Daniel Penny’s defense fund over $1M after manslaughter charge in Jordan Neely subway death

I’m pretty sure my friend was only showing off and was only trying to make me woozy. I tapped out in what had to be only 10 seconds. Was stupid as there was alcohol involved. this poor guy posed zero threat very early on.

 

You seem to keep forgetting Neely was a convicted felon one who had been convicted of violent assault here let me throw you a question... were you there? I wasn't nor were any people on this board, but you want to defend him? A man who most recently bashed a 69 year old woman's face in? What if Penny knew Neely's porpencity for violence? What if he had witnessed it before?? Until all the facts come out no one knows

 

I don’t understand any of it, because it’s not true.

 

Heavy as always bringing the 5 fast facts

I loved helping, communicating and connecting to different people from all over the world. After the military, I enrolled in college but felt completely unfulfilled. I decided to drop out of school and backpack throughout Central America. This decision was inspired by the novel Don Quixote. Don Quixote so inspired by adventure, he leaves his ‘normal’ life to pursue his dreams despite being called a madman. During the travels I rediscovered my love for interacting and connecting with people. I believe that bartending in Manhattan, the place I’ve always referred to as the center of the world , would be an extremely fulfilling position. Being able to serve and connect with the most interesting and eccentric the world has to offer, is what I believe I am meant to do.

Daniel Penny: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

 

If events happened as you describe above, then you’re correct. You are asserting, though, some statements of fact that I have not been able to corroborate through the limited selection of video I have seen (and, again, if anyone has the whole video, unedited, please post it). If, as I suspect presently (totally ready to have my mind changed), that the accused was restraining him with the hold but only applying the choke intermittently as the deceased actively resisted, then he may indeed have been acting in good faith, waiting on the authorities to relieve him. If the second scenario is the case, then it does matter why the accused chose to intervene when and how he did, and that has to be explored. That includes, in my opinion, just how dangerous a reasonable person would think the deceased was under those circumstances. Also, under the second scenario, I think the accuser’s health and disposition matter a great deal and that, too, would have to be explored. But if the first scenario proves to be true, the one you describe, then it is at least manslaughter, and the accused’s rationale for intervention as well as the deceased’s condition at the time matter a great deal less. Because you’re right, if he did indeed apply the choke for three minutes continuously, regardless of whether or not the deceased had gone limp, then that’s lethal force without question. And even if the deceased had previously tried to use lethal force (not saying he did), then he was already rendered harmless by the restraint he was in and there was no justification in killing him.

 

Glad you’re back

 

No. But is that the question? Who is specifically saying the situation required deadly force? No one trying to give Penny the benefit of the doubt (for the moment) seems to think that Penny intended to kill him. If evidence emerges that was his intent, then it’s a fair question.

 

I think the question is not even one of intent, given that the charge is manslaughter. I think the question is whether one could reasonably anticipate killing the person if you did what he did.

 

You write some pretty big free passes. Guy makes a ruckus in the subway, dies at the hand of a passenger--too bad, he shouldn't have been disturbing the peace. Guy that actually killed him through negligence, if nothing else--nothing, not even a wrist slap.

 

I'm saying that a Marine should have an entire repertoire of methods of submission, restraint, and killing, and Penny didn't have to choose a method known to have fatal consequences. He botched his chokehold. Someone died. Intentional or not, there should be legal repercussions.

 

I’ve had the exact same MCMAP training as the accused, and I’m confident that if I could achieve the same dominant position he did I could restrain a man for a lengthy amount of time without killing him or seriously harming him. I don’t find it unreasonable that he would have the same confidence. That said, I have several questions about how often, how hard, and how long he would apply the choke and why; about why he decided to intervene in the first place; and of course about the deceased’s health at the time of the incident. The accused was used to performing these maneuvers with healthy young men, and any confidence he had in not causing harm may have been based on that.

 

Thanks, ursidman! Did anyone start a "where did Dyno go" thread?

 

Ack! I’m being insulted! Mods DO something!!LOL

Bless your heart though…

 

Criming is OK if you’re a GOP”r. As long as it’s your team doing it. I wouldn’t be shocked to learn he’s crimed too.

 

The “choke hold” (blood supply to brain) is the proverbial double edge sword. It is one of the most effective means of subduing someone without injury, ie, no strikes, breaks etc, but also fraught with danger.
We can see the guy restrained, but we don’t know how much pressure is being applied at any one time.

 

I can’t answer that yet, but I, too, want to know why he didn’t go for an arm bar or wrist lock. Absent clarifying information from the accused or witnesses, here is my thin-slice assessment: like anyone in a fight, he took the first opportunity presented. If the opponent offers his throat, you take the throat. You don’t wait for the elbow. Winning as fast as possible is part of the training. Important to remember that MCMAP is combat training. Yes, the training does include warrior ethos, protect the weak, etc. But the essence of it all is win immediately, not for you, but for the line. Your guess is as good as mine if I’m right. We will see.

 

That might be very prudent when dealing with an enemy combatant, but it doesn't translate well into civilian law. Don't forget, two other people were helping to restrain Neely while Penny was applying his hold.

 

To establish precedent in order to support the claim that the decedent's behavior was threatening

 

Ya beat me to it