Jurors deliberating the fate of Marine veteran Daniel Penny, 26, in the manslaughter trial for the death of Jordan Neely requested a review of three crucial pieces of evidence. Penny is accused of negligently causing the death of Neely, a 30-year-old homeless man struggling with schizophrenia, who was reportedly under the influence of drugs and making threats on a subway train. Neely, who had an outstanding warrant, allegedly declared that someone would "die today" and expressed indifference towards life imprisonment. Penny restrained Neely with a chokehold to quell the disturbance. Neely’s history included a prior assault charge and, at the time of the incident, he was reportedly under the influence of K2, a synthetic marijuana. The jury's request for a review of specific evidence highlights the complexities of the case. Here’s a closer look at what they’re re-examining:
1. Daniel Penny's NYPD Interrogation:
After the incident, Penny waived his Miranda rights and spoke with NYPD detectives for approximately 25 minutes. Crucially, he was not informed of Neely's death at the time of this interview. This recording offers valuable insight into Penny’s immediate reaction and understanding of the events. Penny described Neely as acting erratically and threatening passengers, stating Neely claimed he was going to kill everyone and didn't care about going to prison. This interrogation is the sole direct account from Penny presented to the jury, as he chose not to testify.
2. The Bystander Video:
This video, recorded by journalist Juan Alberto Vazquez, captures the events unfolding inside the subway car. It depicts Penny restraining Neely on the floor, assisted by another individual, Eric Gonzales, who held Neely’s arms. The video has been central to the prosecution's case and has been repeatedly shown to the jury during expert testimony. It provides a visual record of the physical altercation, allowing jurors to assess the nature and duration of the restraint.
3. NYPD Bodycam Footage:
Footage from multiple police body cameras, including the first officers on the scene, provides another perspective on the immediate aftermath. The footage captures Penny explaining his actions to the officers, reiterating his perception of Neely as a threat. It also documents the officers' attempts to revive Neely, noting his pulse but lack of breathing. This footage offers a glimpse into the scene as encountered by law enforcement and the initial steps taken to provide medical assistance.
In addition to the evidence, the jury also requested clarification on the legal concept of “justification” regarding the use of force and a review of specific testimony from the forensic pathologist. The jury's careful consideration of these elements underscores the gravity of the decision they face.
