The normal rule for prosecutors is to charge the highest-level offense that you have a decent chance of proving. That's why there was a manslaughter charge. I don't think anyone would have made a big bet that the charge would stick, but there was a legitimate case. After all, the jury hung on it. The lesser charge, criminally negligent homicide, was what I thought the evidence showed. The prosecution theory was that Penny was justified in intervening*, which moots all the complications about defense of others, but that at some point he continued to choke Neely to death when it was no longer reasonable for him to do it. The threat had subsided, other passengers warned Penny that the guy was choking to death and that he should stop -- a by-the-numbers case for criminally negligent homicide. Given that one or more jurors had been willing to convict on manslaughter, it is hard to understand why those same jurors voted to acquit on criminally-negligent homicide. Unless they had been one or two holdouts on a manslaughter acquittal and were just worn down on criminally-negligent homicide.
That said, it wasn't entirely surprising that the jury acquitted. Juries have been remarkably sympathetic to defendants in this sort of case.
* I once tossed a disruptive loon off the subway, to the cheers of fellow passengers. I didn't kill him and probably didn't hurt anything other than his pride. And I was never the trained physical specimen that Penny is.
And a lot never were. But the urge to have a hot take drives far too many people to jump on rumor or speculation on Monday rather than wait until Thursday to get things right. Maybe they get some value out of it, but it's hard to see.
I heard the same speculation from sources not generally hospitable to conspiracy theories, not about Schiff specifically, but about the entire class of potential Trump targets to which he belongs.
That is not as clear as it ought to be: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/010110580824.pdf
And it's hard to see how that would work for a pre-emptive pardon.
Actions speak louder than words. If he accepts a pardon, he can't say "I didn't want this." If he doesn't, he can say what he damn pleases. If he isn't offered one, there's nothing for him to say and we can make up whatever we like, based on our priors about about Schiff, and nobody can prove us wrong.
Place your bets.
The problem with this "school of thought" is that a pardon must be accepted to be effective. Neither Schiff nor anyone else can work both sides of the street:
No, I didn't. I was asking you. You, of course, have the absolute right not to answer and you have exercised that right. Probably a good idea, all things considered.
On “Open Mic for the week of 12/9/2024”
As opposed to when?
"
The normal rule for prosecutors is to charge the highest-level offense that you have a decent chance of proving. That's why there was a manslaughter charge. I don't think anyone would have made a big bet that the charge would stick, but there was a legitimate case. After all, the jury hung on it. The lesser charge, criminally negligent homicide, was what I thought the evidence showed. The prosecution theory was that Penny was justified in intervening*, which moots all the complications about defense of others, but that at some point he continued to choke Neely to death when it was no longer reasonable for him to do it. The threat had subsided, other passengers warned Penny that the guy was choking to death and that he should stop -- a by-the-numbers case for criminally negligent homicide. Given that one or more jurors had been willing to convict on manslaughter, it is hard to understand why those same jurors voted to acquit on criminally-negligent homicide. Unless they had been one or two holdouts on a manslaughter acquittal and were just worn down on criminally-negligent homicide.
That said, it wasn't entirely surprising that the jury acquitted. Juries have been remarkably sympathetic to defendants in this sort of case.
* I once tossed a disruptive loon off the subway, to the cheers of fellow passengers. I didn't kill him and probably didn't hurt anything other than his pride. And I was never the trained physical specimen that Penny is.
"
And a lot never were. But the urge to have a hot take drives far too many people to jump on rumor or speculation on Monday rather than wait until Thursday to get things right. Maybe they get some value out of it, but it's hard to see.
"
I'm perfectly happy to wait for more-or-less credible sources before expending mental energy on things.
"
I heard the same speculation from sources not generally hospitable to conspiracy theories, not about Schiff specifically, but about the entire class of potential Trump targets to which he belongs.
"
Your point being? Or should I know better than to ask?
"
That is not as clear as it ought to be: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/010110580824.pdf
And it's hard to see how that would work for a pre-emptive pardon.
"
Actions speak louder than words. If he accepts a pardon, he can't say "I didn't want this." If he doesn't, he can say what he damn pleases. If he isn't offered one, there's nothing for him to say and we can make up whatever we like, based on our priors about about Schiff, and nobody can prove us wrong.
Place your bets.
"
The problem with this "school of thought" is that a pardon must be accepted to be effective. Neither Schiff nor anyone else can work both sides of the street:
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3-4-1/ALDE_00013319/#essay-9
On “From the New York Post: UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson fatally shot outside Hilton hotel in Midtown in targeted attack: cops”
They couldn't tell?
"
What's a metaphor, and for what?
"
I understood taking the cannoli -- who wouldn't? -- but why leave the gun in the car?
"
Are we talking beer or abs?
"
Same with not-so-respectable Italians.
"
And take the cannolis.
"
I grew up around a lot of amateurs who would have done a better job.
than this strunz.
"
We deserved a break today:
https://www.aol.com/police-questioning-man-pennsylvania-ceo-164500918.html
"
What's the usual timeline for this? Or is there one?
"
Wait until they catch him and he hangs himself in jail.
"
No, I didn't. I was asking you. You, of course, have the absolute right not to answer and you have exercised that right. Probably a good idea, all things considered.
"
As opposed to what?
On “Joe Biden Pardons Local Man”
Meanwhile, on Earth 1....
On “Open Mic for the week of 12/2/2024”
But---but---LatinX! Joe Rogan!
On “Joe Biden Pardons Local Man”
You know, if you don't want to participate in the poll, you can just not participate.
"
Does Gallup tell the people he polls what he thinks?
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.