NOT GUILTY Daniel Penny on Trial for manslaughter and negligent homicide of Jordan Neely #4

[shotgun09]

It also surprises me that a written copy of jury instructions and definitions were not already given to the jury on their initial way to deliberations. I thought that was normal procedure.

 

[Ontario Mom]

It also surprises me that a written copy of jury instructions and definitions were not already given to the jury on their initial way to deliberations. I thought that was normal procedure.

I thought the same thing. I guess not?

 

[mickey2942]

I have never been on a jury, but I had an interesting experience a few days ago, trying to get 6 family members to agree on Christmas dinner. It was contentious, and so drama filled I couldn't wait for it to end.

I can't imagine being on this jury.

 

[shotgun09]

It appears as though the court will take a lunch break now.
(Judge will hang his " Do not Disturb" sign on his door.)
So no verdict notifications/ notes for an hour or so...
MOO

 

[PrairieWind]

It also surprises me that a written copy of jury instructions and definitions were not already given to the jury on their initial way to deliberations. I thought that was normal procedure.

Typically in my jurisdictions and in federal courts the jury would have those instructions with them. They also contain the verdict forms that they will need to fill out.

 

[Leilei]

It also surprises me that a written copy of jury instructions and definitions were not already given to the jury on their initial way to deliberations. I thought that was normal procedure.

I seem to remember the same thing happening in the Karen Read case, but I'm not certain.
It is strange, though.
IMO.

 

[Sundog]

...or a few hold outs

Doesn't surprise me, we may end up with a hung jury. But they may come to an agreement on justifiable homicide, which would lead to Daniel Penny's acquittal.

 

[shotgun09]

No verdict today.
Jury's done for today, per ICP

Judge Wiley: Bring the jury in. Jury entering!Judge: Welcome back, we got your note, that you wish to be released for the day. I will let you go

https://twitter.com/x/status/1864790496071049681

 

[fred&edna]

Has anyone been keeping track of the hours of deliberation?

 

[shotgun09]

Has anyone been keeping track of the hours of deliberation?

I haven't seen anything official, but I will take a guess of at least 15 hours total.

 

[jepop]

Surely the woman whom Mr Penny claims Mr Neely threatened, saying “I will kill,” would remember accurately whether he did or did not do so. She testified under oath that he did not say “I will kill.”

I think yes, she would remember correctly so imo JN in fact did not lunge at her and threaten to kill her. Apparently that was her testimony from the horse's mouth so to speak. So moo it's misinformation and misleading to state otherwise as if factual. And I take it as a given that if DP said to the contrary in his interview with police that was a lie.

Moo if so, he was trying to justify his use of force and lying is a sign of consciousness of wrong doing. Imo detectives understand that as basic psychology in those who are aware on some level of having done wrong. Imo in Penny's case he was aware from early on that he'd overdone it but for whatever personal reasons did not want to ask himself why he overdid it. My speculation only. In all events, instead of being sorry and self reflective Imo DP consciously chose to buckle down and ride the hero wave that suddenly surrounded him. I think only DP understands his deepest reasons for doing so. Jmo

 

[Marysmith]

I think yes, she would remember correctly so imo JN in fact did not lunge at her and threaten to kill her. Apparently that was her testimony from the horse's mouth so to speak. So moo it's misinformation and misleading to state otherwise as if factual. And I take it as a given that if DP said to the contrary in his interview with police that was a lie.

Moo if so, he was trying to justify his use of force and lying is a sign of consciousness of wrong doing. Imo detectives understand that as basic psychology in those who are aware on some level of having done wrong. Imo in Penny's case he was aware from early on that he'd overdone it but for whatever personal reasons did not want to ask himself why he overdid it. My speculation only. In all events, instead of being sorry and self reflective Imo DP consciously chose to buckle down and ride the hero wave that suddenly surrounded him. I think only DP understands his deepest reasons for doing so. Jmo

Agree on the lying. He also showed zero concern, outwardly anyways, for Neely, who had not attacked him or anyone else physically.
Sigh.

 

[GRT]

Surely the woman whom Mr Penny claims Mr Neely threatened, saying “I will kill,” would remember accurately whether he did or did not do so. She testified under oath that he did not say “I will kill.”

Maybe, but maybe not. If she was moving to put herself between JN and her child in the stroller, her focus may not have been on JN's words but rather on her own defensive actions.

There is a very real phenomenon called "false memory creation," whereby a witness's memory can easily be manipulated by things she hears later.

Our Psych teacher told us of an experiment conducted by a teacher where he arranged to have a "stranger" barge into his classroom and push him to the floor before rushing back out. The teacher stood up, acted flustered, and said the only thing he remembered was that the attacker had a mustache. They had the police come and the students made reports about the incident. I can't remember the exact number, but something like three/quarters of the students reported seeing a mustache. Then, the teacher had the attacker (a friend) come back in. He didn't have a mustache.

My gram used to tell me, "Believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you see." After I heard about that experiment, I understood why.

We like to think we know our minds, but do we...?

 

[Jade]

Maybe, but maybe not. If she was moving to put herself between JN and her child in the stroller, her focus may not have been on JN's words but rather on her own defensive actions.

There is a very real phenomenon called "false memory creation," whereby a witness's memory can easily be manipulated by things she hears later.

Our Psych teacher told us of an experiment conducted by a teacher where he arranged to have a "stranger" barge into his classroom and push him to the floor before rushing back out. The teacher stood up, acted flustered, and said the only thing he remembered was that the attacker had a mustache. They had the police come and the students made reports about the incident. I can't remember the exact number, but something like three/quarters of the students reported seeing a mustache. Then, the teacher had the attacker (a friend) come back in. He didn't have a mustache.

My gram used to tell me, "Believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you see." After I heard about that experiment, I understood why.

We like to think we know our minds, but do we...?

The witness gave her testimony in the courtroom and under oath.

That testimony will be treated as truth in the court as that’s the way it works.

If one wishes to impeach her testimony then the whole thing will have to be thrown including that she was very scared and relieved when JN was restrained.

Daniel Penny lied to authorities even though he was a Marine that would have normally given him credibility but he’s a liar as shown on the interview video.

There is no video evidence or other testimony that contradicts this witnesses testimony.

She got on the stand Daniel Penny did not.

Imo, liars and the unsure are not invited to the stand.



All imo

 

[GRT]

The witness gave her testimony in the courtroom and under oath.

That testimony will be treated as truth in the court as that’s the way it works.

If one wishes to impeach her testimony then the whole thing will have to be thrown including that she was very scared and relieved when JN was restrained.

Daniel Penny lied to authorities even though he was a Marine that would have normally given him credibility but he’s a liar as shown on the interview video.

There is no video evidence or other testimony that contradicts this witnesses testimony.

She got on the stand Daniel Penny did not.

Imo, liars and the unsure are not invited to the stand.



All imo

I was just pointing out that eyewitness memories are often flawed.

Numerous studies verify that.

 

[jepop]

Maybe, but maybe not. If she was moving to put herself between JN and her child in the stroller, her focus may not have been on JN's words but rather on her own defensive actions.

There is a very real phenomenon called "false memory creation," whereby a witness's memory can easily be manipulated by things she hears later.

Our Psych teacher told us of an experiment conducted by a teacher where he arranged to have a "stranger" barge into his classroom and push him to the floor before rushing back out. The teacher stood up, acted flustered, and said the only thing he remembered was that the attacker had a mustache. They had the police come and the students made reports about the incident. I can't remember the exact number, but something like three/quarters of the students reported seeing a mustache. Then, the teacher had the attacker (a friend) come back in. He didn't have a mustache.

My gram used to tell me, "Believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you see." After I heard about that experiment, I understood why.

We like to think we know our minds, but do we...?

Wow, so now the witness that doesn't suit the defense narrative and some of whose testimony shows up Daniel Penny as playing with the truth in police interview, has false memory? Sorry but really? Lol. Just for that particular part of her testimony, but not the bit where she says she was scared?

I don't recall that witness being accused of false memory by the defense or being impeached in any way. False memory in regards to that witness is not in evidence and there is no reason why the jury would consider that part of her testimony as such. IMO. Daniel Penny chose to not get up and call her a liar or suggest she was remembering wrong so ce la vie. Moo

Daniel Penny lied several times in his interview to police including about when in the sequence of events he released his chokehold hold on the victim J N, as has been discussed and shown with links up thread. Imo that says something about his consciousness of having done something wrong. I tend to think the jury will have noted his lies and will decide if and how much that affects his credibility. Moo

 

[Ontario Mom]

Hung jury territory?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1864863004510019839

 

[GRT]

Wow, so now the witness that doesn't suit the defense narrative and some of whose testimony shows up Daniel Penny as playing with the truth in police interview, has false memory? Sorry but really? Lol. Just for that particular part of her testimony, but not the bit where she says she was scared?

I don't recall that witness being accused of false memory by the defense or being impeached in any way. False memory in regards to that witness is not in evidence and there is no reason why the jury would consider that part of her testimony as such. IMO. Daniel Penny chose to not get up and call her a liar or suggest she was remembering wrong so ce la vie. Moo

Daniel Penny lied several times in his interview to police including about when in the sequence of events he released his chokehold hold on the victim J N, as has been discussed and shown with links up thread. Imo that says something about his consciousness of having done something wrong. I tend to think the jury will have noted his lies and will decide if and how much that affects his credibility. Moo

None of that changes the fact that eyewitness memories -- are often flawed.

No matter who the eyewitness is.

A false memory and a deliberate lie are two very different things.

 

[Jade]

I was just pointing out that eyewitness memories are often flawed.

Numerous studies verify that.

Anyone that follows true crime knows that as it relates to descriptions.

This witness was talking about direct interaction.

Interesting that is mentioned in relation to an important piece of testimony not favorable to DP while accepting the rest which is.

When it’s to the point of impeaching a citizen’s witness testimony that appeared to delivered truthly and to the best of her recollection while under oath it just seems desperately dismissive. <modsdnip>


All imo

 

[Marysmith]

None of that changes the fact that eyewitness memories -- are often flawed.

No matter who the eyewitness is.

A false memory and a deliberate lie are two very different things.

Exactly. And Penny pretty clearly lied deliberately.