In a closely watched trial, a Manhattan jury on Monday acquitted Daniel Penny, a 26-year-old former Marine, of criminally negligent homicide in the death of Jordan Neely, a 30-year-old homeless man, on a New York City subway last year. The verdict followed intense deliberations and widespread public debate over the case, which highlighted issues of mental health, race, and safety in urban settings.
Case Overview

The incident occurred on May 1, 2023, when Neely, described as a street performer who struggled with homelessness and mental illness, entered a subway car and began behaving erratically. Witnesses reported that Neely threw down his jacket and shouted about being hungry and thirsty, adding that he didn’t care whether he lived or died. Penny, who was also a passenger, intervened, placing Neely in a chokehold and restraining him on the subway floor for several minutes. Neely became unresponsive during the restraint and was later pronounced dead.
Bystander video capturing the chokehold was widely circulated on social media and played repeatedly during the trial. The footage became a focal point in arguments presented by both the prosecution and the defense.
Trial and Verdict
Penny initially faced a more severe charge of second-degree manslaughter, which carried a potential 15-year prison sentence. However, Judge Maxwell Wiley dismissed the manslaughter charge last Friday after jurors declared themselves deadlocked on the count during two rounds of deliberations. This left the jury to consider only the lesser charge of criminally negligent homicide, which carried a maximum sentence of four years.
The jury deliberated for just over an hour on Monday before delivering the not-guilty verdict. Applause erupted in the courtroom as the decision was announced, with Penny visibly relieved, nodding in gratitude toward the jury. Neely’s father, who was present for the verdict, reacted emotionally, leading to his removal from the courtroom after an outburst.
Prosecution vs. Defense
Prosecutors argued that Penny acted recklessly by holding Neely in a chokehold for an extended period, even after Neely ceased struggling. During closing arguments, Assistant District Attorney Dafna Yoran stated, “We are here today because the defendant used way too much force for way too long in way too reckless of a manner.”
Penny’s defense team maintained that their client acted to protect himself and other passengers from a perceived threat. “I wasn’t trying to injure him,” Penny told NYPD investigators in a recorded interview. “I’m just trying to keep him from hurting anybody else. He was threatening.”
The defense also contested the medical examiner’s conclusion that the chokehold caused Neely’s death, suggesting that factors such as Neely’s pre-existing health conditions and drug use may have contributed. They argued that the charges were a result of public pressure and not grounded in medical science.
Public Reaction and Broader Implications
The case has divided public opinion in New York City and beyond. Black Lives Matter activists have cited Neely’s death as part of a broader pattern of racial injustice and police-style brutality, holding demonstrations outside the courthouse throughout the trial. Many of Neely’s supporters have argued that his erratic behavior on the subway reflected systemic failures in addressing homelessness and mental health crises.
Conversely, some have defended Penny’s actions, framing him as a protector who intervened in a chaotic situation to safeguard others. This viewpoint resonated with subway riders and residents who expressed frustration over rising disorder on public transit.
The trial has also sparked debate about the legal boundaries of self-defense and the obligations of individuals in potentially dangerous situations. The case highlighted the lack of adequate resources for mental health interventions and the complexities of urban safety.
What’s Next?
Although Penny has been acquitted of criminally negligent homicide, the incident continues to resonate in public discourse. Legal experts suggest the trial underscores the challenges of prosecuting cases where the line between self-defense and excessive force is contested.
Neely’s family has yet to issue a formal statement following the verdict. Advocates for the family have called for systemic reforms to prevent similar tragedies, urging investments in mental health services and homelessness prevention programs.
For Penny, the verdict marks the end of a legal battle, but he remains a controversial figure. His defense attorneys stated that the case represented a “rush to judgment” and emphasized their client’s intent was never malicious. However, critics argue that the lack of accountability in such incidents perpetuates a dangerous precedent.
Conclusion
The acquittal of Daniel Penny closes a high-profile legal chapter but leaves open questions about justice, public safety, and societal responsibility. As New York City grapples with the intersection of mental health, homelessness, and crime, the case serves as a stark reminder of the human and legal complexities involved in navigating such challenges.