Daniel Penny, a 26-year-old former Marine, was acquitted on December 9, 2024, of criminally negligent homicide in the death of Jordan Neely, a 30-year-old homeless man, following a high-profile incident aboard a New York City subway train in May 2023. The case, which has sparked widespread debates about race, public safety, mental illness, and the justice system, saw Penny initially facing two charges: second-degree manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide.
The Incident: May 1, 2023
The tragic incident unfolded on the afternoon of May 1, 2023, aboard an uptown F train in Manhattan. Neely, a former Michael Jackson impersonator, boarded the subway and began yelling at passengers. Witnesses described Neely as acting erratically, shouting about being hungry and thirsty, and claiming he wanted to return to jail, stating that he didn’t care whether he lived or died. Some passengers reported that Neely made threats to harm others, while others did not recall hearing any threats.
Penny, who was on his way to the gym, saw Neely’s behavior as a threat to the safety of fellow passengers. He approached Neely and placed him in a chokehold, a technique he had learned during his time in the U.S. Marines. Penny, along with two other men, held Neely on the floor of the train for nearly six minutes. During this time, Neely appeared to stop moving, and when first responders arrived, he was unresponsive. Despite efforts to revive him, Neely was pronounced dead at a nearby hospital.
The Trial: Charges and Legal Arguments
Penny faced two charges: second-degree manslaughter, which carries a maximum sentence of 15 years, and criminally negligent homicide, carrying a maximum of four years in prison. The trial, which began in October 2024, focused on whether Penny’s actions caused Neely’s death and whether his use of the chokehold was justifiable.
Prosecutors argued that Penny’s decision to continue the chokehold after Neely stopped moving was reckless and unnecessary. They contended that Penny had held Neely’s neck for far too long and should have released the hold when it became clear that Neely was no longer a threat. The prosecution’s case emphasized that Penny acted with reckless disregard for human life, and that his actions directly led to Neely’s death. They pointed to testimony from Dr. Cynthia Harris, the medical examiner, who confirmed that Neely’s cause of death was compression of the neck, commonly known as asphyxia.
On the other hand, Penny’s defense team argued that he had acted in self-defense and to protect other passengers. They described Penny as a hero who intervened to stop what he believed was a dangerous situation. Penny himself testified that he “just put [Neely] in a chokehold” and “put him out” to ensure he wouldn’t hurt anyone on the train. His defense attorneys also suggested that Neely’s death might have been caused by other factors, including his history of mental illness, drug use, and a potential underlying medical condition. A defense expert pathologist testified that Neely’s death could have been the result of a combination of factors, including schizophrenia, sickle cell trait, and synthetic cannabinoids found in his system.
The Verdict
After nearly a week of deliberations, the jury found Penny not guilty of criminally negligent homicide. The more serious charge of manslaughter had been dismissed three days earlier after the jury failed to reach a unanimous decision on that count. The decision came after extensive deliberation, and while some in the courtroom applauded, others, including Neely’s father, Andre Zachery, reacted with anger and grief. Zachery was escorted from the courtroom after raising his voice following the verdict.
The acquittal sparked protests both inside and outside the courthouse, with demonstrators chanting “No justice, no peace” and calling the decision a reflection of racial injustice. Neely, a Black man, and Penny, a white man, had become central figures in a debate over race, the use of force, and the treatment of people with mental illness and homelessness in the United States. Some, including conservative politicians and supporters of Penny, praised the verdict, while others, including Neely’s family and civil rights groups, criticized the outcome, calling it a failure of the justice system.
Reactions to the Verdict
The case generated strong reactions across the country. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, whose office brought the charges against Penny, stated that while he respected the jury’s decision, the case had highlighted important issues about mental health and homelessness. “The totality of the facts and the evidence underscored why this case was put in front of a jury of Mr. Penny’s peers,” Bragg said in a statement.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams also commented on the verdict, acknowledging that Neely’s death highlighted significant failings in the city’s mental health system. Adams stressed the need for reform and stated that Neely “should not have had to die.” The case has reignited calls for better support systems for people experiencing homelessness and mental health issues, with many arguing that a lack of proper intervention led to the tragic outcome.
In contrast, some public figures, particularly from conservative circles, celebrated Penny’s actions as justified. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and Congressman Matt Gaetz supported Penny, calling him a hero. Penny’s defense fund, supported by donations from his backers, had raised over $3 million by the time of the trial’s conclusion.
Ongoing Legal Challenges
Despite the criminal acquittal, Neely’s family has vowed to continue seeking justice through a civil lawsuit. Filed just days before the trial’s conclusion, the lawsuit accuses Penny of negligent contact, assault, and battery, claiming that he caused Neely’s death through excessive force. The family expressed their heartbreak over the verdict, with Donte Mills, the family’s lawyer, stating, “Jordan Neely was choked to death by someone who didn’t care people were telling him to stop.”
Broader Impact and Public Debate
The case has sparked broader debates about the use of force, public safety, and race relations in America. Protests and rallies have been held across the country, with many questioning the fairness of the criminal justice system, especially in cases involving race. Civil rights leaders and activists have pointed to the case as yet another example of how Black lives are undervalued in the eyes of the law.
On the other hand, some defend Penny’s actions, claiming that he acted out of a sense of duty to protect others. This division reflects the deepening polarization in American society on issues of race, police power, and self-defense.
This article is based on the following articles:
https://gothamist.com/news/jury-finds-daniel-penny-not-guilty-in-nyc-subway-chokehold-case
Background Information
1. The Role of a Jury in the Legal System
In the United States, serious criminal cases are decided by a jury, which is a group of 12 citizens selected from the community. The jury listens to evidence presented by both the prosecution and the defense, then decides whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty based on the law and the evidence. Jury deliberations are confidential, and their decision must be unanimous for criminal charges. In this case, the jury had to determine whether Daniel Penny’s actions were criminally negligent, meaning reckless or careless enough to cause a person’s death.
2. Mental Illness and Homelessness
Jordan Neely was a homeless man with a history of mental illness. Many homeless individuals face challenges like mental health issues, substance abuse, or a lack of access to stable housing and medical care. Neely’s erratic behavior on the subway is an example of how untreated mental health problems can lead to public safety concerns. This highlights the importance of providing mental health support and housing for vulnerable populations.
3. The Chokehold and Its Implications
A chokehold is a physical restraint where pressure is applied to someone’s neck, potentially cutting off their airflow or blood flow. It is often taught in martial arts and military training but can be dangerous if misused. In recent years, the use of chokeholds has been heavily debated, especially in policing, as it can lead to serious injuries or death. Understanding the risks of using such techniques is crucial to evaluating whether their use was justified in this case.
4. Race and Social Justice in America
The racial dynamics of this case—Jordan Neely was Black, and Daniel Penny is white—led to discussions about how race impacts the justice system. Many people argue that Black individuals are often treated unfairly, both by the legal system and in public situations. Movements like Black Lives Matter have worked to raise awareness about racial inequality and police violence, making this case part of a larger national conversation about race and justice.
5. Vigilantism and Public Safety
The concept of “vigilantism” refers to individuals taking the law into their own hands instead of waiting for law enforcement. While some see this as heroic, others believe it is dangerous and can lead to unnecessary harm. This case has sparked debates about whether it is acceptable for individuals to act forcefully in situations where they feel others are at risk.
6. The Role of Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys
In criminal trials, prosecutors represent the government and argue that the defendant broke the law. In this case, prosecutors from the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office tried to prove that Daniel Penny’s actions were reckless and caused Jordan Neely’s death. Defense attorneys, on the other hand, represent the defendant and argue that their client’s actions were justified or not criminal. Defense attorneys also work to challenge the evidence presented by the prosecution.
7. The Impact of Viral Videos on Public Opinion
The incident was recorded by a bystander and widely shared on social media, leading to national attention. Viral videos can shape public opinion quickly, but they don’t always show the full context of a situation. This case shows how video evidence can influence both legal proceedings and public debates.
8. The Challenges of Public Transit Safety
Public transit systems like New York City’s subway are used by millions of people daily. While they are generally safe, incidents involving people acting aggressively or unpredictably can make passengers feel threatened. The lack of police or security personnel in such situations often leaves passengers uncertain about how to respond, as seen in this case.
9. Laws on Self-Defense
Self-defense laws allow people to protect themselves or others if they believe there is an immediate threat of harm. However, the law also requires that the level of force used be reasonable. In this case, the jury had to decide whether Daniel Penny’s actions went beyond what was reasonable under the circumstances.
10. Civil Lawsuits vs. Criminal Trials
While Penny was acquitted in the criminal trial, Neely’s family has filed a civil lawsuit against him. Criminal trials determine whether someone violated the law and can result in imprisonment, while civil lawsuits seek financial compensation for harm caused by the defendant’s actions. Civil cases have a lower standard of proof than criminal cases, meaning it is easier to win a civil case than a criminal one.
11. The Role of Mental Health Services
This case has highlighted the failures of mental health services in helping individuals like Jordan Neely. Mental health services include therapy, medication, and support programs to help people manage conditions like schizophrenia. Advocates argue that stronger mental health systems could prevent tragedies like this one by addressing issues before they escalate.
12. Media Coverage and Polarization
The media played a significant role in shaping public opinion about this case. News outlets often present different perspectives, and people’s views can be influenced by how the story is framed. Some saw Penny as a hero protecting others, while others viewed him as a vigilante whose actions were unnecessary and dangerous. This polarization shows how media coverage can deepen societal divisions.
13. Historical Context of Use of Force in Public Incidents
Incidents of force used in public settings, especially on public transit, are not new. Similar cases in the past have led to widespread debates about when force is justified and how society should respond to mental health crises in public spaces. This context helps students understand the broader significance of the Penny-Neely case.
Debate/Essay Questions
- Does the Daniel Penny case highlight systemic racism in the justice system, or is it a case of self-defense being misinterpreted?
- When, if ever, is it justified for a civilian to use potentially lethal force in a public space?
- What role should policymakers play in creating laws to address situations like the one between Daniel Penny and Jordan Neely?
Please subscribe to Insight Fortnight, our biweekly newsletter!