Deliberations stalled in Daniel Penny trial for Jordan Neely's death

The jury analyzing the case of Daniel Penny, charged with involuntary manslaughter in the death of Jordan Neely, reported that they did not reach a unanimous verdict on the main charge. Despite this, the judge ordered deliberations to continue.

After four days of deliberations, the jury informed Judge Maxwell Wiley that it had been unable to reach a unanimous verdict on the second-degree murder charge. The indictment required proving that Daniel Penny, a 26-year-old Marine and architecture student, acted recklessly in subduing Neely, a homeless man with mental problems who had threatened to kill passengers in a Manhattan subway car, with a neck brace.

Judge Wiley ruled out the possibility of the jury advancing to the second count, criminally negligent manslaughter, until a decision is made on the first count of second-degree manslaughter. "I have to at least try to ask the jury to find a verdict on count 1," Wiley explained to lawyers for both sides.

The judge announced that he will give the jury instructions based on the "Allen charge," a measure that seeks to avoid a mistrial by urging jurors to reconsider their positions. However, this practice is controversial, as it could put pressure on jurors and lead them to relent in their opinions.

Context of subway violence and public reaction

The incident occurred in a context of growing insecurity in the New York subway system, where episodes of assault and pushing on the tracks have alarmed users. According to testimonies, Neely, a 30-year-old man with schizophrenia and a criminal record that included assault, issued death threats to passengers before being restrained by Penny.

The case has generated polarized debate. Penny's defenders argue that he acted not only in self-defense but also in the defense of other passengers, while his critics accuse him of using excessive and unjustified force.

Paul Mauro, a former NYPD inspector, called the case "ideological" and said a deadlocked jury is not a victory for Penny, who could still face a new trial if the current one is declared a mistrial.

Ultimately, any decision will depend on whether jurors believe Penny's actions were reasonable and justified or whether they engaged in criminal recklessness.

Implications of the case

The ultimate decision will depend on whether the jury finds that Penny's actions were reasonable and justified or whether they were criminally reckless. This case will set a crucial precedent for how the use of force is evaluated in situations of perceived risk, especially in public settings such as urban transportation.

Penny faces a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison if convicted of the most serious charge.