(DailyAnswer.org) – The case of Daniel Penny, a Marine veteran charged in the 2023 death of Jordan Neely on a New York City subway train, continues to spark intense debate. As jurors remain deadlocked, former U.S. assistant attorney Andy McCarthy accuses Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg of manipulating the legal process to secure a conviction.
McCarthy claims Bragg added an unnecessary “reckless homicide” charge to give jurors an alternative if they couldn’t agree on the more serious manslaughter charge. This tactic increases the odds of conviction by offering the jury something to compromise on, McCarthy explained in an article for National Review.
The manslaughter charge hinges on proving Penny acted recklessly when he subdued Neely, a mentally ill homeless man, during a violent incident on May 1, 2023. Neely, reportedly high on drugs, entered a subway car shouting threats and alarming passengers. Penny placed him in a chokehold, an act McCarthy argues was meant to protect others, not harm Neely.
The trial took a dramatic turn when Judge Maxwell Wiley dismissed the manslaughter charge after jurors reported being deadlocked multiple times. This move allows them to deliberate solely on the lesser charge of criminally negligent homicide, which carries a maximum sentence of four years.
McCarthy criticized this shift as a “strong-arm” tactic, designed to pressure jurors into reaching a decision. “This isn’t a recklessness case,” McCarthy insisted. “The evidence shows Penny acted responsibly — even positioning Neely to help him breathe and cooperating fully with police after the incident.”
The case has drawn sharp reactions. Jeremy Carl of the Claremont Institute called the prosecution “a disgrace,” comparing it to other high-profile self-defense cases. Former TV host Meghan McCain warned of the broader implications. “Demonizing a Marine who protected others from a dangerous man yelling ‘someone is going to die today’ is radicalizing people,” she wrote.
Critics argue the charges against Penny reflect political motives rather than justice. Supporters maintain he acted heroically under extreme circumstances.
With the jury still deliberating, the trial remains a flashpoint in the ongoing debate over self-defense and public safety in America.
Copyright 2024, DailyAnswer.org
