Early this afternoon, a New York State jury began deliberating in the homicide case that Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg, the paragon politicized progressive prosecutor, brought against former Marine Daniel Penny in the death of Jordan Neely. Penny intervened on a subway train when Neely, a violent criminal, was threatening frightened passengers. Neely, a drug abuser, died after Penny held him in a choke hold (there is a causation issue in the case regarding whether the choke hold, as opposed to Neely’s physical condition, caused his death).

I last wrote about the case here. No one contends that Penny murdered Neely or intended that he die. And the law permits people to act in self-defense — which includes the defense of other innocent people as well as oneself. Yet, Bragg charged Penny with two homicide counts, (1) second-degree manslaughter (basically, reckless homicide, in which one perceives a threat to life but callously ignores it, and death occurs) and (2) criminally negligent homicide (essentially, when a person fails to perceive a risk of death that the average person would perceive under the circumstances, and death occurs).

To my mind, Penny should never have been charged and should be acquitted. That said, I believe this is at most a negligence case and that Bragg cynically brought the recklessness charge to give the jury something on which to compromise in favor of conviction. That is, jurors would probably acquit if there was just an up or down vote on the negligence count; but if some jurors feel that something must be done to Penny because Neely died, the other jurors may go along with a guilty verdict on the negligence count if they can rationalize that they’re acquitting him on the more serious recklessness count.

Of course, Bragg only needs a guilty verdict on one count to “win” the case. In stark contrast, Penny could lose even if he is acquitted of reckless homicide (which carries a penalty of up to 15 years’ imprisonment) because he could face a sentence of up to four years’ imprisonment on the negligence charge.

Predictably, the prosecutors have suggested a racial angle (Penny is white; Neely was black). There is no reason to believe that race had anything to do with Penny’s protective actions . . . but a lot of reason to believe that progressive obsessions with race influenced Bragg’s decision to charge him.

New York is the worse for it, as anyone who rides its subways knows.