Consume Product

Perhaps there were enough people on the jury who were sick of having to deal with junkie degenerates on the subway every day.

hijacking top comment because it has nothing to do with kike judges here. for people wondering wtf is going on, penny was charged with two charges:

* second degree manslaughter, aka "murder in the heat of the moment". this has ill intent, and is basically alleging penny lost his cool and killed the guy
* criminally negligent homicide, basically causing the death of someone by accident, but unlike a normal no-fault "sometimes shit happens" kind of accident, the allegation is that penny was supposed to be more careful in suppressing this chimp, that he wasn't even exercising basic reasonable care, and his conduct arose to criminal negligence.

this is allowed in american law under what's called "pleading in the alternative". it's fully valid for the prosecutor/plaintiff to say "X happened, and if X didn't happen, then Y happened and either way, you're still guilty/liable".

on the first charge (second degree manslaughter), the jury came back to the judge TWICE and said they failed to come to an agreement. the prosecutors requested the judge to dismiss the charges. it could be for a dozen different reasons... the largest probably that if the jury refused to deliberate it further and entered a hung verdict (which they fully had the power to do), and then there's a good chance the jury would deadlock on negligent homicide too. by withdrawing the manslaughter charges, they at least had a shot at getting negligent homicide. it's all risk calculations.

but then their worst case scenario hit, where the jury said it wasn't negligent homicide either. i don't know under NY state law whether double jeopardy would prevent him from being charged for manslaughter again. in my state, as in many states, anything other than a mistrial triggers double jeopardy. my LLM is suggesting NY is the same law as my state.

Ceo assassin on the loose

I think they tried to throw the book at him, but the jury just didn't go for it. New Yorkers will put up with a lot of libshittery but they know that the subways are a shit show right now and they're fed up with it. The race-baiting isn't strong enough to overcome their frustration at an actual source of inconvenience in their daily lives (I know some New Yorkers and even the ones that don't regularly ride the subway do so specifically because they know what it's like down there these days. They'd love to use it again if it weren't a warzone). I'm not surprised a New York jury would acquit a guy who was just doing something that most of them quietly wish someone would.

They could care less about the PR. We are cattle to them. Who would care about the opinions of their livestock.

Even if found innocent, the process of getting there can be the punishment.