NEW YORK – A jury acquitted Daniel Penny of criminally negligent homicide on Monday in the death of Jordan Neely, after more than a week of deliberations. The case had garnered significant attention due to the circumstances surrounding Neely’s death – he was put in a chokehold on a subway car in May 2023.
The jury had spent over 24 hours across five days to arrive at this decision. Deliberations continued into this week over whether the act constituted criminally negligent homicide, following a deadlock on an earlier, more serious charge of manslaughter.
At the heart of the legal proceedings last Friday, Judge Maxwell Wiley, dismissing the manslaughter charge, which could have resulted in up to 15 years in prison, directed the jurors to contemplate the lesser charge. The criminally negligent homicide charge carries a maximum sentence of four years, with no minimum penalty mandated.
In court, prosecutors argued that Penny, by applying the chokehold for approximately six minutes, was aware of the lethal risk but disregarded it. They emphasized the point when Neely, a 30-year-old who was homeless and formerly worked as a Michael Jackson impersonator, went limp yet Penny maintained the hold for another 51 seconds.
The defense contended that Neely’s death was a consequence of a genetic disorder and substances found in his system, rather than the chokehold. Penny’s lawyer, Steven Raiser, described his client’s actions as a response to Neely’s erratic and threatening behavior which frightened other passengers. Raiser asserted that Penny did not intend to kill Neely.
New motions for a mistrial raised by Penny’s defense on Monday were promptly denied by Judge Wiley. These motions came after the defense argued that the dismissal of the manslaughter charge might unfairly bias the jury’s deliberations towards a conviction on the lesser charge.
Throughout the trial, external factors also played a role. Judge Wiley proposed specific instructions to assist jurors in focusing solely on the legal aspects of the case, advising them to disregard external influences, including protests outside the courthouse. Chants from these protests could occasionally be heard inside the courtroom.
Previously, the jury had struggled to reach a unanimous decision on the charge of manslaughter, having spent an extensive period in deliberations. Ultimately, the charge was dismissed, and the focus shifted to criminally negligent homicide — a charge that required proving Penny engaged in conduct he should have known posed a risk of death.
Outside the courtroom, tensions palpable in the assembled crowds reflected the divisive views on the case, with competing chants for and against Penny echoing as he entered the courthouse.
The outcome of this trial raises critical questions about the use of physical restraint and the responsibilities towards ensuring safety and dignity for all individuals.
Disclaimer: This article was automatically written by Open AI. The people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. For corrections, retractions, or removals, please contact [email protected].