GREGG JARRETT: Daniel Penny is not guilty, but District Attorney Bragg has done lasting damage

Every now and then justice is vindicated and good triumphs over evil.

With its “not guilty” verdict on Monday, a Manhattan jury unanimously sent a resounding message to District Attorney Alvin Bragg that he wrongly prosecuted a Good Samaritan. A man who bravely came to the aid of subway passengers threatened with imminent death. Not that Bragg will pay any attention to it.

The case against Navy veteran Daniel Penny should never have been brought. It was a gross injustice. Under the law, he was entitled to use reasonable force — even deadly force — to subdue a maniac who promised to kill passengers as soon as he stepped into a subway car. That man, Jordan Neely, initiated the confrontation and died as a result of his own threatening and illegal actions.

DANIEL PENNY FOUND NOT GUILTY IN SUBWAY CHOKEHOLD TRIAL

Instead of being praised, Penny was pilloried as a bigoted vigilante by the usual crowd of racial justice warriors eager to turn Neely’s death into another George Floyd outrage. Bragg, who views everything through the prism of race and politics, was more than happy to do whatever they wanted. During the trial, his lead prosecutor referred to Penny as “the white man.” It was reprehensible.

But in the end, twelve different jurors refused to abide by the blatant racism. They were well aware of the dangers of New York’s treacherous subway system, which saw a 60% increase in homicides this year, according to police statistics. Stabbings, shootings, assaults and robberies now seem to be commonplace as criminals roam freely in the underground transportation system in search of their next victims.

Jurors accepted as true testimonies from passengers – some of whom are black – that they were grateful when Penny came to their aid. Neely terrorized them. They were panicking and afraid that their lives were about to end. Far from being a rogue criminal, the former Marine was seen by those in danger as their beneficent and heroic figure.

Bragg didn’t care about the innocent patients who were threatened with death. His idea of ​​’restorative justice’ has always been about protecting criminals. During the trial, his accusers contemptuously ignored passengers’ accounts of what happened that terrible day, while manipulating evidence to turn Neely from villain to victim.

ANDREW MCCARTHY: Prosecutor, judge makes a mockery of justice in the trial of subway hero Daniel Penny

Erroneous court rulings made Penny’s defense all the more difficult. When jurors were deadlocked after nearly 30 hours of deliberation on the most serious charge of manslaughter, Judge Maxwell Wiley agreed to the district attorney’s request to drop the charge, even though prosecutors spent weeks trying to tell the jury that the suspect was guilty of this.

The judge’s ruling was inappropriate. He contradicted his own earlier statement that the jury could only think of the lower negligent homicide rate if they do that First found Penny “not guilty” of the top count. That didn’t happen. The judge seemed to acknowledge that a dismissal was impermissible, but then did so anyway.

Indeed, the rules governing criminal procedure require a mistrial in the event of a hung jury unless the defense agrees to a dismissal. Penny’s lawyers don’t.

It may seem abnormal or inconsistent for a jury to deadlock on a more serious crime but acquit the suspect on the lesser charge. But jurors are allowed to change their minds during deliberations as they reconsider the evidence and process counterarguments behind closed doors.

Though he may be foolish enough to try, Bragg cannot re-indict Penny on the manslaughter charge he voluntarily dismissed during deliberations. Danger arises when a jury is sworn and sworn. Therefore, a second prosecution would be prohibited under the Fifth Amendment’s constitutional doctrine of double jeopardy.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS ADVICE

Inevitably, social justice activists immediately denounced Penny’s acquittal and intensified their protests. Protesters outside the New York courthouse raised chants of “no justice, no peace,” the implicit threat of violent unrest that became a raw symbol of the Black Lives Matter movement. The crowd is, if nothing else, unrelenting.

Within minutes of the ruling, provocateurs affiliated with the BLM unleashed incendiary threats, calling for “black vigilantes” and “retaliation.” Their goal is to stoke racial hatred under the guise of egalitarian justice. They condemned the outcome of the trial as a victory for white supremacy and the Ku Klux Klan.

It is a sad measure of our times that such vile demagoguery has a devoted audience of mindless disciples.

For Daniel Penny, the jury’s correct decision provides immediate relief from the criminal case he has endured with dignity over the past eighteen months. He is acquitted, but unfairly smeared. He still faces a civil lawsuit filed late last week by Neely’s absent father.

I do not want to dismiss the plaintiff’s case as having a prosperous future. It is true that the standard of proof is lower in a civil action, but any recoverable damages would be speculative and minimal.

Typically, a parent will file a lawsuit for loss of companionship or future financial support. There isn’t one here. A needy and estranged son with little or no contact with his father would not provide a meaningful windfall.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Unfortunately, the greater societal damage caused by Bragg’s unjustified case may be borne by future crime victims in New York and perhaps elsewhere. Knowing that an elected prosecutor is eager to prosecute well-meaning Samaritans will likely deter them from defending others who are being targeted. The weak and vulnerable among us can become easier targets.

That is the tragic epitaph of the Daniel Penny trial.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM GREGG JARRETT