New York — The jury deliberating the fate of Daniel Penny, accused in the choking death of subway performer Jordan Neely, finds itself at an impasse, prompting the Manhattan District Attorney to drop a manslaughter charge. Deliberations will continue Monday focusing solely on the remaining charge of criminally negligent homicide.
The case, which attracted widespread attention after a video of the May 2023 incident on a Lower Manhattan F train went viral, has stoked debates over self-defense and the use of force in public spaces. Penny, captured on video holding Neely in a chokehold until he ceased to move, claims he acted in self-defense after Neely, known for his Michael Jackson impersonation in the subway, exhibited threatening behavior.
Initially charged with second-degree manslaughter, which carries a maximum penalty of 15 years, Penny could now face up to four years if convicted of criminally negligent homicide. Following over three days of deliberation without reaching a verdict on the manslaughter charge, the jury was instructed by Judge Maxwell Wiley to persist in their efforts using an Allen charge — a judicial tool intended to prevent a deadlock by encouraging jurors to re-examine their positions.
Penny’s defense has sought a mistrial, contending that the Allen charge was coercive due to the complex nature of the situation. However, Judge Wiley rejected this motion, and the trial progressed with the manslaughter charge subsequently dropped.
Defense attorney Thomas Keniff expressed relief at the reduction of charges but reiterated his position that Penny had acted reasonably. “While we are pleased with the decision to withdraw the more severe charge, we continue to assert that an acquittal on all counts would be the true administration of justice,” Keniff stated.
The backdrop to the trial was a city grappling with issues of safety and policing in public spaces. Neely’s death set off a wave of protests across New York, with demonstrators calling for accountability and highlighting the tensions between community safety and individual actions deemed as vigilante behavior.
Prosecutors argue that Penny’s prolonged use of the chokehold, well beyond Neely’s resistance, shifted the action from potential self-defense to reckless endangerment. Meanwhile, defense witnesses have suggested Neely’s erratic behavior and distressing declarations about his own life posed an imminent threat, justifying Penny’s response as a civilian protecting himself and others.
The jury, which began deliberations on December 3 following a trial that started in late October, is now set to reconvene. The reduction of charges against Penny shapes a new legal landscape for the jury to navigate as they work towards a unanimous decision.
As the city awaits a verdict, the outcome of this case will likely resonate beyond the courtroom, potentially influencing public discourse on the boundaries of civilian intervention in crisis situations.
The content of this article is automatically generated by OpenAI and may contain inaccuracies. This story can be updated, retracted, or corrected by reaching out to [email protected] for any concerns or requests.