Closing arguments were presented on Monday in the trial of Daniel Penny, the accused in the killing of Jordan Neely, a Black homeless man, on a New York City subway. The prosecution, represented by Assistant District Attorney Dafna Yoran, argued that no one needed to die on May 1, 2023.
Neely had allegedly made verbal threats that frightened some passengers, but Yoran emphasized that Penny’s actions were reckless. Penny, a 26-year-old Marine veteran, faces charges of manslaughter and negligent homicide, carrying a potential sentence of up to 15 years in prison if convicted. The jury is expected to deliberate starting Tuesday, with the possibility of continuing into Wednesday.
Penny’s defense, however, sought to portray him as a modern-day savior, claiming he acted out of necessity to protect other subway passengers. Defense attorney Steven Raiser emphasized that Neely, a street performer, entered the train “filled with rage” and posed a threat to those aboard.
Raiser argued that Penny’s actions were driven by a desire to save the passengers from an imminent danger. Penny’s legal team also refrained from putting the defendant on the stand during the trial, concluding their case on November 22 without his testimony.
Jury to Deliberate in Daniel Penny’s Trial for Killing Jordan Neely on NYC Subway
Neely’s death occurred when Penny placed him in a chokehold for approximately six minutes, during which Neely was unable to escape. A bystander recorded the incident, and the video went viral, showing Neely’s lifeless body on the train floor.
The prosecution argued that Penny used excessive force, pointing out that Neely did not brandish a weapon or physically attack anyone. In contrast, the defense acknowledged that Neely’s entrance was threatening but insisted it did not justify deadly force.
While Yoran conceded that Neely’s behavior on the train was alarming, she contended that Penny overreacted by holding the chokehold for too long.
She argued that Penny’s initial intent to protect passengers was reasonable, but his failure to release Neely when he stopped resisting contributed directly to the death. The prosecution emphasized that Penny could have restrained Neely without resorting to lethal force.
The defense attempted to shift the blame for Neely’s death to other factors. They argued that synthetic marijuana found in Neely’s system and a potential genetic condition were significant contributors.
Raiser also denied that Penny used a typical Marine blood choke, insisting that the purpose was never to render Neely unconscious, but to subdue him. However, the prosecution disagreed, asserting that Penny could have easily restrained Neely without killing him. The case now rests with the jury to decide.
