The manslaughter charge against Daniel Penny, a former Marine, was dismissed after the jury failed to reach a unanimous decision following extensive deliberations.

Following the inability to reach a consensus on the manslaughter charge, the jury is now moving on to evaluate a charge of criminally negligent homicide next week, as the Washington Examiner reports.

The charges against Penny stem from an incident that occurred on May 1, 2023, on a Manhattan F train. Jordan Neely, a homeless man known to suffer from mental illness, boarded the train and began to shout at commuters.

His repeated declarations, stating his readiness to die and intentions of violence, frightened fellow passengers.

Witnesses to the event described Neely's behavior as erratic and intimidating. Reports indicated that he made unsettling gestures, causing several passengers to fear for their safety. These past altercations had seen Neely arrested 42 times, including on charges of theft, fare evasion, and assault.

As the tension escalated, Penny, assisted by two other passengers, restrained Neely by applying a chokehold. Neely's limp body was kept in this hold for almost six minutes, despite going unconscious. Penny and his co-restrainers placed Neely in a recovery position upon realizing his state.

Legal Proceedings and Medical Examination

The delayed response of law enforcement, who arrived 30 minutes after Neely's initial disruption, meant that Neely was taken to a nearby hospital, where he was declared deceased. Subsequently, the medical examiner determined the cause of death to be asphyxiation resulting from the chokehold.

In contrast, a defense-hired medical expert suggested that Neely's demise could also be attributed to factors like drug use. The conflicting medical opinions added complexity to the court proceedings.

Eleven days after the incident, District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Penny with second-degree manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide. Penny, who remained adamant in his innocence, was released on a bond of $100,000.

Jury Deliberations and Mistrial Ruling

The jury, composed of seven women and five men, was tasked with combing through the evidence, which included body camera footage highlighting the intense moments on the train. These deliberations consumed four exhausting days, leading to a deadlock.

By Friday, the jury informed Judge Maxwell Wiley of their inability to reach an agreement on the manslaughter charge, prompting a potential mistrial. Initially, Judge Wiley asked the jury to continue their discussions but ultimately acquiesced to the prosecution's request to drop the manslaughter charge.

This dismissal took place at about 3:30 p.m. on Friday. The decision enables the legal process to advance as the jury gears up to consider the lesser charge of negligent homicide starting Monday.

The Repercussions of Public Outcry

In the wake of these judicial proceedings, Jordan Neely's father has initiated a civil lawsuit against Penny. Allegations contained within this suit include claims of negligence, assault, and battery, adding another layer of legal scrutiny for Penny.

Reflections on the trial reveal that assistant district attorneys sought to emphasize the danger of Neely's behavior in the courtroom. Statements made during the proceedings underscored the racial dynamics involved, referring to Penny as “the white man.”

Penny, in his defense, recounted his military training, insisting that his sole objective in the confrontation was the preservation of safety, not harm.

Awaiting the Next Stage of Trial

The case reflects broader debates surrounding public safety and the treatment of mentally ill individuals in public spaces. Neely’s vocal expressions, like his declarations regarding jail and life imprisonment, were brought to the fore in court.

Public interest remains high as the courtroom prepares for continuing deliberations on Monday. The decision to dismiss the manslaughter charge does not mark the end of Penny's judicial challenges.

As observers anticipate the next legal steps, the outcome of the ongoing deliberations could hold considerable significance for those involved and the wider community.