Daniel Penny on Trial for manslaughter and negligent homicide of Jordan Neely

[Izzylizzy]

Say what?? The struggle caused his sickle cell to cause lack of oxygen?? This guy is beyond belief!! Of course it couldn't relate to the fact that HE WAS BEING CHOKED??!! Seriously, can't all of you see how ridiculous this is??

IIRC and IMO:
According to Dr. Harris JN had sickle cell trait which is different then sickle cell.
Most people with SCT live normal lives though it can be activated by extreme physical activity.

So Chunfru is claiming that the resistance JN exerted when restrained in the chokehold activated his SCT and less oxygen reached his brain which caused his death.
Go figure.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Say what?? The struggle caused his sickle cell to cause lack of oxygen?? This guy is beyond belief!! Of course it couldn't relate to the fact that HE WAS BEING CHOKED??!! Seriously, can't all of you see how ridiculous this is??

He made $90,000 to come up with that failure of a worn out theory.
It does have a familiar ring to it though.

In NYC chokehold defense, ex-Marine's expert casts doubt ...​

https://www.courthousenews.com/in-nyc-chokehold-defense-ex-marines-expert-casts-doubt-on-autopsy-report/

5 hours ago — He's paid handsomely to do so — Chundru said his revenue is roughly $5 million per year, and he's billed Penny's defense team for about $90,000
jmo

 

[Izzylizzy]

The prosecution will continue their cross tomorrow.
Dafna Yoran didn't disappoint. imo:


"But Chundru faced a grueling cross-examination Thursday afternoon as prosecutors hammered him with questions about his history as a forensic pathologist-for-hire.

Under fiery questioning from Assistant District Attorney Dafna Yoran, Chundru acknowledged that a majority of his work is in cases like this, where he is hired by defense attorneys to disprove the conclusions of county medical examiners. He’s paid handsomely to do so — Chundru said his revenue is roughly $5 million per year, and he’s billed Penny’s defense team for about $90,000 so far.

Still, Chundru insisted: “I always try to find the truth.”

But Yoran got Chundru to walk back some of his testimony. On direct examination, Chundru downplayed the hemorrhaging found in Neely’s neck as minimal. On cross, he admitted that some hemorrhages were found “deep inside the neck,” indicative of Penny using some force as he restrained Neely.

Chundru also conceded that, had Neely gone unconscious at one point from Penny’s squeeze, Penny continued applying pressure for long enough afterward to cause Neely serious brain injury or death. '

https://www.courthousenews.com/in-nyc-chokehold-defense-ex-marines-expert-casts-doubt-on-autopsy-report/

 

[Charlot123]

BBM:
Neither a victim or an example.
Many want DP to be held responsible for killing an unarmed man who didn't assault anyone by using lethal force.

JMO

Oh, don’t get me wrong. I personally feel that Mr. Penny, too, could benefit from seeing a specialist at VA for his issues and that he could encounter a lots of other problems in life. If not vigilante, then DV or something along the lines. Choking is not a reflex, it is an outlet for rage. However, the sum collected for his defense is very telling. We can ill afford to make him a victim, a symbol or an “embodiment”.

 

[Charlot123]

IIRC and IMO:
According to Dr. Harris JN had sickle cell trait which is different then sickle cell.
Most people with SCT live normal lives though it can be activated by extreme physical activity.

So Chunfru is claiming that the resistance JN exerted when restrained in the chokehold activated his SCT and less oxygen reached his brain which caused his death.
Go figure.

We have many people in this country carrying either a sickle cell trait or thalassemia minor. Both make people more sensitive to oxygen deprivation. But this is not how we determine that “enough is enough” - among other things, loosening of the sphincters should have been indicative of brain hypoxia. Not to say that people, especially trained in the military, should feel when someone becomes limp and stops resisting.

 

[fred&edna]

Curiosity got me and I googled some info regarding SCT...

"Rarely, extreme conditions such as severe dehydration and high-intensity physical activity can lead to serious health issues, including sudden death, for individuals with sickle cell trait."

Sickle Cell Trait

Understand the difference between sickle cell trait and sickle cell anemia.

www.hematology.org

My opinion... Just based on the info at the link, it seems that since red blood cells (which carry oxygen) can be more easily deformed in a person with SCT and this can cause a lack of oxygen to many different organs of the body. While sudden death associated with intense physical activity (which I assume was happening in this case) is rare... it's not unheard of. So maybe, it's not a ridiculous medical argument??

 

[LinasK]

Curiosity got me and I googled some info regarding SCT...

Rarely, extreme conditions such as severe dehydration and high-intensity physical activity can lead to serious health issues, including sudden death, for individuals with sickle cell trait.

Sickle Cell Trait

Understand the difference between sickle cell trait and sickle cell anemia.

www.hematology.org

My opinion... Just based on the info at the link, it seems that since red blood cells (which carry oxygen) can be more easily deformed in a person with SCT which cause a lack of oxygen to many different organs of the body. While sudden associated with intense physical activity (which I assume was happening in this case) is rare... it's not unheard of. So maybe, it's not a ridiculous medical argument??

Even IF this were true, Neely still wouldn't have died from the condition had Penny not placed him in a choke-hold and refused to let go.

 

[Izzylizzy]

.

​

Curiosity got me and I googled some info regarding SCT...

"Rarely, extreme conditions such as severe dehydration and high-intensity physical activity can lead to serious health issues, including sudden death, for individuals with sickle cell trait."

Sickle Cell Trait

Understand the difference between sickle cell trait and sickle cell anemia.

www.hematology.org

My opinion... Just based on the info at the link, it seems that since red blood cells (which carry oxygen) can be more easily deformed in a person with SCT and this can cause a lack of oxygen to many different organs of the body. While sudden death associated with intense physical activity (which I assume was happening in this case) is rare... it's not unheard of. So maybe, it's not a ridiculous medical argument??

IMO:
I see the bottom legal line to the SCT theory would be would JN have died from a lack of oxygen within the 6 min time frame he was in a chokehold from his SCT had lethal force not been used on him when it was not required since it was 3 men on one?

 

[Snoopster]

I find it incredible that we are discussing a case when facts are being ignored. DP (Daniel Penny) didn't die. What I have seen is one medical examiner state from looking at a video that she was certain when the death of JN (Jordan Neeley) (not DP) died. Defense has produced a forensic pathologist that states the opposite "You can have a chokehold applied, leave with that kind of injury, and survive." Whoever you believe is your opinion. The one thing you are right about is juries aren't stupid. I trust they will come to the correct factually conclusion. Burden of proof lies with the prosecution. They have not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that DP killed JN, nor is DP a vigilante. JMO MOO

Well, you and I will beg to differ. This is a challenging case and I don't envy the jury.
Thanks for sharing your view.
It just goes to show that we can all look at the same event and come to different conclusions. We don't have perfect information though so I'm glad it's in the hands of a jury.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Well, you and I will beg to differ. This is a challenging case and I don't envy the jury.
Thanks for sharing your view.
It just goes to show that we can all look at the same event and come to different conclusions. We don't have perfect information though so I'm glad it's in the hands of a jury.

Thankfully the jury has the video(s) and hopefully jurors who paid acute attention to them when Dr.Harris walked them through it along side the autopsy photos.
jmo

 

[Izzylizzy]

IMO:
It's all about the Cha-ching.


"Cross-examining Chundru, Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Dafna Yoran appeared to raise questions about the quality of his work, suggesting through a series of questions that he performed more autopsies a year than is recommended by the National Association of Medical Examiners, of which he is a member. Yoran will continue her cross-examination Friday."

Defense pathologist says Jordan Neely didn't die of chokehold on NYC subway

A forensic pathologist hired by Daniel Penny’s attorneys disputed a New York City medical examiner’s finding that Penny’s chokehold killed Neely in May 2023.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[GRT]

I view this far differently, I believe that DP was in fact, following a "Good Samaritan" law, helping people who were in danger. Therefore, he should be covered under this law, and not charged for any actions that caused a death or injury.

Good Samaritan law - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Good Samaritan laws take their name from a parable found in the Bible, attributed to Jesus, commonly referred to as the Parable of the Good Samaritan which is contained in Luke 10:29–37. It recounts the aid given by a traveller from the area known as Samaria to another traveller of a conflicting religious and ethnic background who had been beaten and robbed by bandits.[4]".

In this case, Penny actually saved people from being beaten or robbed by Neely, he was definitely threatening physical harm to passengers. Penny didn't know that Neely was under the influence of drugs, or having a psychotic episode. He truly thought he was being a "Good Samaritan".

Therefore, his actions should be considered within the purview of rescue. Not murder.

I agree with this and I think the jury will agree. MOO

Penny came to the aid of others when he (and they) felt Neely was threatening them.

Good Samaritan laws vary in wording from state to state, but in general, they seek to encourage citizens to help others in an emergency and protect those acting in good faith in the event their actions inadvertently cause harm.

So yes, I think it applies here.

MOO

 

[GRT]

Even IF this were true, Neely still wouldn't have died from the condition had Penny not placed him in a choke-hold and refused to let go.

That's true. But, at the same time, Penny wouldn't have placed him in that chokehold had Neely not been aggressive and frightening others.

It would have been a different story if Neely had been minding his own business and sitting quietly when Penny put him in the chokehold.

As I understand the situation, Neely's actions created a frightening situation, and Penny stepped in to subdue Neely.

That subduing led to oxygen reduction and, in conjunction with Neely's medical condition and the drugs in his system, triggered a sickling attack from which Neely died.

The real question is whether an otherwise healthy person would have survived the restraint, and from what Chundru said -- probably so.

 

[Lilibet]

I agree with this and I think the jury will agree. MOO

Penny came to the aid of others when he (and they) felt Neely was threatening them.

Good Samaritan laws vary in wording from state to state, but in general, they seek to encourage citizens to help others in an emergency and protect those acting in good faith in the event their actions inadvertently cause harm.

So yes, I think it applies here.

MOO

The New York State Good Samaritan Law applies to helping people who are having a medical emergency. It does not apply to this situation at all. Mr Penny causing a medical emergency and death to Mr Neely in order to prevent Mr Neely from possibly doing harm to others is not what this law is about. So he is not covered by it.

What Is New York's Good Samaritan Law? | SPBMC Law

In an emergency, an injured person may not be able to call for help and may need to rely on the intervention of passing strangers for assistance. Many states have enacted “Good Samaritan” laws that protect individuals who act in good faith to help others from undue civil or criminal…

www.triallaw1.com

Many states have enacted “Good Samaritan” laws that protect individuals who act in good faith to help others from undue civil or criminal penalties. New York’s Good Samaritan Laws can pertain to preventing a drug overdose death, administering a defibrillator to resuscitate a person in a public institution, or giving life-saving treatment such as CPR in an emergency.

 

[Charlot123]

The New York State Good Samaritan Law applies to helping people who are having a medical emergency. It does not apply to this situation at all. Mr Penny causing a medical emergency and death to Mr Neely in order to prevent Mr Neely from possibly doing harm to others is not what this law is about. So he is not covered by it.

What Is New York's Good Samaritan Law? | SPBMC Law

In an emergency, an injured person may not be able to call for help and may need to rely on the intervention of passing strangers for assistance. Many states have enacted “Good Samaritan” laws that protect individuals who act in good faith to help others from undue civil or criminal…

www.triallaw1.com

Many states have enacted “Good Samaritan” laws that protect individuals who act in good faith to help others from undue civil or criminal penalties. New York’s Good Samaritan Laws can pertain to preventing a drug overdose death, administering a defibrillator to resuscitate a person in a public institution, or giving life-saving treatment such as CPR in an emergency.

I understand your point. I remember another different situation in my life, a long time ago. It was a transatlantic flight, and I saw a young woman crying before the takeoff. We made an eye contact; I was left with the feeling that she was returning home after a bad breakup. What followed next was likely a lot of alcohol. Mid-flight, we heard a request from the crew for several able-bodied men to help with “restraining an agitated passenger.” No one moved, and it felt shameful. I went to the back due to a vague suspicion that it could be that woman. By the time I reached the tail, she was already through the attempt to tear off an inner panel of the plane and was crying at the shoulder of a male flight attendant. Somehow he turned the tide. Well, I don’t know what ultimately happened with her, as upon landing, we were asked to leave first. But my shame for the men that didn’t respond to the call i remember well.
Trying to look at it from another angle. If we encourage everyone to be like Mr. Penny, we’ll have overuse of force. If we discourage, welcome to my experience: 10000+ km above the ocean, the crew is asking for help and not a single Mr. Penny around. So having thought of it, honestly, the verdict should not be manslaughter. Is there something like: “excessive use of force in response to a danger”?

 

[GRT]

The New York State Good Samaritan Law applies to helping people who are having a medical emergency. It does not apply to this situation at all. Mr Penny causing a medical emergency and death to Mr Neely in order to prevent Mr Neely from possibly doing harm to others is not what this law is about. So he is not covered by it.

What Is New York's Good Samaritan Law? | SPBMC Law

In an emergency, an injured person may not be able to call for help and may need to rely on the intervention of passing strangers for assistance. Many states have enacted “Good Samaritan” laws that protect individuals who act in good faith to help others from undue civil or criminal…

www.triallaw1.com

Many states have enacted “Good Samaritan” laws that protect individuals who act in good faith to help others from undue civil or criminal penalties. New York’s Good Samaritan Laws can pertain to preventing a drug overdose death, administering a defibrillator to resuscitate a person in a public institution, or giving life-saving treatment such as CPR in an emergency.

Right. I get that.

I was just talking about the spirit of such laws, not the literal interpretation, and the societal need to encourage citizens to step in to aid others when necessary.

Given Chundru's testimony, Neely's death was a combination of factors, and Penny couldn't have known about his medical condition. To me, that negates manslaughter and negligence and, rather, puts Penny's actions in a similar light as those of a good Samaritan. He did the right thing for the right reason, but an unforeseen tragedy ensued as a result.

Right now, I'm leaning strongly toward acquittal, but if some damning information comes out, that could change.

 

[GRT]

I understand your point. I remember another different situation in my life, a long time ago. It was a transatlantic flight, and I saw a young woman crying before the takeoff. We made an eye contact; I was left with the feeling that she was returning home after a bad breakup. What followed next was likely a lot of alcohol. Mid-flight, we heard a request from the crew for several able-bodied men to help with “restraining an agitated passenger.” No one moved, and it felt shameful. I went to the back due to a vague suspicion that it could be that woman. By the time I reached the tail, she was already through the attempt to tear off an inner panel of the plane and was crying at the shoulder of a male flight attendant. Somehow he turned the tide. Well, I don’t know what ultimately happened with her, as upon landing, we were asked to leave first. But my shame for the men that didn’t respond to the call i remember well.
Trying to look at it from another angle. If we encourage everyone to be like Mr. Penny, we’ll have overuse of force. If we discourage, welcome to my experience: 10000+ km above the ocean, the crew is asking for help and not a single Mr. Penny around. So having thought of it, honestly, the verdict should not be manslaughter. Is there something like: “excessive use of force in response to a danger”?

This.

Your post makes a lot of sense.

There's an uncomfortable trade-off here, and in a way, it reminds me of the catch-22 law enforcement officers sometimes find themselves in when they respond in a way that results in the injury or death of a suspect.

 

[Lilibet]

I understand your point. I remember another different situation in my life, a long time ago. It was a transatlantic flight, and I saw a young woman crying before the takeoff. We made an eye contact; I was left with the feeling that she was returning home after a bad breakup. What followed next was likely a lot of alcohol. Mid-flight, we heard a request from the crew for several able-bodied men to help with “restraining an agitated passenger.” No one moved, and it felt shameful. I went to the back due to a vague suspicion that it could be that woman. By the time I reached the tail, she was already through the attempt to tear off an inner panel of the plane and was crying at the shoulder of a male flight attendant. Somehow he turned the tide. Well, I don’t know what ultimately happened with her, as upon landing, we were asked to leave first. But my shame for the men that didn’t respond to the call i remember well.
Trying to look at it from another angle. If we encourage everyone to be like Mr. Penny, we’ll have overuse of force. If we discourage, welcome to my experience: 10000+ km above the ocean, the crew is asking for help and not a single Mr. Penny around. So having thought of it, honestly, the verdict should not be manslaughter. Is there something like: “excessive use of force in response to a danger”?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. What an awful experience you had! Those men should be ashamed. I certainly applaud Mr Penny for taking the initiative to subdue Mr Neely. No question about that! Unfortunately, it was “excessive use of force” applied for too long a time…approximately six minutes, even after he had ceased moving. We don’t know if the pressure on Mr Neely’s neck was excessive the whole time or not, but long enough to render him brain dead fairly quickly. I suspect that Mr Penny got carried away in the moment and didn’t stop when he knew he should have. Only he knows why.

The point (to me) of charging Mr Penny with manslaughter instead of something less is to emphasize that someone died, even if it wasn’t intentional. In other words, it places a value on human life, even Mr Neely’s, which hopefully we all have. But as you pointed out, the verdict either way can send a message that has unintended consequences.

It’s a really tough case. I hate seeing a seemingly decent stand-up guy do the right thing initially and have it end so badly due to poor his judgement IMO. I’m afraid I wasn’t convinced by the forensic pathologist for the defense. And I hate seeing a mentally ill man die in the process. I’m glad I’m not on the jury!

 

[Lilibet]

Right. I get that.

I was just talking about the spirit of such laws, not the literal interpretation, and the societal need to encourage citizens to step in to aid others when necessary.

Given Chundru's testimony, Neely's death was a combination of factors, and Penny couldn't have known about his medical condition. To me, that negates manslaughter and negligence and, rather, puts Penny's actions in a similar light as those of a good Samaritan. He did the right thing for the right reason, but an unforeseen tragedy ensued as a result.

Right now, I'm leaning strongly toward acquittal, but if some damning information comes out, that could change.

Thanks for clarifying. I get what you’re saying about the societal need for all of us to be willing to step up and help others when needed. Mr Penny was a Good Samaritan in that sense.

I explained my position on manslaughter and the pathologist’s testimony in my response to Charlot so I won’t repeat it here. I’m still seeing guilty as a just verdict, but I’m keeping an open mind too. It’s such a sad case regardless of the verdict.

 

[Charlot123]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. What an awful experience you had! Those men should be ashamed. I certainly applaud Mr Penny for taking the initiative to subdue Mr Neely. No question about that! Unfortunately, it was “excessive use of force” applied for too long a time…approximately six minutes, even after he had ceased moving. We don’t know if the pressure on Mr Neely’s neck was excessive the whole time or not, but long enough to render him brain dead fairly quickly. I suspect that Mr Penny got carried away in the moment and didn’t stop when he knew he should have. Only he knows why.

The point (to me) of charging Mr Penny with manslaughter instead of something less is to emphasize that someone died, even if it wasn’t intentional. In other words, it places a value on human life, even Mr Neely’s, which hopefully we all have. But as you pointed out, the verdict either way can send a message that has unintended consequences.

It’s a really tough case. I hate seeing a seemingly decent stand-up guy do the right thing initially and have it end so badly due to poor his judgement IMO. I’m afraid I wasn’t convinced by the forensic pathologist for the defense. And I hate seeing a mentally ill man die in the process. I’m glad I’m not on the jury!

Yes, I agree. I couldn’t be on the jury. I was not convinced by the forensic pathologist ether. Complex case.