Marine veteran Daniel Penny, who was recently acquitted of charges in the death of a homeless man on a New York City subway, is now exploring new legal possibilities.

Penny's lawyers are contemplating a potential malicious prosecution lawsuit against Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, alleging misconduct in the way the case was conducted, as Fox News reports.

The subway case gained national attention due to the circumstances surrounding the death of Jordan Neely and the ensuing racial narrative some attempted to foster.

In a dramatic incident on a New York subway, Penny engaged with Neely, a 30-year-old homeless man who was reportedly threatening other passengers.

In response, Penny applied a chokehold to restrain Neely, resulting in his death. Following the incident, Penny was charged with second-degree manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide.

Penny's Defense Team Eyes Lawsuit

The legal proceedings took a surprising turn as the jury deliberated the manslaughter charge. After two attempts, the jury could not reach a unanimous decision on this charge, leading to its dismissal.

Consequently, focus shifted to the charge of criminally negligent homicide. On Monday, the jury announced its verdict, declaring Penny not guilty.

Following the favorable verdict, Penny's defense attorney, Steven Raiser, criticized the handling of the case by Bragg.

He suggested that a lawsuit for malicious prosecution is now under consideration. Raiser accused Bragg, along with others involved, of unethical practices and alleged that there was "collusion" in managing the case from its inception.

Raiser voiced concerns that both the district attorney's office and the medical examiner acted in coordination to prosecute Penny unjustly. He further claimed that there was pressure from political connections influencing the proceedings.

"They wanted to try and get him on something," Raiser commented, emphasizing his belief that the charges were motivated by a desire to convict Penny.

Allegations of Collusion and Politics

The defense maintains that the charges against Penny were not solely based on evidence but were influenced by political dynamics. Raiser claimed that the medical examiner, allegedly under pressure, collaborated with Bragg's office to expedite the case in a manner that compromised ethical standards. He specifically pointed out a connection between Neely's death and Mayor Eric Adams, who appoints the medical examiner and shares a political party with Bragg.

Raiser further argued that the cooperation between the medical examiner and the district attorney began from the "very beginning" and persisted throughout the legal process. The implication was that the legal actions against Penny were a strategic maneuver to secure a conviction, however unfounded it might be.

Penny's Perspective in Wake of Trial

In light of the acquittal, Penny expressed relief but remains haunted by the events leading to Neely's death. In an interview, he stated that he had no choice but to intervene and that he could not live with himself had Neely harmed anyone else. This statement underscores Penny's view of the incident as an unfortunate necessity to protect fellow subway passengers.

Although Penny has been acquitted of criminal charges, the potential legal battle with Bragg looms large. The defense's allegations of malicious prosecution will likely intensify discussions regarding the influence of political connections in legal proceedings.

Implications for Future Legal Proceedings

The defense team's decision to pursue legal action against Bragg remains uncertain at this stage. If filed, the lawsuit could reshape perceptions of prosecutorial conduct and political influence in criminal cases, particularly those drawing significant public attention.

Given the complexity of the case, the outcome of any potential lawsuit could have far-reaching implications. It might prompt a reevaluation of prosecutorial decisions and raise questions about the intersection of politics and justice.

In conclusion, while Daniel Penny has been cleared of criminal wrongdoing, the possible lawsuit against Bragg suggests that this legal saga is far from over. The controversies surrounding the case highlight the challenges and scrutiny faced by public officials in highly publicized legal actions.