure. I wouldn't count on the media to tell use if there was, and the government for sure wouldn't. Some government prosecutors have no compunctions at all about spinning the facts and claiming they prove something that no reasonable person would agree they prove.

Maybe you have been there and seen enough evidence in person to know what the facts are, but I have not been. That is why I say I should have avoided accusing Penny of killing the man.

Offhand, I would say:

1. There was video.
2. The jury doesn't seem to have questioned whether he killed him.
3. News sources are saying he did kill him, and Daniel Perry could make a lot of money by suing them if that's not true.

Was there any evidence or expert testimony presented at trial that would suggest that perhaps the chokehold was not the cause of death?

[ohio jones]

Bootstrap: A perry for your thoughts.

Are we talking about the death of Jordan Neely, or the death of Garrett Foster?

[Robert]

Maybe the police could have saved his life despite what Perry did, but that doesn't mean Perry didn't kill him.

The overwhelming evidence showed that Perry was not guilty. This means he is not responsible for Nelly's death. The stronger evidence is that other factors killed Neely. I just think we need to be careful of accusations, especially about taking someone's life.

I appreciate ken_s' response and pulling back from the strong rhetoric. That is a good example for us all to follow.

[Bootstrap]

Bootstrap: A perry for your thoughts.

Are we talking about the death of Jordan Neely, or the death of Garrett Foster?

Daniel Perry and Garrett Foster?
Or Daniel Penny and Jordan Neely?

I admit, I conflated the two.

[temporal1]

The overwhelming evidence showed that Perry [Penny] was not guilty. This means he is not responsible for Nelly's death. The stronger evidence is that other factors killed Neely. I just think we need to be careful of accusations, especially about taking someone's life.

I appreciate ken_s' response and pulling back from the strong rhetoric. That is a good example for us all to follow.

Agreed.
“Innocent until proven guilty.” (except on internet forums, social media)

Nor should we imply that any Mennonites involved in this conversation have been making a martyr or a hero out of Penny.

Nor villain, i would hope.

This case, culminating just as Hunter Biden, 54, with multiple priors, unending privileges, is receiving a sweeping pardon,
is a sad commentary on the state of things. Typical earthly stuff.

[Bootstrap]

The overwhelming evidence showed that Perry [Penny] was not guilty. This means he is not responsible for Nelly's death. The stronger evidence is that other factors killed Neely. I just think we need to be careful of accusations, especially about taking someone's life.

Honestly, I see no need for a thread on this at all. Starting a thread to discuss it means the question has been raised. And raised in a way that takes sides in a case that the jury can handle better than we can, with more information.

But if we're going to do that at all ... we should distinguish (1) legal responsibility from (2) the act of killing.

[temporal1]

If admin+mods want to delete this topic, and all my forum input, i submit, i do not resist.

[Bootstrap]

If admin+mods want to delete this topic, and all my forum input, i submit, i do not resist.

That seems incredibly unlikely to happen.

But if you start a thread about someone who killed someone else, we might wind up discussing the fact that he killed someone else. I don't understand why that would be objectionable - and it's hard to discuss the topic at all without discussing that.

I think this account is accurate, and reflects what occurred according to the trial - is there any doubt about any part of it?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/08/nyre ... trial.html

A few stops in, at Second Avenue, an unhinged Jordan Neely got on and threw his jacket to the floor.

He started ranting about deprivation — about wanting ginger ale, about not caring if he ended up at Rikers, about feeling ready to die. Whether he mentioned wanting to kill anyone is unclear; witnesses offered differing accounts. But he seemed to be unarmed, directing his tirade at no one in particular.

Mr. Penny, a former Marine with a green belt from the corps’ martial arts program, looked at the frightened women and children around him and immediately sought to subdue a man they believed to be dangerous, grabbing him from behind and putting him in a chokehold. According to records from the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, only 30 seconds passed between the time the train left Second Avenue and when it arrived at the next station.

At that point, everyone fearing this person who seemed so combustible could get off. Still, Mr. Penny held to the chokehold, exerting varying degrees of pressure, for nearly another five and a half minutes. Mr. Neely was pronounced dead at Lenox Hill Hospital in Greenwich Village. A medical examiner determined that he had died as a result of compression to the neck.

On Monday morning, after just a brief period of deliberation, jurors acquitted Mr. Penny on the charge of criminally negligent homicide.