Daniel Penny Acquitted in Connection with Jordan Neely’s Subway Death

NEW YORK CITY—On December 9, a jury in Manhattan found Daniel Penny not guilty of criminally negligent homicide in connection with the death of Jordan Neely, a homeless man with mental health issues whom Penny subdued with a chokehold on a subway train in May of the previous year.

On Friday, Judge Maxwell Wiley decided to dismiss the primary charge of second-degree manslaughter after the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict following three days of deliberation.

This verdict wraps up a trial that garnered intense scrutiny, lasting just over a month, from the jury selection process at the end of October to witness testimonies throughout November, culminating in this week’s closing arguments and jury discussions.

Eyewitnesses agreed that Neely boarded an uptown F train at Manhattan’s Second Avenue station and immediately began to shout about being hungry, homeless, and indifferent to returning to prison.

Though their testimonies varied slightly, some witnesses claimed Neely threatened to harm others if his needs were not addressed.

Lori Sitro, who was traveling with her young son, expressed that Neely’s actions instilled such fear for her child’s safety that she positioned the stroller in front of him to protect him from Neely.

According to Sitro, her child was too small to exit the train quickly, and she expressed her gratitude to Penny for intervening to safeguard the passengers.

Sitro’s account aligned with that of several other witnesses, such as Yvette Rosario, who reported feeling so terrified that she thought she might faint and placed her head on a friend’s chest.

Dan Couvreur indicated that the episode surpassed other distressing experiences he had encountered while riding the subway.

Alethea Gittings described Neely’s remarks as “very loud, very menacing, very disturbing,” expressing her appreciation for Penny’s intervention to ensure the safety of herself and other passengers.

During her closing statements to the jury on December 3, lead prosecutor Dafna Yoran acknowledged that some jurors might feel thankful to Penny for his swift response to protect the passengers, complicating their assessment of his potential guilt or innocence.

Yoran argued that it would be challenging to convict someone who acted with good intentions and without the desire to take another person’s life.

The defense contended that, based on the testimonies of those present on the train, Penny demonstrated courage and selflessness, while suggesting that the government was attempting to scapegoat an innocent man.

Sharp disagreements arose between the prosecution and defense regarding the factors leading to Neely’s death, the justification for using lethal force to protect subway passengers, and the legitimacy of defense claims under New York law.

A Parade of Witnesses

Throughout the trial, the jury was presented with a variety of witnesses, including subway passengers who witnessed the altercation, former Marine comrades of Penny, a friend of the defendant, his mother, and two medical experts who contradicted each other’s accounts regarding the cause of Neely’s death.

Prosecutors called Dr. Cynthia Harris, a medical examiner from New York City who conducted Neely’s autopsy, to the stand.

Harris testified that she discovered synthetic cannabinoids in Neely’s system that were more potent than marijuana, comparable to cocaine in their aggressive effects.

She indicated that the chokehold inflicted by Penny caused vascular and airway compromises that led to Neely’s death, resulting in “a low-oxygen state for the brain,” a condition “sufficient to cause death,” according to her sworn testimony on November 15.

The defense sought to counter these claims by putting certified forensic pathologist Satish Chundru on the stand.

During direct examination by defense attorney Steve Raiser, Chundru stated that several factors combined to lead to Jordan Neely’s death.

Chundru pointed out that Harris should have accounted for other factors, including the drugs in Neely’s system, his schizophrenia, and a sickle cell trait that became crisis under the duress of the chokehold.

He explained that red blood cells in individuals with this trait morph under stress, transitioning from their usual round shape to a “crescent moon or banana shape,” rendering them ineffective at transporting oxygen to tissues.

During the chokehold, Neely experienced a sickle cell crisis that directly led to his death, Chundru claimed.

He argued that attributing the death solely to the chokehold disregarded the impact of Neely’s sickle cell condition and its potential to cause fatal complications in circumstances that would not typically endanger a healthy individual.

Differing Theories

The prosecution and defense frequently disputed the implications of cell phone footage recorded during the incident.

Attorneys on both sides repeatedly displayed this footage on screens in the courtroom, presenting conflicting interpretations regarding when Neely lost consciousness and analyzing nonverbal cues such as the position of his tongue and leg movements while he was restrained by Penny’s chokehold.

Yoran aimed to undermine Chundru’s testimony, which suggested that Neely remained conscious and struggled at a point in the video where she argued that Penny had caused him to lose consciousness.

Another critical aspect of the trial involved Penny’s character.

Although Judge Wiley leaned toward the prosecution’s view that character witness testimony was irrelevant to the case, he momentarily allowed Penny’s attorneys to call to the stand individuals who had served with him in the Marines.

These witnesses portrayed Penny as a decent and responsible person who adhered to rules, interacted well with others, and had not been the target of complaints or negative remarks during their experiences with him.

Yoran utilized the testimony of Joseph Caballer, who had taught Penny combat techniques during their service, to bolster her claim that Penny’s actions exceeded what his training permitted or endorsed.

Throughout her arguments, Yoran asserted that the chokehold that Penny applied to Neely was inappropriate, considering both the positioning of their bodies and the duration of the hold.

Yoran contended that Penny should have released Neely immediately once he showed signs of losing consciousness and posed no threat, yet he maintained the hold for approximately six minutes, leading to an asphyxial death.