Jury Acquits Daniel Penny in Subway Chokehold Case
NEW YORK – A jury has found Daniel Penny, a former Marine, not guilty of criminally negligent homicide related to the death of Jordan Neely, an unarmed homeless man whom Penny placed in a chokehold on a subway last year.
This morning, around 11:30 AM, the jury announced that they had reached a unanimous decision regarding the second count of the indictment, according to court officials.
The case gained national attention when footage of the chokehold after Neely’s death went viral, with the city’s medical examiner declaring the death resulted from “compression of the neck.”
There has been extensive debate among attorneys about whether Penny’s actions constituted a crime during the moment he kept Neely in a chokehold. After more than a month of expert testimonies and witness statements, Penny was acquitted.
Defense attorney Steve Raiser expressed relief that this “nightmare” is over for Penny, allowing attorneys to shift their focus to a civil lawsuit initiated by Neely’s father regarding his son’s death.
The trial lasted for over a month, during which a jury from Manhattan assessed two charges against Penny: the more serious charge of second-degree manslaughter and the lesser charge of criminally negligent homicide.
However, by noon on Friday, the jury communicated that they were struggling to reach a verdict.
Penny’s defense argued that Neely had been yelling at other subway riders before Penny applied a chokehold for about six minutes in an effort to safeguard the passengers. Conversely, prosecutors contended that Penny had acted recklessly by using excessive force for too long, leading to a deprivation of oxygen for Neely, who was 30 years old and formerly a Michael Jackson impersonator.
On Friday afternoon, prosecutors requested the judge to dismiss the more severe charge of second-degree manslaughter, which the jury indicated they were divided on.
Understanding the Charges
To secure a conviction for second-degree manslaughter, the jury would have needed to concur that Penny acted recklessly by realizing Neely’s life was endangered yet continued to apply the chokehold, according to the prosecution.
For a conviction of criminally negligent homicide, the jury would have needed to conclude that Penny failed to recognize the life-threatening situation Neely was in while struggling to breathe due to the chokehold, as set forth in prosecutorial documents.
Manslaughter Charge Dismissed
At the trial’s commencement, Judge Max Wiley directed the jury that they must agree on the second-degree manslaughter charge prior to considering the criminally negligent homicide charge. If they ruled not guilty on the former, then both charges would be dropped, Wiley noted.
However, on Friday, the jury communicated to the judge that they were deadlocked on the first count. Despite Wiley’s request for them to continue deliberating, they remained at an impasse.
This prompted prosecutors to ask for the more severe second-degree manslaughter charge to be dropped.
In response, the judge emphasized to the jurors their responsibility to work toward a unanimous verdict, urging them to consider each other’s viewpoints, according to Raiser.
Defense Arguments
The defense claimed during the trial that Neely was behaving “psychotic” and posed a threat to passengers on the subway. They argued that Penny acted to protect those around him, as Neely threatened several individuals before he was restrained. The defense also asserted Penny’s chokehold alone could not have been the direct cause of Neely’s death, suggesting that Neely experienced a severe sickle cell crisis which compromised his oxygen supply. However, the medical examiner testified that Neely’s death stemmed from “compression of the neck,” not from pre-existing medical conditions.
Prosecution’s Stance
Prosecutor Dafna Yoran maintained that Penny should have been aware that his actions put Neely’s life in jeopardy as the chokehold continued and Neely was deprived of oxygen. Yoran argued that Penny was unnecessarily reckless for maintaining the chokehold long after Neely ceased to pose a threat.
The prosecution also contended that Penny acted without hesitation in placing Neely in the hold and did not attempt to resolve the situation through other means. Another bystander offered to restrain Neely’s arms so Penny could release him from the chokehold, but instead, Penny maintained his grip on Neely’s neck.
Yoran explained to the jurors that even after Neely’s body became unresponsive, the amount of force used was excessive and prolonged.
“He applied excessive force for an unacceptable length of time,” Yoran stated.