D
Deleted member 39678
Guest
Can you please link the pertinent NY law that you speak of?
NOT GUILTY Daniel Penny on Trial for manslaughter and negligent homicide of Jordan Neely #4
- Thread starter HmmMysterious
- Start date
- Status
I think they were just talking about NY laws in general, as opposed to laws in other states which may be different.
D
Deleted member 39678
Guest
I would still like to see a link to the NY law. It could help in clearing things up in this discussion.
References about laws being different in other states reinforces my wish for clarity. JMO.
Well, in this situation... it appears there isn't case law supporting the decision the judge made, and the issue of possible jury tampering didn't seem to matter much. Both of which have already disturbed the process of this jury coming to a good, fair and just decision. But, don't worry, I won't be heading to the big apple to protest if the jury arrives at a decision I dislike. I feel sorry for them with the task they've been assigned, or should I say reassigned, or... coerced into decision making?
jmo
I don't know that anyone has a specific law that pertains to this trial and what happened on Friday. Hopefully it will become clearer tomorrow. I personally don't know the laws in NY in relation to that situation at all.
D
Deleted member 39678
Guest
I'm not asking you for a link. I'm asking the OP who brought up NY law for one.
There was a post upthread with a link to Andrew McCarthy's statements on the case telling us what he said with a link. I'll see if I can find it for us.
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2024
- Messages
- 2,466
- Reaction score
- 29,800
I appreciate you pointing that out, as prior to posting that wasn’t at the forefront of my consideration & I admit it should have been. Fair enough & I don’t disagree with you at all.
As you, I won’t be protesting any resulting decision & I do feel for the jurors as well as the victim, defendant & families of both. While I assume both families appreciate the support, I’d expect to some extent both would be disappointed in how those not directly involved are conducting themselves. Then again, some folks feed off of dispute & ire. Pretty sad situation all around. Again, thanks for your comment.
JMO
Have there been protesters outside the courthouse during this trial shouting and/or using bullhorns demanding Daniel Penny to go free and/or is innocent? I've only seen news videos and read reports of protesters shouting that he's guilty during the trial.
jmo
jmo
Here's one link -
Daniel Penny verdict: Can he be retried if there's a hung jury?
Daniel Penny could get a retrial if there is a hung jury in his manslaughter case in the death of Jordan Neely in New York City.
www.newsweek.com
Here's another link -
Lawyer slams Manhattan DA for trying to 'strong-arm' Daniel Penny jury
DA Alvin Bragg faces criticism for 'strong-arm' tactics in the Daniel Penny trial after a manslaughter charge was dismissed. The jury can now focus on a lesser count of criminally negligent homicide.
And here's another link -
<modsnip>
Last edited by a moderator:
I understood where you were coming from, though. It's all good. And, it's good to see you here... we had some good exchanges during the RA trial.
jmo
Andrew McCarthy is a former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York so I have no doubt that he is very knowledgeable of NY law.
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2024
- Messages
- 2,466
- Reaction score
- 29,800
Agreed, thank you & appreciate it though I won’t be participating as much here due to lack of familiarity, it not being as close to home & some topics and/or opinions are just too over the top for me to get as involved, but I may chime in here & there.
Re NY law and statute re charges and deliberations, mistrial etc etc.
INAL. But here is tweet posted earlier up thread with attached NY statute I believe. My interp is that judge is good. He can allow for jury to consider lesser charge either if a Ng verdict is reached on primary or if jury is hung on primary it can still go on to consider lesser charge with judge's blessing. In my opinion noting INAL.
Imo primary charge dismissal was a legally careful and defendant friendly move by pros and was accepted by judge. I think judge did not want to invoke the statute as is technically permissible because apparently there are no accompanying precedents in case law. I think it is about trying to actually avert an appeal issue by having the primary dismissed prior to jury considering the secondary. It's the other way round to what some are assuming, jmo and INAL.
Also, if anyone can be bothered checking charging docs, imoo and I believe, judge did mention in some way or other that the jury would be able to consider the secondary charge in the event they could not make a decision on the primary. No time to seek out charging docs but will say that imoo some other States have standard provisions for juries to reach a verdict on lesser charges in the event they cannot agree on the primary charge.
Jmo but DA and pros haven't done anything wrong. If anything DP's defense should be happy and friggin grateful the primary charge was dropped! It means DP cannot be retried ever again on that charge. If jury hang on the lesser count on Monday then Dp can be retried on that though. Moo
If judge had called a mis-trial after Allen charge on primary failed on Friday (instead of invoking the statute to allow jury to move on to secondary, cos imo judge has discretion not to invoke) DP would right now be potentially eyeing up a retrial on manslaughter 2!
What's happened is actually in DP's interests. IMO
What I believe is the relevant NY statute is embedded in the earlier post copied below (includes an interpretation by the tweeter).
,,,,...,,........................................................
INAL. But here is tweet posted earlier up thread with attached NY statute I believe. My interp is that judge is good. He can allow for jury to consider lesser charge either if a Ng verdict is reached on primary or if jury is hung on primary it can still go on to consider lesser charge with judge's blessing. In my opinion noting INAL.
Imo primary charge dismissal was a legally careful and defendant friendly move by pros and was accepted by judge. I think judge did not want to invoke the statute as is technically permissible because apparently there are no accompanying precedents in case law. I think it is about trying to actually avert an appeal issue by having the primary dismissed prior to jury considering the secondary. It's the other way round to what some are assuming, jmo and INAL.
Also, if anyone can be bothered checking charging docs, imoo and I believe, judge did mention in some way or other that the jury would be able to consider the secondary charge in the event they could not make a decision on the primary. No time to seek out charging docs but will say that imoo some other States have standard provisions for juries to reach a verdict on lesser charges in the event they cannot agree on the primary charge.
Jmo but DA and pros haven't done anything wrong. If anything DP's defense should be happy and friggin grateful the primary charge was dropped! It means DP cannot be retried ever again on that charge. If jury hang on the lesser count on Monday then Dp can be retried on that though. Moo
If judge had called a mis-trial after Allen charge on primary failed on Friday (instead of invoking the statute to allow jury to move on to secondary, cos imo judge has discretion not to invoke) DP would right now be potentially eyeing up a retrial on manslaughter 2!
What's happened is actually in DP's interests. IMO
What I believe is the relevant NY statute is embedded in the earlier post copied below (includes an interpretation by the tweeter).
,,,,...,,........................................................
D
Deleted member 39678
Guest
I'm looking at NY 310.70 and it doesn't seem to fit this cases scenario.
This jury has not reached a verdict to anything in this case. JMO.
I’m a little slow on this legal stuff and I’ve been trying to figure out what happened Friday with the charges and the jury. Please correct me if I’m wrong. As I understand it, Mr Penny could not be convicted of both charges. The not guilty verdict for the first charge involved addressing whether the state had failed to prove he was justified for his actions resulting in second degree manslaughter OR not guilty for a reason that did not involve justification.
The only way the jury could consider the second charge is if they found him not guilty of the first charge for a reason that did not involve whether he was justified in his actions, but for another reason. (See the bolded Verdict Sheet below) For example, they might find him not guilty because they didn’t think he consciously disregarded a substantial risk to Mr Neely. In that case, they could consider whether he was guilty or not guilty of count 2. But if their reason for finding him not guilty of count 1 involved their belief that he was justified in his actions, they could not move on to count 2. I’m not sure why, but I’ve run out of energy to think about it.
The jury was a hung jury. So they did not find Mr Penny not guilty of count 1 for the reason that would allow them to move on to count 2 as described above. So the prosecutor asked the judge to drop count 1, which he did.
As much as I believe that Mr Penny should be convicted, I don’t understand how it can be legal to drop a charge after a jury has failed to reach the not guilty verdict the way it needed to be reached before moving on to count 2. I’m sure court will be quite volatile tomorrow if the judge tells the jury to consider count 2.
Thanks for reading this as I puzzled it out. I hope it makes sense.
www.fox5ny.com
After the dismissal of the second-degree manslaughter charge, Penny now faces only a criminally negligent homicide charge.
The only way the jury could consider the second charge is if they found him not guilty of the first charge for a reason that did not involve whether he was justified in his actions, but for another reason. (See the bolded Verdict Sheet below) For example, they might find him not guilty because they didn’t think he consciously disregarded a substantial risk to Mr Neely. In that case, they could consider whether he was guilty or not guilty of count 2. But if their reason for finding him not guilty of count 1 involved their belief that he was justified in his actions, they could not move on to count 2. I’m not sure why, but I’ve run out of energy to think about it.
The jury was a hung jury. So they did not find Mr Penny not guilty of count 1 for the reason that would allow them to move on to count 2 as described above. So the prosecutor asked the judge to drop count 1, which he did.
As much as I believe that Mr Penny should be convicted, I don’t understand how it can be legal to drop a charge after a jury has failed to reach the not guilty verdict the way it needed to be reached before moving on to count 2. I’m sure court will be quite volatile tomorrow if the judge tells the jury to consider count 2.
Thanks for reading this as I puzzled it out. I hope it makes sense.
Judge dismisses manslaughter charge in Daniel Penny trial: What this means
After a highly contested day of deliberations, the judge in the Daniel Penny trial dismissed the second-degree manslaughter charge that had deadlocked the jury.
After the dismissal of the second-degree manslaughter charge, Penny now faces only a criminally negligent homicide charge.
- (Dismissed charge) Manslaughter requires proving that a defendant recklessly caused another person's death. The standard entails, among other things, consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that an action will be deadly.
- Criminally negligent homicide, on the other hand, involves engaging in serious "blameworthy conduct" while not perceiving such a risk.
Last edited by a moderator:
From reports DP's supporters are apparently mostly not local and have to make their impact on the trial by sending him unencumbered money ongoing.
DP used the financial support, a luxurious amount, to fly in a slick, wealthy, out of town, hired gun to make an impression.
For Jordan supporters when you got no money you take to the streets to make an impression.
I remember when the elected officials, et al, were right outside the NYC court doors protesting and using bullhorns for their indicted ones trial.
It's done, doesn't bother me to see anyone use their free speech and right to gather.
all imo
Good Morning !
From Inner City Press who is present in the courtroom this am:
Update of 9:39 am - Judge Maxwell Wiley enters the courtroom stage left, not yet in black robe, carrying tall paper cup presumably of coffee.
Court officer: Morning, Judge.
Judge waves and exits stage right.
Protesters chanting down on Centre Street can be heard
From Inner City Press who is present in the courtroom this am:
Update of 9:39 am - Judge Maxwell Wiley enters the courtroom stage left, not yet in black robe, carrying tall paper cup presumably of coffee.
Court officer: Morning, Judge.
Judge waves and exits stage right.
Protesters chanting down on Centre Street can be heard
IDK
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2016
- Messages
- 1,661
- Reaction score
- 9,455
Thank you for the update!
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2009
- Messages
- 5,218
- Reaction score
- 32,470
Covered in Texas prisons and jails as well
The Correctional Managed Health Care Program provides comprehensive health care services to adult inmates incarcerated in Texas prison and state jail facilities. The Inmate Health Services Plan describes the level, type and variety of services available to inmates. Such services include, but are not limited to basic ambulatory care, infirmary care, hospitalization and specialty care services, pharmaceutical services, dental care, optometry care, and mental health services.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
