Podcast Summary: Tangle – Episode: The Daniel Penny Verdict

Host: Isaac Saul
Guest: Will Kaback, John Sullivan
Release Date: December 11, 2024
Episode Title: The Daniel Penny Verdict

Introduction

In this episode of Tangle, host Isaac Saul delves into the recent verdict of Daniel Penny, a former Marine acquitted of criminally negligent homicide in the death of Jordan Neely. The discussion explores various perspectives surrounding the case, highlighting reactions from both the political left and right, and culminates with editor Will Kaback's personal analysis.

Case Overview: The Daniel Penny Verdict

Time Stamp: 05:25

• Verdict Details: A Manhattan jury found Daniel Penny, 26, not guilty of criminally negligent homicide related to the death of Jordan Neely, a 30-year-old homeless street artist. Penny was previously charged with second-degree manslaughter, which was dismissed due to a hung jury.

• Incident Description: In May of the previous year, Neely boarded a New York City subway car and began acting erratically, threatening passengers. Penny approached Neely from behind and placed him in a chokehold for several minutes until other passengers assisted in restraining him. A video of the incident circulated widely, triggering public outcry.

• Legal Proceedings: District Attorney Alvin Bragg initially charged Penny with second-degree manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide. The prosecution argued that Penny's actions were reckless and unjustified, while the defense highlighted Neely's mental health issues and the immediate threat perceived by Penny.

• Courtroom Reactions: Post-verdict, Neely's father, Andre Zachary, expressed profound grief and frustration, emphasizing the personal and societal tragedies surrounding the case.

Reactions from the Political Left

Time Stamp: 09:26 – 17:11

• Critical Perspectives:

  • New York Daily News Editorial Board: Highlighted systemic failures in mental health care and the criminal justice system, questioning whether Penny should have been absolved for his excessive use of force. They acknowledged the complexity of the case but underscored the inadequacies in supporting individuals like Neely.

  • Sarah Pequeno, USA Today: Argued that the case transcends public safety, touching on racial justice, homelessness, and mental health care. Pequeno emphasized that Neely's life mattered regardless of his socio-economic status and mental state, advocating for more compassionate and de-escalative approaches.

  • Ginnia Belafonte, The New York Times: Noted that the verdict reflects a broader loss of faith in public safety among New Yorkers, exacerbated by a rise in subway-related crimes post-pandemic. Belafonte pointed out the lack of significant activism in Neely's case compared to similar incidents involving racial bias.

• Notable Quotes:

  • Daphna Yorin, Assistant Prosecutor: “You obviously cannot kill someone because they are crazy and ranting and looking menacing, Jordan said in her closing argument.” [05:23]

  • New York Daily News: “Penny did the right thing up to a point, and reasonable minds can disagree about when that point arrived.” [09:26]

Reactions from the Political Right

Time Stamp: 09:26 – 17:11

• Supportive Stance:

  • Free Press Editorial Board: Celebrated the acquittal, labeling the prosecution as unwarranted and criticizing District Attorney Bragg's handling of the case. They portrayed Penny as a Good Samaritan who acted to protect fellow passengers.

  • Nicole Russell, USA Today: Viewed Penny as a hero who intervened to safeguard others, criticizing the prosecution for targeting someone who acted under threat. Russell lauded the jury’s decision as a triumph for justice.

  • Noah Rothman, National Review: Defended Penny against accusations of racial animus, attributing the harsh prosecution to political motivations. Rothman emphasized the importance of common sense and actual justice over social justice narratives.

• Notable Quotes:

  • Nicole Russell, USA Today: “To me, Penny is a hero who intervened to protect the people who couldn't protect themselves.” [09:26]

  • Noah Rothman, National Review: “In lieu of social justice, a New York City courtroom dispensed actual justice on Monday.” [09:26]

Will Kaback’s Take

Time Stamp: 17:11 – 25:28

Will Kaback offers a nuanced analysis, drawing from his personal experiences in New York City’s subway system:

• Personal Experiences: Kaback shares instances where he intervened in subway altercations, highlighting the everyday challenges and safety concerns faced by commuters.

• Case Analysis:

  • Mixed Emotions: Kaback expresses conflicted feelings about the verdict, acknowledging both Penny’s excessive use of force and the chaotic environment that led to the incident.

  • Legal Justification: He contemplates whether Penny’s actions were legally justifiable in the interest of public safety, considering the perceived immediate threat Neely posed.

  • Moral Ambiguity: Kaback grapples with the ethical implications of Penny’s intervention, questioning the balance between self-defense and excessive force.

• Conclusion: While recognizing the complexity of the case and the factors influencing the jury's decision, Kaback posits that Penny’s actions, though problematic, may not have met the threshold for criminal conviction. He underscores the need for broader societal discussions on mental health, public safety, and community responsibility.

• Notable Quotes:

  • Will Kaback: “Morally, Penny's actions are in a gray area. Can Penny have been right to intervene, but wrong in how he went about it?” [17:11]

  • Will Kaback: “I think Penny should have been able to control himself and minimize the risk to Neely's life. But even ceding that Penny's chokehold was negligent and that it killed Neely, it's hard for me to say definitively he was legally not justified.” [25:28]

Additional Segments

Under the Radar Story:

• American Workers’ Skills Gap: A report indicates that American workers are lagging behind their peers in other industrialized nations in job readiness and problem-solving skills. The U.S. ranked 14th in literacy, 15th in adaptive problem-solving, and 24th in numeracy across 31 countries.

Listener Question:

• Health and Political Systems: Amy from Ohio inquires about the message conveyed by Casey and Callie Means regarding American health and the impact of political systems. Will responds by acknowledging the validity of their points about chronic health crises and systemic issues, while also critiquing their extreme statements and the polarization surrounding healthcare discourse.

Closing Remarks

The episode wraps up with encouragement for listeners to engage with Tangle through memberships and subscriptions, ensuring continued access to in-depth political discussions and independent analyses.

Notable Quotes Summary

1. Daphna Yorin, Assistant Prosecutor:
   “You obviously cannot kill someone because they are crazy and ranting and looking menacing.” [05:23]

2. Nicole Russell, USA Today:
   “To me, Penny is a hero who intervened to protect the people who couldn't protect themselves.” [09:26]

3. Noah Rothman, National Review:
   “In lieu of social justice, a New York City courtroom dispensed actual justice on Monday.” [09:26]

4. Will Kaback:
   “Morally, Penny's actions are in a gray area. Can Penny have been right to intervene, but wrong in how he went about it?” [17:11]
   “I think Penny should have been able to control himself and minimize the risk to Neely's life. But even ceding that Penny's chokehold was negligent and that it killed Neely, it's hard for me to say definitively he was legally not justified.” [25:28]

Conclusion

This episode of Tangle provides a comprehensive examination of the Daniel Penny verdict, presenting diverse viewpoints and thoughtful analysis. By navigating the complex interplay of legal standards, societal expectations, and personal ethics, the discussion underscores the multifaceted nature of justice in high-stakes, emotionally charged cases.