Jurors in Daniel Penny case 'unable to come to a unanimous vote' on manslaughter charge:

"We the jury request instructions from Judge [Maxwell] Wiley. At this time, we are unable to come to a unanimous vote on court 1 – manslaughter in the second degree," read a note that the jurors reportedly sent to the court around 11 a.m.

https://justthenews.com/govern..._campaign=newsletter

Friday marked the fourth day of jury deliberations.

What will happen to Penny as this next process plays out?

The Judge can tell them to keep deliberating or declare a mistrial. Then the prosecutor will decide whether to try him again.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
I think Penny will walk and there will be no retrial.

I agree, especially after the mayor spoke well about the case.

A judge on Dec. 6 directed the jury in the Daniel Penny trial to continue deliberating after jurors said they were unable to reach a unanimous verdict on the top charge of manslaughter.

https://www.zerohedge.com/poli...-manslaughter-charge

quote:

Originally posted by Krazeehorse:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
I think Penny will walk and there will be no retrial.

I agree, especially after the mayor spoke well about the case.

Would have been nice if the Mayor are those statements a bit earlier in the process.


I heard a report that judge told them to keep working at it, if they can’t agree there will be another trial with another jury.

Once a jury indicates they're hung, the Judge will typically send them back to continue deliberating at least once.

If it remains hung after further deliberations, a mistrial will be declared.

Upon a mistrial, the trial on the hung charges is effectively rendered null, and the prosecution has to make the decision of whether to proceed with a second trial from square one with a brand new jury at a later date.

But if they think they still won't be able to secure a conviction on the next go-round, it may result in either a generous plea offer to lesser charges, or potentially dropping the charges altogether.

I got a notification from Andrew Branca if anyone is interested.

Dafna Yoran, the prosecutor in this case, tried an earlier case in which an 87 year old man was at an ATM and a thug snuck up from behind and punched him in the back of the head. He died.

Dafna, a radical lesbian on the Far Left, secured a light sentence for the lowlife POS because she said that she "felt sorry" for someone who had to rob in order to survive. I swear I am not making that up.

UPDATE: Daniel Penny’s defense has OPPOSED the dismissal of this charge, as they’re worried about a “compromise verdict” on the second charge.

They’re accusing DA Bragg of coercing the jury to shift focus to the other charge, which fundamentally alters the case.

Defense wants a mistrial


https://x.com/nicksortor/status/1865134084969689569

Just ridiculous.

Reading Neely's father is looking to file a civil suit against Penny....pure money grab where the lawyers will get over half of anything.
Are there cases of high-profile civil suits that go in favor of the defense?

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:
Reading Neely's father is looking to file a civil suit against Penny....pure money grab where the lawyers will get over half of anything.
Are there cases of high-profile civil suits that go in favor of the defense?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The ghetto lottery

I know it’s “legal” and happens all the time, but it really pisses me off that a prosecutor can take one act and charge/try the case under multiple laws for the same act.

Manslaughter vs. Negligent homicide. Pick ONE, take your shot and present your case. As far as I am concerned these “fall back positions” are essentially double or triple jeopardy all at once. Being charged multiple things, for the same act hoping one will stick.


I get if I steal a car and then run someone over there are multiple crimes. Penny did ONE act, pick ONE charge that you feel fits. one bite of the apple. </rant>

None of this, “well if you won’t convict of this, maybe you will convict of this, or this, or this…” crap

quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:
I know it’s “legal” and happens all the time, but it really pisses me off that a prosecutor can take one act and charge/try the case under multiple laws for the same act.

Manslaughter vs. Negligent homicide. Pick ONE, take your shot and present your case. As far as I am concerned these “fall back positions” are essentially double or triple jeopardy all at once. Being charged multiple things, for the same act hoping one will stick.


I get if I steal a car and then run someone over there are multiple crimes. Penny did ONE act, pick ONE charge that you feel fits. one bite of the apple. </rant>

None of this, “well if you won’t convict of this, maybe you will convict of this, or this, or this…” crap

If the secondary charge is a lesser included offense of the first one, that's one thing but prosecutor or any plaintiff for the matter, can have different theories of recovery.

It would be a waste of judicial resources and litigation costs to try one theory and lose, then try a second theory and so on. One proceeding for all the possible theories.

In this case, the prosecutor knows they aren't getting a reckless manslaughter conviction otherwise the jury would have come back long before today.

This prosecutor is desperate for some kind of win and that's why they dropped the reckless manslaughter and are going with the second charge of negligent manslaughter.

I believe the judge's original instructions were to decide count one first and then if they don't agree to convict, they can move to the negligent manslaughter charge.

Dropping the reckless charge is a win for the prosecution because the jury might have felt bad about locking up Penny for a long time and under the guise of "you can't just kill people and get away with it," they might be ok with only a little time.

If they find him guilty of negligent homicide, that's an automatic win in the dad's civil case against Penny. Damages would be speculative and hard to decide, IMO.

The easiest way to stop those multiple charges is to file to sanction the prosecutor if the defendant prevails on the more serious charge. Or get a judge who won’t play games.

I agree. Pick one and take your best shot. Then the defendant get to take his best shot.

A small diversion for a moment.

Twitter I SAID TWITTER has become a primary news source, if not the primary news source for many people. As I've pointed out Twitter's network of citizen journalists have decentralized the reporting of news, though, at this time, still rely on primary sources for the feed.

Be that as it may, those who are functioning as reporters have an obligation to be as accurate in their reportage as they possibly can, but, as always, the almighty dollar gets in the way.

In an effort to attract traffic to their channel, some of the people on Twitter are distorting the facts of the Penny trial.

I have seen quite a few channels saying "WE WIN!". This is because the most severe of the charges has been dropped, but the fact is that the case is not over and Daniel Penny might still end up spending years in prison, and the people on Twitter pulling this shit know this.

If Twitter were mine, I'd hire an army of moderators aided by AI to seek out such behavior. Those members would be contacted and told "You know what you're doing and you know why you're doing it and you know what you're doing is immoral and unethical and SO DO WE, and the next time you pull this shit, you will be permanently banned from Twitter, with no further warning and no appeal."

That is all

I think that's the idea behind community notes.
Still seems to be a work in progress, but giving the audience a voice in fact checking and rating those that do may lead to a self-correcting method.

quote:

Originally posted by 220-9er:
I think that's the idea behind community notes.

"A lie gets halfway around the world while the truth is still putting its shoes on."

That is Community Notes. These unethical assholes have gathered up 30,000 clicks before CN shows up, IF it shows up at all. This behavior I'm describing is so common, only a small fraction of a percent of it is ever addressed. Furthermore, CN does nothing but try to correct the record. It does not take action against unethical members. Suspend their account for a week and warn them 'Never again' and then there would be some changes of behavior.

After years of suppression of the truth on Twitter, we suddenly have a great deal of freedom to speak, and this is what a non-insignificant portion of the users choose to do with this opportunity: self enrichment and nothing but. Disgusting.