Daniel Penny opts not to testify in manslaughter trial: ‘How much jury…’ – Times of India

Daniel Penny (Picture credit: Reuters)

The defense rested its case on Friday in the manslaughter trial of Daniel Penny, a Marine veteran charged in the death of Jordan Neely, a homeless New York subway performer. In a notable decision, Penny chose not to testify in his own defense.
The defense’s final witness was court clerk Brian Kempf, who testified about issuing an arrest warrant for Neely after he missed a court appearance in February 2023, as reported by the New York Post. This occurred two months before Neely’s death aboard an F train in May.
Penny’s decision not to take the stand means the jury will not hear his personal account of the events leading up to Neely’s death.
The 24-year-old is on trial for second-degree manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide. The incident took place on May 1, 2023, on an uptown F train in Manhattan, when Penny restrained Neely in a fatal chokehold during an altercation.
Witnesses described Neely as delivering an “unhinged” rant toward passengers before Penny subdued him in a chokehold that lasted six minutes.
Although Penny chose to remain silent, his attorney, Thomas Kenniff, addressed reporters after court proceedings. “This jury has heard from Mr Penny. They heard from him before he had the opportunity to have an attorney. They heard him in the minutes and hours after this incident… He told them what happened, and he said all the same things, all the same things in essence that the credible eyewitnesses testified. That Jordan Neely was terrifying,” Kenniff said, as quoted by the New York Post.
Kenniff stressed the defense’s argument: “He believed, like so many eyewitnesses, that [Neely] was going to make good … He thought someone was going to get hurt, he thought someone was going to get killed, and he acted. I don’t know how much more the jury has to hear in that regard.”
The case has divided New Yorkers, sparking debate over vigilante justice and subway safety. Prosecutors maintain that Neely, though behaving erratically, was non-violent, while the defense argues Penny’s actions were justified by Neely’s threatening demeanor.