Daniel Penny Verdict Watch: Jury Still Asking Questions

As deliberations continued in the trial of Daniel Penny, the jury on Thursday continued to ask questions about the case.

Penny is charged with the killing of Jordan Neely, who was allegedly threatening to kill passengers on a New York City subway train last year. On Thursday, jurors continued to hear a read-back of the cross-examination of New York medical examiner Dr. Cynthia Harris, who testified that she made the determination Neely died due to asphyxiation based on video alone – before the toxicology report came back.

According to journalist Matthew Lee, jurors on Thursday also requested more footage of the incident captured by passengers.

Update of 11:45 am – Daniel Penny, lawyers and team have come in. Court security officers milling around; admonitions to be quiet in the courtroom.
Judge Wiley comes in.
Judge: We have a note, the jurors want the Vasquez and Rosario videos

— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) December 5, 2024

In the afternoon, the jury sent another note to Judge Maxwell Wiley, asking him to reread the definition of recklessness and negligence – words associated with Penny’s lesser charge of criminally negligent homicide, Lee reported.

Update of 12:12 pm – Daniel Penny is here and seated.
Judge Wiley: We just got a note, We request that Judge Wiley read the definition of recklessness and negligence. And can we have them in writing.
Do the parties give consent?

— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) December 5, 2024

The jury was released for the day without rendering a verdict and continued deliberations on Friday.

Penny is also charged with second-degree manslaughter. Jurors can find him guilty of one of the charges or acquit him of all charges. If convicted of manslaughter, he faces up to 15 years in prison. If convicted of the lesser charge, he faces up to four years.

Since they began deliberating Tuesday afternoon, jurors have asked to review key pieces of evidence and specific sections of the jury instructions.

On Wednesday, jurors asked to review body cam footage from police taken as they arrived at the scene after Penny placed Neely in a chokehold. Penny said he took action because Neely was threatening passengers on the subway. They also asked to review the original video of the incident taken by another passenger, and the footage from Penny’s interrogation with police, where they didn’t tell him Neely had died.

Jurors had also asked to be reread the portion of Dr. Harris’ testimony where she said she would not change her opinion on Neely’s cause of death even if the toxicology report showed drugs in his system.

Defense attorneys this week reported the prosecution to Judge Wiley, saying they were acting improperly and providing misleading information to the jury through the media, The Daily Wire reported. Defense attorneys accused Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office of asking media outlets to report in their coverage that there is no mandatory minimum sentence for Penny if he is convicted of second-degree manslaughter.

CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE

“The District Attorney’s efforts to have the jury speculate as to a potential sentence are both improper and misleading,” Penny attorneys Steven Raiser and Thomas Kenniff said on Fox News. “While it is technically true that these charges do not carry a mandatory minimum, that is the case with most felonies in New York. It is equally true that the maximum sentence is 15 years in state prison.”

“Moreover, the tenacity with which the District Attorney has sought to obtain a conviction against Mr. Penny strongly suggests that they will advocate for a substantial sentence in the event of a guilty verdict,” the attorneys added.

A defense attorney not connected to the case told Fox that the prosecutor’s office could be using this as a ploy to encourage the jury to find Penny guilty while thinking he might not serve much prison time.

“Defense lawyers are barred from mentioning potential sentences at trial — the reasoning being that it would be an attempt to seek sympathy from jurors who then may reach a verdict based on something other than the facts, In other words, ‘He may be guilty, but 10 years is too much time,’” Danielle Iredale told the outlet. “Here, there is a hypocrisy to the DA’s messaging. In attempting to publish the fact that there is no statutory mandatory minimum sentence, they are essentially saying, ‘It’s OK to convict, he may not go to the jail!’”