Possible clarification from creator (AI generated):
A hung jury will be treated as not found guilty for market resolution purposes
Possible clarification from creator (AI generated):
Market will resolve based on the outcome of this trial only
Any potential retrial would be covered by a separate market
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ505 | |
| 2 | Ṁ300 | |
| 3 | Ṁ206 | |
| 4 | Ṁ199 | |
| 5 | Ṁ183 |
People are also trading
So they spent four days debating the greater charge and couldn't come to a consensus, but then came to a not guilty verdict on the lesser in half a day. Huh?
I'm going to irresponsibly speculate that most of the jury wanted to acquit on manslaughter, but one or two activists were pushing for guilty verdict. Once they saw the judge dismiss the manslaughter charge, they might have given up hope and went along with the not guilty verdict so they could go home.
@GG I agree with your assessment. Keeping the case alive, and dismissing the biggest charge, was a boon to the defense. There was at least one person wanting Penny to walk. Now we can reasonably speculate that there was a holdout preventing a full not guilty verdict. Like, for example, people who like to feel safe riding the subway.
They can't come to an agreement on the top charge, manslaughter.
>https://www.foxnews.com/us/daniel-penny-jurors-tell-judge-they-cant-agree-top-charge-subway-chokehold-case
Which presumably means they can come to an agreement on the lower charge of criminally negligent homicide.
@GG that seems plausible but they were instructed not to consider the second charge until they had dealt with the first
Didn't know that! Thank you!
But still, if we're on the border of manslaughter and not-manslaughter, I would expect we were well within the territory of negligent homicide (especially since there's no question of fact that Neely was killed by the chokehold, only questions on whether the chokehold was reasonable).
Although since we have 12 member of the jury, it's possible that some of them place Penny firmly in center of the manslaughter territory while other place him outside of either charge. This could lead to a hung jury on both the manslaughter and negligent homicide charges. Alternatively, some "no NH, no manslaughter" jurors might see a "yes NH, no manslaughter" as a type of compromise and vote to convict on NH once the manslaughter charge is off the table. They're not supposed to think this way, but some people do.
Either way, I don't see this ending in two not-guilty verdicts. Best case for Penny is a hung jury on the NH charge with a not-guilty on the manslaughter charge.
@GG I think a total acquittal is quite unlikely for a number of reasons and yes, that a negligent homicide verdict might be put forward as a “compromise”