Brian there on WNYC. We'll talk now about the acquittal of Daniel Penny. The acquittal

surprised many people who thought there would be some kind of conviction, for no other reason than because

he had Jordan Neely in that chokehold on that F train for six minutes, even after Neely

defecated on himself, and the public saw a video of one of the writers saying, enough, you're going to

kill him. So how did the jury acquit Daniel Penny? WNYC and Gothamist public safety

reporter Samantha Max was in the courtroom covering the trial and she joins us now. Hi Sam,

thanks for coming back on the show. Hi, Brian. And listeners, we can take some questions about

evidence in the trial and the jury's decisions at 212-433.

WNYC, call or text, 212, 433-9692. Have jurors commented publicly that you've seen on their reasoning?

Not that I am aware of at this point. I mean, all of these jurors have been kept

anonymous, so we know what they look like, and I have information about them from when they were

questioned during jury selection, but we don't know their names. And given kind of the division

over the case, I would not be surprised if many of them want to

state that way. They had a hung jury on the more serious charge of manslaughter, but a quitted

penny on the less serious charge of criminally negligent homicide. Is it clear how that happened?

It would seem to be backwards being more open to the more

serious charge. Yeah, it's a good question. I mean, basically these two charges are very similar,

and kind of the difference between them is just a sense of mindset, essentially. So they would

have never been able to charge on both either way.

It would have kind of been up to whether they felt it was one or the other or neither.

So when we're talking about manslaughter,

basically the jury would have had to have found that not only did Penny directly cause the death with his

...