Prosecutor in Tyre Nichols trial tells jury that officers laughed, bragged in closing

(NEW YORK) — Daniel Penny “used far too much force for far too long” and though he may be an “honorable veteran” and “nice young man,” he was reckless with Jordan Neely’s life because “he didn’t recognize his humanity,” Assistant District Attorney Dafna Yoran said in her opening statement Friday during the trial over the fatal chokehold.

“He was aware of the risk his actions would kill Mr. Neely and did it anyway,” Yoran said.

Penny is charged with manslaughter and negligent homicide in the May 2023 death of Neely, a homeless man who was acting erratically on a New York City subway car.

“Jordan Neely took his last breaths on the dirty floor of an uptown F train,” Yoran told a rapt jury.

Neely entered a moderately crowded subway car at the Second Avenue stop and began making threats about hurting people, scaring many of the passengers, Yoran said.

She pointed at Penny as she told the jury, “This man, took it upon himself to take down Jordan Neely. To neutralize him.”

Thirty seconds later, the train arrived at the next station and all the passengers left the train car, except two men who were helping Penny restrain Neely. The prosecutor said Penny hung onto Neely for 51 seconds after Neely’s body went limp.

“By doing so, he pushed Mr. Neely to the point of no return,” Yoran said. “He left Mr. Neely lying on the floor unconscious and didn’t look back.”

Penny has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide in Neely’s death. His attorneys have said Neely was “insanely threatening,” but Yoran said Penny’s actions were unnecessarily reckless because he continued the chokehold for 5 minutes and 53 seconds after the subway car was empty of passengers. “A grasp that never changed,” Yoran called it.

“The defendant did not intend to kill him. His initial intent was even laudable,” Yoran said. “But under the law, deadly physical force such as a chokehold is permitted only when it is absolutely necessary and for only as long as is absolutely necessary. And here, the defendant went way too far.”

The prosecutor told jurors they would see video of the chokehold.

“You will see Mr. Neely’s life being sucked out before your very eyes,” Yoran said, appearing to upset one of the jurors who grimaced and briefly shut his eyes.

She also said jurors would see body camera video of Penny’s initial encounter with police, four and a half minutes after letting go of Neely.

When the officer asked Penny what happened, the prosecutor said Penny replied that Neely had been threatening. “Then he said, ‘I just put him out,'” Yoran told the jury.

The defense is set to give its opening statement on Friday following a break.

Protest audible from courtroom

The sounds of a sidewalk protest over the death of Neely were audible in the 13th-floor courtroom ahead of opening statements. Protesters were heard calling Penny a “subway strangler.”

Judge Max Wiley said he would instruct jurors to ignore “noise outside the courthouse.”

Penny, in a slate blue suit, strode confidently into the courtroom and took his seat at the defense table ahead of opening statements.

The jury of seven women and five men, four of whom are people of color, will be asked to do something prosecutors concede is difficult: convict someone of an unintentional crime.

To convict, prosecutors must prove Penny’s use of lethal force was unjustifiable and that Penny acted recklessly and consciously disregarded the substantial risk of putting Neely in the chokehold for so long. Prosecutors do not have to prove Penny intended to kill Neely, which defense attorneys have said Neely did not intend to do.

Wiley denied Penny’s bid to dismiss his involuntary manslaughter case in January.

The trial is expected to last between four and six weeks, according to Wiley.

The case has fueled political narratives about urban crime and captivated a city in which the subway is indispensable.

Differing accounts of the incident

While there is no doubt that Penny’s actions led to Neely’s death on May 1, 2023, witness accounts differ regarding the events that led up to Penny applying the fatal chokehold, according to various sources.

Many witnesses reported that Neely, 30, who was homeless at the time of his death and was known to perform as a Michael Jackson impersonator, had expressed that he was homeless, hungry and thirsty, according to prosecutors. Most of the witnesses also recounted that Neely indicated a willingness to go to jail or prison.

Some witnesses also reported that Neely threatened to hurt people on the train, while others did not report hearing those threats, according to police sources.

Additionally, some witnesses told police that Neely was yelling and harassing passengers on the train. However, others have said that while Neely had exhibited erratic behavior, he had not been threatening anyone in particular and had not become violent, according to police sources who spoke with ABC News following the incident.

According to prosecution court filings, some passengers on the train that day said they didn’t feel threatened. One said they weren’t “really worried about what was going on,” while another called it “like another day typically in New York. That’s what I’m used to seeing. I wasn’t really looking at it if I was going to be threatened or anything to that nature, but it was a little different because, you know, you don’t really hear anybody saying anything like that.”

Other passengers, however, described being fearful, according to court filings. One said they “have encountered many things, but nothing that put fear into me like that,” while another said Neely was making “half-lunge movements” and coming within a “half a foot of people.”

Neely had a documented history of mental health issues and arrests, including alleged instances of disorderly conduct, fare evasion and assault, according to police sources.

Less than 30 seconds after Penny allegedly put Neely into a chokehold, the train arrived at the Broadway-Lafayette Station, according to court records.

“Passengers who had felt fearful on account of being trapped on the train were now free to exit the train. The defendant continued holding Mr. Neely around the neck,” said prosecutor Joshua Steinglass in a court filing objecting to Penny’s dismissal request.

According to prosecutors, footage of the interaction, which began about two minutes after the incident started, captures Penny holding Neely in the chokehold for about four minutes and 57 seconds on a relatively empty train, with a couple of passengers nearby.

Prosecutors said that about three minutes and 10 seconds into the video, Neely ceases all purposeful movement.

“After that moment, Mr. Neely’s movements are best described as ‘twitching and the kind of agonal movement that you see around death,'” prosecutors said.

The case is expected to feature testimony of passengers who were aboard the subway at the time, as well as a roughly six-minute video of the chokehold.

Jury to hear eyewitness statements

Before opening statements on Friday, Wiley granted a defense request to allow some of the statements that eyewitnesses to the chokehold made to police that were captured on body-worn cameras.

One witness, a Ms. Rosario, was captured on body-worn camera 15 minutes after the incident aboard the F train.

“I can see most of that statement coming in as an excited utterance,” Wiley said.

The judge declined to allow a part of her statement in which an officer is heard asking whether she thought Neely was on drugs.

A Mr. Latimer is captured a minute later and Wiley said his statement is “well within the immediacy of the event” and could be admitted.

“This person displays emotion, excitement as he’s describing what happened. It’s narrative,” Wiley said.

Most of the passengers who were aboard the train and who witnessed the event are expected to testify at trial.

Jury will see evidence that Neely did not have a weapon

The judge also previously ruled that the jury will see evidence that shows Neely was unarmed.

Penny’s defense had sought to preclude evidence or testimony about the lack of a weapon recovered from a search of Neely’s body but in a written opinion issued Thursday, Wiley said such evidence and testimony is relevant to the case.

“The fact that Mr. Neely was unarmed provides additional relevant information to aid the jury, namely, it clarifies what could have been perceived by someone in the defendant’s position,” Wiley wrote. “The possibility that a person in the defendant’s situation could have been reasonable in mistakenly believing that Mr. Neely had been armed is appropriate for consideration by the jury and well within their capability.”

The defense worried that including evidence that Neely was unarmed could bolster sympathy for the victim but Wiley said it would help the jury decide whether Penny’s actions were justified.

Penny’s lawyers and Neely’s family speak ahead of the trial

Members of Neely’s family were seated with the spectators for opening statements Friday.

“I loved Jordan. And I want justice for Jordan Neely. I want it today. I want justice for everybody and I want justice for Jordan Neely,” his uncle, Christopher Neely, said before entering court.

Prosecutors in the Manhattan district attorney’s office are expected to concede that Neely may have seemed scary to some subway riders, but will argue Penny continued the chokehold well past the point where Neely stopped moving and posed any kind of threat.

Penny’s attorneys have said that they were “saddened at the loss of human life,” but that Penny saw “a genuine threat and took action to protect the lives of others,” arguing that Neely was “insanely threatening” to passengers aboard the subway train.

While Penny’s defense will argue that he had no intent to kill Neely, prosecutor Steinglass has noted that the second-degree manslaughter charge only requires prosecutors to prove Penny acted recklessly, not intentionally.

“We are confident that a jury, aware of Danny’s actions in putting aside his own safety to protect the lives of his fellow riders, will deliver a just verdict,” Penny’s lawyers, Steven Raiser and Thomas Kenniff, said earlier this year, after Penny’s request to dismiss the charge was denied.

“This case is simple. Someone got on a train and was screaming so someone else choked them to death,” Neely family attorney Donte Mills said in a past statement to ABC News. “Those two things do not and will never balance. There is no justification.”

“Jordan had the right to take up his own space. He was allowed to be on that train and even to scream. He did not touch anyone. He was not a visitor on that train, in New York, or in this country,” Mills added.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — On a recent Sunday night in Virginia, Henrico County registrar Mark Coakley was waiting for the start of the Cowboys-Steelers NFL game that was delayed due to inclement weather.

Coakley was scanning X, formerly known as Twitter, when he came across a post by the platform’s billionaire owner, Elon Musk, who is a vocal Trump supporter. Musk had reposted a tweet from 2023 that falsely claimed that “election integrity leaders in Virginia” found fraudulent votes in Henrico County from the 2020 election.

“Is this accurate @CommunityNotes?” Musk posted in conjunction with the tweet, engaging X’s Community Notes feature that allows users themselves to fact check a tweet.

Coakley, the county’s top election official, scrambled to respond. On Monday morning, the Henrico County’s X account debunked the premise of Musk’s posts in a five-post thread.

“They were uninformed tweets,” Coakley recalled in an interview with ABC News. “Media was calling, friends were calling me.”

The challenge for Coakley: While Musk’s initial post has garnered 27.7 million views, Coakley’s response has received fewer than 100,000. It’s a contemporary spin on the old adage that a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes.

As Musk has continued to promote false and misleading election information on X, election officials have increasingly confronted him on his own platform. But their reach typically pales in comparison to Musk’s 200 million followers.

“It’s just not a fair battle,” said Larry Norden, a voting expert at the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonprofit think tank.

In Philadelphia, Musk reposted a tweet suggesting that 5,200 voters had registered with the same address. “This is crazy,” Musk commented.

Seth Bluestein, a Philadelphia County Commissioner, replied hours later, tweeting, “The post you shared is spreading disinformation.”

But while Musk’s initial tweet drew nearly 10 million views, Bluestein’s response garnered fewer than 10,000.

Even some Republican officials have confronted Musk on X. Stephen Richer, the GOP recorder in Maricopa County, Arizona, has regularly quarreled with Musk online over alleged election misinformation targeting the state — and has even offered to connect with Musk in person.

“On every previous post you’ve made about Arizona elections (all of which have been wrong, but you’ve never corrected any of them), I’ve offered my office as a resource to you (and anyone) who wants actual answers to these questions,” Richer told Musk in a post in September.

Sam Woolley, a disinformation researcher at the University of Pittsburgh, said Musk has treated X as his own “bully pulpit” to support Trump and denigrate the election system since taking control of the company in 2022.

“This is certainly a case of a very powerful individual using not only his ownership of the platform but also his ability to control massive swaths of engagement on the platform for his own benefit and for the benefit of his political allies,” Woolley said.

Not only are the misinformation narratives promoted by Musk “corrosive to democracy,” Norden said, but the time and energy required to rebut them might actually undermine election officials’ ability to execute their other election-related work.

“It’s distracting,” Norden said. “We are putting a huge load on election officials, and if, on top of that, they have to respond to a guy who boosts his own content on his own network to spread lies, it’s distracting from the essential work that they need to do. That is troubling.”

Musk did not respond to a request for comment from ABC News.

Despite the enormous online reach of the world’s richest man, at least one election official has managed to match it: Jocelyn Benson, the secretary of state in Michigan.

After Musk suggested on X that there are more registered voters in the state than eligible voters, Benson shot back.

“Let’s be clear: @elonmusk is spreading dangerous disinformation,” Benson wrote. “Here are the facts: There aren’t more voters than citizens in Michigan. There are 7.2 million active registered voters and 7.9 citizens of voting age in our state.”

Musk’s initial retweet received some 32 million views.

But Benson’s response topped it, getting 33.5 million.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(SEATTLE) — Boeing machinists on Wednesday rejected a new contract proposal that would’ve ended a weekslong work stoppage against the embattled aerospace company — and the union said the strike will go on.

Sixty-four percent of workers voted to reject the new contract, according to the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), the union representing 33,000 Boeing workers in Washington, Oregon and California.

Representatives for Boeing said Wednesday night the company did not have a comment on the vote.

The proposed contract would have delivered a 35% raise over the four-year duration of the contract, upping the 25% cumulative raise provided in a previous offer overwhelmingly rejected by workers in a vote last month. Workers had initially sought a 40% cumulative pay increase.

The proposal also called for hiking Boeing’s contribution to a 401(k) plan, but it declined to fulfill workers’ call for a reinstatement of the company’s defined pension. The contract would have included a $7,000 ratification bonus for each worker, as well as a performance bonus that Boeing had sought to jettison.

But union leaders said the concessions offered in the proposal were not enough to meet the demands of rank-and-file union members.

“This contract struggle began over ten years ago when the company overreached and created a wound that may never heal for many members,” said Jon Holden, president of IAM District 751 in Seattle, in a statement after the vote. “I don’t have to tell you all how challenging it has been for our membership through the pandemic, the crashes, massive inflation, and the need to address the losses stemming from the 2014 contract.”

The union said the strike will continue as they return to the bargaining table with the company.

Hours before workers cast ballots on Wednesday, Boeing released an earnings report showing the company had lost a staggering $6.1 billion over the most recent quarter due primarily to costs associated with the strike.

“We have some really big rocks that we need to get behind us to move the company forward,” Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg said in a letter to investors on Wednesday.

Ortberg singled out the strike as an issue that must be addressed “first and foremost.”

“We have been feverishly working to find a solution that works for the company and meets our employees’ needs,” Ortberg said.

The company and its workers have faced significant financial losses during the nearly six-week strike.

Union members have received $250 per week from a strike fund, beginning in the third week of the work stoppage. That compensation marks a major pay cut for many of the employees.

Mid-ranking workers involved in the strike typically make $20 per hour, which totals $800 per 40-hour work week, while higher-paid members earn salaries upward of $100,000 per year, or nearly $2,000 per week.

“The question is whether the employees and their union determine that they have the power to get more from Boeing,” Henry Harteveldt, a travel industry analyst at Atmosphere Research Group, told ABC News. “It’s whether they think they can extract more from Boeing, or Boeing says, ‘You know what, this is it.'”

The strike was set to cost Boeing $108 million per day in lost revenue, amounting to as much as $5.5 billion in losses should the work stoppage last 50 days, investment bank TD Cowen said in a report reviewed by ABC News at the outset of the dispute. So far, the strike has lasted 40 days.

In September, Boeing announced furloughs and pay cuts for some white-collar employees in response to the strike. Last week, Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg announced plans to cut 17,000 jobs, which amounts to about 10% of its global workforce.

“This is really painful for Boeing,” Richard Aboulafia, managing director of aerospace consulting firm AeroDynamic Advisory, told ABC News.

The most recent IAM strike against Boeing in the Pacific Northwest, in 2008, lasted 57 days. Work stoppages undertaken by unionized Boeing employees in the same region have historically lasted an average of 60 days, a Bank of America Global Research analysis found after examining seven previous strikes, the earliest in 1948.

In the days leading up to Wednesday’s vote, the outcome remained unclear, Jake Rosenfeld, a professor of sociology at Washington University in St. Louis, who studies labor, told ABC News.

“What are the workers going to do?” Rosenfeld said. “That’s a really tough question.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.