Daniel Penny was acquitted of criminally negligent homicide in connection with the death of Jordan Neely, a verdict delivered by a jury on Monday after extensive deliberations lasting over five days.
The jury’s decision followed an earlier deadlock on a more serious manslaughter charge. Judge Maxwell Wiley had instructed the jury to focus on the lesser charge after the second-degree manslaughter allegation was dismissed at the prosecution’s request. This charge, if convicted, would have carried a maximum sentence of 15 years, while criminally negligent homicide holds a maximum of four years.
The prosecution argued that Penny, a 26-year-old former Marine, acted recklessly when he applied a chokehold to Neely, a 30-year-old homeless man, for six minutes on a subway car in May 2023. They claimed that Penny ignored the risks of his actions and continued to restrain Neely even after he became unresponsive. However, the defense contended that Neely’s death was primarily due to a pre-existing medical condition exacerbated by synthetic marijuana in his system. They portrayed Penny’s actions as a response to Neely’s threatening behavior, suggesting that he was attempting to protect himself and fellow passengers from a perceived violent threat.
Despite the lengthy discussions among jurors, they could not reach a unanimous decision on the more serious charge of manslaughter, which required proof that Penny had acted recklessly. The charge of criminally negligent homicide required determination of whether Penny’s actions constituted “blameworthy conduct” not considered to pose a lethal risk.
Throughout the trial, tensions remained high, evidenced by the presence of protesters outside the courthouse chanting conflicting messages. In a bid to ensure a fair process, Judge Wiley offered to issue guidance to mitigate any undue influence from external protests during deliberations.
The verdict has reignited discussions surrounding issues of mental health, public safety, and the challenges faced by individuals experiencing homelessness.
This case serves as a reminder of the complexities involved in such legal situations, particularly regarding the difficult balance between self-defense and accountability for one’s actions. As societal challenges continue to grow, there is hope that this incident may lead to increased awareness and dialogue about violence and mental health resources, ultimately fostering safer communities for all.