Daniel Penny: Subway Hero? Or Racist Murderer?

↑ ora_43

Mon, Dec 09 2024, 8:34 am

It's kind of amazing that NYC managed to have two cases of 20-something young men who killed an 30-something drugged-up, aggressive man on the subway, and both cases involve a man named 'Jordan.' Either that's quite a coincidence, or there are just so many subway stabbings that we were bound to get this level of similarity eventually.

(Note to self: when visiting NYC, do not ride the subway.)

But it's not really reasonable to say that the only reason they're being treated differently is race. There are other important differences
- Jordan Williams (aka Jordan #2) was physically attacked
- Jordan #2 killed the guy more quickly (makes it a clearer case of pure self-defense)
- Different district attorney's office making the call (maybe Jordan #2 would also be on trial if he were in Manhattan)

Assuming that the only reason Daniel Penny is on trial is because he's white is as silly as assuming that the only reason he killed a violent drug addict was because the guy was black.

I get that some of you are very sensitive about the term "woke Right" but come on, when certain 'right-wing' people insist on seeing everything through the lens of race, with their side as the perpetual victim in the racism hierarchy, what other term fits?

(and again, I do not think Penny should be convicted. "His case is less clear-cut" is not "he's guilty as sin, lock him up")

↑ Hello99 ↓

Mon, Dec 09 2024, 9:06 am

ora_43 wrote:

I am a conservative but far from the woke right you are talking about. In this case the right isn't the one who made it about race. Do you think it is ever appropriate for a prosecuter to refer to one of the parties by their race (this black man, this white woman) Penny never mentioned anything about Neeleys race yet within 5 minutes the story blew up as white person kills black man. You can't help but wonder if his own race (white) had anything to do ith the fact that he was charged.

↑ miami85 ↓

Mon, Dec 09 2024, 9:12 am

fleetwood wrote:

She was assigned to the case.

How in earth is this a chillul H??

Because she is prosecuting him and pushing the fact that he is guilty refusing to drop the charges that never should have been brought.. I can't recall exactly but there was something in her prosecution that was making the case that Penny knew he should've stopped/racial something or other. She has a history of being a social justice advocate. She got a reduced sentence for a black man. She was quoted saying "I had a murder case where the defendant did not intentionally kill the victim,' Yoran boasted during an online seminar.

'When I got the time I took the time to learn about he defendant.... I really felt incredibly sorry for him that he had gotten to that point in his life where he felt there was no choice but to commit this robbery.'

Whereas here the "killer" was a white man, black victim and was never intended to be killed. One of the legal analysts said that when Penny voluntarily went to the police the way he described Penny was as if he was still alive--he wasn't aware that he was dead. How could "the chokehold" cause the death if Penny had let go thinking that he was still alive? Just like George Floyd there were other reasons why these men died from their own mistakes rather than the action placed upon them. It's tragic, but law enforcement and good Samaritans need protection from prosecution for trying to help others.

Jews already have a reputation of "running the world" and this will not look good if it causes a good Samaritan to go to jail for something that Alan Dershowitz and Jonathan Turley said should never have been brought.

↑ miami85 ↓

Mon, Dec 09 2024, 9:26 am

fmt4 wrote:

But let’s say there’s another situation where it wasn’t actually a life or death situation? But someone decides it is? And kills someone who didn’t need to be killed? The point is that we can’t trust random people to know when the situation calls for that kind of reaction and when it doesn’t. We can’t have a lawless country where any one can decide that the situation calls for them taking the law into their own hands and killing someone they hav decided is a threat. I’m not saying this happened with Penny. I’m saying that it could happen if that kind of justice becomes the norm.

In Penny's case the video shows 2 others involved in trying to subdue Neely, 2 random strangers who all happen to be on the train trying to get Neely to calm down. This wasn't just a 1:1 in a back alley of someone beating the daylights out of a single mugger. This was 3 adults taking on 1 deranged man who was making threatening comments/actions towards others. There is no reason to suspect that Penny was trying to do something to end up in death.

In these types of self-defense cases, you can bring in Kyle Rittenhouse's case as well. I would love to hear what the "Reasonable response" would've been. When someone is threatening you, what ARE you supposed to do? In Rittenhouse's case the prosecution was trying to suggest that Kyle was supposed to do something else as the guy lunged forward trying to grab his gun, that's when Kyle shot him.

In Penny's case "Several subway riders testified they were terrified Neely was going to attack and that they were relieved when Penny put him in a chokehold and kept him there." What would've been the "correct response"--LET Neely attack someone before you restrain him? I believe the point of the chokehold in this case would be to subdue him into unconsciousness until authorities could arrive. But just like in George Floyd's case it seems like the drugs were having an impact and making the victims' body tense up requiring more pressure which may have lead to the death.

↑ shoshanim999 ↓

Mon, Dec 09 2024, 10:27 am

ora_43 wrote:

I wouldn't say it's the only reason he's on trial but to deny that Bragg's office has played identity politics and hasn't been open about sympathizing with blacks whether they are the perpetrator or the victim is to deny the obvious. Bragg has said he wouldn't prosecute certain thefts in order to establish a "racial equity balance". I mean, he's not even hiding his bias and prejudice.

In 2022 Bragg initially brought murder charges against 61 year old bodega worker Jose Alba who was working as a cashier when a black man jumped the counter and assaulted him. After extended public outrage, Bragg ultimately dropped the charges. Alba is now suing Bragg claiming that the reason the charges were brought in the first place was because of Bragg's admitted pursuit of racial equity in the justice system.

In 2019 Bragg's officer persecuted a case against a 35 year old black man who murdered an 87 year old man at an ATM machine. Once again Bragg's office agreed to a lighter sentencing explaining they it was an opportunity for a transformative outcome.

Bragg himself doesn't deny that he prosecutes and applies sentencing based on race. So yes, many of us are stating the obvious and repeating what Bragg openly admits to. He is a woke DA that uses race to determine how to prosecute cases.

↑ Cheiny ↓

Mon, Dec 09 2024, 12:00 pm

exaustedmom wrote:

Its crazy that in the eyes of thr left George Floyd is a hero and Daniel Penny a villian.

Up is down and down is up.

Neely’s father just spoke, following the verdict. He said this is “racial injustice,” and “we can’t let this stand!” BLM has threatened to burn down the city. Is this not incitement?

Reportedly, when the verdict came down and one of Penny’s attorneys clapped, Neely’s father yelled out, “Are you trying to get f****** killed?!” Real stellar citizens of society, these Neely’s…

The biggest outrage is the father claiming he’s “hurting” because of his son being killed. Really? Why did he suddenly come out of the woodwork only when he saw an opportunity to sue Penny and enrich himself, after ignoring his son for his entire life, allowing him to be homeless, etc.? Nauseating.

Last edited by Cheiny on Mon, Dec 09 2024, 12:21 pm; edited 1 time in total

↑ Cheiny ↓

Mon, Dec 09 2024, 12:12 pm

Hello99 wrote:

I think that Penny did the right thing. According to court testimony neeley had a lot of drugs in his system and the NYPD didn't administer mouth to mouth. Even if you believe that he did the wrong thing and neeley wouldn't have followed through with his threats, why did this case become a race issue? What did Penny do or say that made it about neeleys race? The prosecuter referred to Penny as the "white guy". Is there more information that I am missing?

No, you’re not missing anything. Racists make everything about race, even when it clearly has no relevance, such as in this case. People of different races all helped to restrain the crazed Neely, and after the incident, eyewitnesses who were black expressed their appreciation for the courage of Penny who clearly prevented what could’ve been a huge tragedy and a danger to numerous people on that subway.

But the racists are ignoring all those facts. Neely’s father, BLM members and others are already calling it racism, protesting, and making threats. But no one will touch them, because calling out their racism gets you labeled the racist.

The race baiters are the true racists while they accuse everyone else of being the racists…otherwise known as projection.

Last edited by Cheiny on Mon, Dec 09 2024, 12:22 pm; edited 1 time in total

↑ Cheiny ↓

Mon, Dec 09 2024, 12:15 pm

zohar wrote:

This is a classic case of כל המרחם על אכזרים סופו מתאכזר לרחמנים.

It's amazing that this can always predict a leftist's reaction to a situation. (Poor Palestinians leads to Jewish victims have it coming, for example)

In this case we have a very similar case that never made it to trial in NYC. A man, on the subway, was acting officially erratically, on drugs, threatening people, including a woman who's boyfriend then stabbed him to death. This case is even "worse" as the he for sure was the one who killed him, and he used obvious deadly force. Whereas with Neely, he may have died from drug overdose and even if not, it definitely wasn't intentional. Although, I do remember when this happened, it was a local story that was minimally reported on. This became a national story immediately. What is the difference in these two cases? One thing. In the stabbing case, both parties were black and it can't be made into a race story.

Here's a link to the above story:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/w.....amp=1

There is a two tiered justice system in NY

Exactly right, as I’ve said. But according to bleeding heart woke liberals, you must be “missing the nuance…”

↑ miami85 ↓

Mon, Dec 09 2024, 12:22 pm

Cheiny wrote:

Neely’s father just spoke, following the verdict. He said this is “racial injustice,” and “we can’t let this stand!” BLM has threatened to burn down the city. Is this not incitement?

Reportedly, when the verdict came down and one of Penny’s attorneys clapped, Neely’s father yelled out, “Are you trying to get f****** killed?!” Real stellar citizens of society, these Neely’s…

The biggest outrage is the father claiming he’s “hurting” because of his son being killed. Really? Why did he suddenly come out of the woodwork only when he saw an opportunity to sue and enrich himself, after ignoring his son for his entire life, allowing him to be homeless, etc.? Nauseating.

Mazal tov for true justice. My condolences for NYC because once again BLM only sees the race of the individuals involved rather than the facts and led people to believe that an outcome would be there that was never there to begin with. I hope Eric Adams has a rabbit up his sleeve that he can calm down the city before BLM burns it down.