Twitchy Presents: Bill Clinton’s 'Rules for Politics' - The X Extended Edition
Absolutely VILE Lefties Continue to Smear Pete Hegseth As a White Supremacist Because...
SHE FOUGHT: Listen to the Absolutely Heartbreaking Opening Statements in the Laken Riley...
The Party's OVER! Politico Says Lobbyists 'Used to Getting Their Way' Fear RFK...
We Feel SO MUCH Safer Knowing the FBI Is Investigating Offensive Text Messages...
Republicans Seek Removal of Security Clearances for Intel Lapdogs Who Lied About Hunter...
Democrats: So Left-Wing They Fly in Circles
Donald Trump Names Karoline Leavitt White House Press Secretary
SAD COMMIE NOISES: Chicago City Council UNANIMOUSLY Rejects Mayor Brandon Johnson's $300M...
She's SUPER SERIOUS, Y'all! AOC Warns RFK Jr. Running HHS Will Take Us...
I'd Like to Teach the World to CRINGE! New AI Coca-Cola Ad Has...
CRUEL Britannia! Care Worker Jailed NINE MONTHS for 'Crime' of Filming Riot Aftermath
Trump Just Crossed an Election Threshold That's a 'First Ever for a Republican...
X Marks the Ad Spot! Big Win for Elon Musk and Free Speech...
'Move the F**K On': Justine Bateman Goes OFF on Scolds Lecturing Her About...

A witness comes forward to support Daniel Penny’s defense

As you probably know, Daniel Penny is the retired Marine who allegedly killed Jordan Neely on the New York City subway. We have speculated from the beginning that Penny might claim self-defense or defense of others, and today some evidence came to light supporting such a defense:

Advertisement

In the New York Post article linked to in the Tweet we learn that a woman came forward anonymously to speak up for Mr. Penny (although she is apparently not anonymous to the police):

A straphanger who was on the subway when former Marine Daniel Penny placed Jordan Neely in a fatal chokehold said Thursday she’s ‘praying’ for Penny after it was revealed the 24-year-old would face charges tied to the high-profile case.

‘I hope he has a great lawyer, and I’m praying for him,’ the 66-year-old woman, who did not want to be identified, told The Post Thursday night. ‘And I pray that he gets treated fairly, I really do. Because after all of this ensued, I went back and made sure that I said ‘Thank you’ to him.’ …

The subway rider said Neely, who had a history of mental illness, was threatening passengers after he hopped on an F train in Manhattan.

‘He said, ‘I don’t care. I’ll take a bullet, I’ll go to jail’ because he would kill people on the train,’ the woman said of Neely. ‘He said, ‘I would kill a motherf—er. I don’t care. I’ll take a bullet. I’ll go to jail.’’

The retiree said Penny did not initially engage with Neely during the wild rant until things got out of hand and he felt the urge to step in.

‘This gentleman, Mr. Penny, did not stand up,’ the rider said. ‘Did not engage with the gentleman. He said not a word. It was all Mr. Neely that was … threatening the passengers. If he did not get what he wants.’

Advertisement

Previously, we said this on self-defense or defense of others:

Any competent lawyer recognizes there are several avenues of defense. First, was any force justified (as a matter of law)? Second, was deadly force justified? Certainly, if no force was justified then the video definitely shows a crime, but that’s the rub, isn’t it?

However, suppose force is justified, but not deadly force? First, his lawyer could argue that while the force he used caused death, it wasn’t technically ‘deadly force’ as defined by the law. Second, his lawyer could argue that even if it is deadly force, his client didn’t intend to use deadly force. Of course, then we might talk about whether his conduct is reckless, or criminal negligence.

However, we haven’t talked about the most crucial question, yet: What is the burden of proof? The short version is that like in the Zimmerman and Rittenhouse cases, it will be the government’s burden to prove it was not self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

Does this witness create a reasonable doubt? Assuming she ends up on the stand, not quite yet, but it is getting there. Recall what she said: ‘[Neely said] ‘I don’t care. I’ll take a bullet, I’ll go to jail’ because he would kill people on the train[.] He said, ‘I would kill a motherf—er. I don’t care. I’ll take a bullet. I’ll go to jail.’’

Then, later on, she says, ‘It was all Mr. Neely that was … threatening the passengers. If he did not get what he wants.’

The problem with this account is that it is clear that there are things she is leaving out—maybe even things Neely said. When hearsay comes in—and it would on this topic—the courts insist that you quote the person’s words as much as possible, and you can’t just give your summary or characterization of what they said. So, if she got on the stand, she would have to fill in some of that. And the threat has to be very immediate—you have to believe he is literally about to engage in the unlawful force—if it is straight defense of self or others.

Advertisement

However, there was another possibility we had been overlooking until now. She says Mr. Neely was ‘threatening the passengers. If he did not get what he wants.’ While we would like to hear Neely’s actual words, that sounds a bit like a robbery. One classic example of robbery under New York law is when a criminal says to a person ‘your money or your life’ to coerce that person into giving over their valuables. That might be what she is describing here, if she is pressed on details.

That is important because under New York law, one can also use deadly force if one reasonably believes the other person is committing or attempting to commit a robbery (among other crimes). If there is a reasonable doubt as to whether or not Mr. Penny had such a reasonable belief, the law says he must be acquitted.

(By the way, we are assuming you, dear reader, are smart enough to know this isn’t legal advice. But we will give you this life advice: Take some time to learn your local laws when it comes to self-defense.)

In any case, we are still withholding judgement, but it is tantalizing evidence supporting the claim that Mr. Penny acted lawfully.

But some people have already made up their minds:

Advertisement

Others had more measured reactions:

Advertisement

We will also note that the last time we discussed the Penny/Neely issue, we wrote: ‘Indeed, there might be video we haven’t seen yet. Not everyone immediately runs to the press or to social media with this kind of thing.’

Well, it turns out that according to the woman quoted by the New York Post, our speculation has aged very well:

The woman said she and another rider gave their account of the incident to authorities at the precinct because Penny asked them to. Other subway riders took videos of the encounter between Penny and Neely, she said.

‘So I believe that those videos are going to come forward, maybe people will do it anonymously,’ she said.

We would hope everyone with footage before, during or after the confrontation between Penny and Neely comes forward and provides it to the police and Mr. Penny’s attorneys. Let the truth come out and the chips fall where they may.

Still, we will re-post the link to Mr. Penny’s legal defense fund:

We are not sure Mr. Penny is innocent or guilty (so we presume innocence, naturally), but we have no doubt Mr. Penny deserves a robust defense.

Advertisement

***

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy’s conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement