NYC Penny Jury locked and DA has judge tell them to consider a different charge question

[puma guy]

I'm not a lawyer, thus not well versed on legal proceedings in Texas, much less NYC. The news reports that the judge dismissed the manslaughter charge against Penny so the jurors can consider a lessor charge. I would have their would be options outlined in the instructions to be able to consider, I.E. the highest level of Manslaughter, the maybe negligent manslaughter/homicdie and so on. If the options were laid out already for deliberation why and how can the DA and judge make the jurors go back since they already had different options in the first place. If there weren't options it doesn't make sense to me that being charged with Manslaughter and being tried with no decision would then give prosecutors a chance to come up with a different charge that wasn't argued in the trial. and having the trial. Any lawyers out there care to help me understand?

[wheelgun1958]

What I've gleaned is he had two charges. Manslaughter and negligent homicide. The jury was instructed they could not consider the secondary until they reached a conclusion on the primary. Since they could not reach said conclusion on manslaughter (the primary), they were instructed to ignore the primary (charge being dropped) and concentrate on the secondary.

[philip964]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... neely.html

Defense attorney blasts judge for unorthodox ruling.

[srothstein]

OK, to make it a little easier to understand, the difference (in Texas law and I assume in NY) between manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide is solely the mental state. If the person did the act recklessly, then it is manslaughter. If he only did the act negligently, it is criminally negligent homicide. Recklessly means he was aware of the risk of death and ignored that risk. Negligently means there was a risk he should have been aware of and he acted anyway.

In legal terms, criminally negligent homicide is a lesser included offense to manslaughter. So, a person cannot be convicted of both offenses because of the different mental states. The jury instructions posted on the web that I saw say to consider manslaughter. If he is convicted, ignore the negligent homicide charge. If he is not convicted because of a lack of evidence countering the justification (in other words you found him justified), do not consider the negligent homicide because the justification applies equally to both charges. If he was not convicted for any other reason (mostly lack of proof of the awareness of the risk), then you can consider the negligence.

The jury hung on the first charge. They could not go further because the situation did not have a valid resolution. The DA dropped the first charge in the hope that the jury would come to a decision on the negligence as a compromise solution. The judge, in my opinion, should have either not dropped the first charge and declared a mistrial so the whole case could be reheard, or should have dropped both charges. I think the judge could only make that decision if he could find out what factor was splitting the jury. If they were hung because some felt it was justified, he should have declared a mistrial at that point or dismissed both charges.

I doubt he could have found out what the factor was without being accused of jury tampering though. This is why I think the correct answer was to declare a mistrial because of the hung jury and then let the DA decide to drop the charges or take it to another trial.

All of this is based on the fact that he was charged at all and the charges need to be resolved. I also think the DA should be recalled over the charging at all, and the ADAs that prosecuted should be fired. But I have no say in any of that.

[powerboatr]

OK, to make it a little easier to understand, the difference (in Texas law and I assume in NY) between manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide is solely the mental state. If the person did the act recklessly, then it is manslaughter. If he only did the act negligently, it is criminally negligent homicide. Recklessly means he was aware of the risk of death and ignored that risk. Negligently means there was a risk he should have been aware of and he acted anyway.

In legal terms, criminally negligent homicide is a lesser included offense to manslaughter. So, a person cannot be convicted of both offenses because of the different mental states. The jury instructions posted on the web that I saw say to consider manslaughter. If he is convicted, ignore the negligent homicide charge. If he is not convicted because of a lack of evidence countering the justification (in other words you found him justified), do not consider the negligent homicide because the justification applies equally to both charges. If he was not convicted for any other reason (mostly lack of proof of the awareness of the risk), then you can consider the negligence.

The jury hung on the first charge. They could not go further because the situation did not have a valid resolution. The DA dropped the first charge in the hope that the jury would come to a decision on the negligence as a compromise solution. The judge, in my opinion, should have either not dropped the first charge and declared a mistrial so the whole case could be reheard, or should have dropped both charges. I think the judge could only make that decision if he could find out what factor was splitting the jury. If they were hung because some felt it was justified, he should have declared a mistrial at that point or dismissed both charges.

I doubt he could have found out what the factor was without being accused of jury tampering though. This is why I think the correct answer was to declare a mistrial because of the hung jury and then let the DA decide to drop the charges or take it to another trial.

All of this is based on the fact that he was charged at all and the charges need to be resolved. I also think the DA should be recalled over the charging at all, and the ADAs that prosecuted should be fired. But I have no say in any of that.

your synopsis, makes much more sense than what we are told on the news
agree if the MAJOR crime was causing the jury to be deadlocked or hung or what ever, the judge should have dropped the whole thing
i find it horrible the other 2 people that helped subdue the now deceased person, got deals to testify against penny and they receive nothing, when they are accessories in my eyes

so much imo for appeal or pardon etc...the DA is a racist, by his own actions and words. he hates everyone that is not same color or mindset as him.
he refuses to prosecute other people that are commit crimes, yet goes after this guy ten days later,

[puma guy]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... neely.html

Defense attorney blasts judge for unorthodox ruling.

I read that the jury instructions were to consider both charges and decide which applies, one or the other or I assume acquittal/not guilty. This jury couldn't decide on any of the choices. So my question remains how can the judge demand they go back into deliberation when they already considered all the choices? The matter of recklessness or negligence seems moot to me.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... neely.html

‘A hung jury means the prosecution failed to meet its burden of proof on the top count. And here, the jury was specifically instructed it was only permitted to find Penny guilty of one or the other, if at all. [ /quote]

[mrscarlson1]

This is an absolute injustice.

[philip964]

This is an absolute injustice.

Will New Yorkers be quick to defend the vulnerable on the Subways after this? Or will we read “ and the bystanders did nothing to help the elderly woman” ?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/daniel ... p-lawmaker

Penny tapped for Congressional Gold Medal.

[RoyGBiv]

This is lawfare.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/heres-wh ... Position=4

In some cases — and in the most likely case — the second charge of criminally negligent homicide can only even be considered if the jury finds a guilty verdict for the second-degree manslaughter charge. Here are the jury instructions (emphasis added):

If you find the defendant not guilty of count 1, manslaughter in the second degree, for the reason that the People have failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not justified, then, you must not consider count 2, criminally negligent homicide, and you must also find the defendant not guilty of that count.

[philip964]

There may be hope for NYC.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/09/us/danie ... index.html

https://www.yahoo.com/news/daniel-penny ... 01068.html

Not guilty.

[wheelgun1958]

If his family was that concerned for him, why was he homeless?