Daniel Penny trial closing arguments bring pressure and tension to Manhattan court, as case nears the jury

Pressure.

It’s been looming over the Daniel Penny manslaughter trial in lower Manhattan.

It’s on the defense to convince the jury he’s an innocent man guilty only of trying to help his fellow New Yorkers — and retain his freedom and his good name.

And it’s bearing down on beleaguered Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, whose soft-on-crime policies have helped to create a precarious state of law and order in Manhattan, setting the stage for the events which led to this trial.

Today, Bragg finally showed his face in court as both sides gave closing arguments.

Even Monday’s proceedings, which started an hour-and-a-half late due to bickering and technical difficulties, were physically uncomfortable. Temperatures in the crowded courtroom soared — a palpable reminder of how charged this entire case has been.

And ultimately it all comes down to this: did Penny, while restraining Jordan Neely in a chokehold apply enough consistent and sufficient pressure to cause the 30-year-old mentally disturbed man’s death?

In their closing remarks, the defense argued the Marine veteran, who is trained in chokeholds, did not.

“What happened on May 1, 2023 was not a chokehold death,” said defense attorney Steven Raiser. “They must prove that Danny actually applied it in the following manner: consistent and sufficient to the point of death. The truth is, he didn’t.”

Raiser added that Penny didn’t apply such pressure because he wasn’t trying to “render him unconscious.”

Raiser reiterated the findings of Dr. Chundru, their forensic pathology expert, who disputed the medical examiner’s conclusion Neely died of a chokehold. Chundru said Neely died of a combination of factors: his use of street drug K2, his schizophrenia, and the struggle, which triggered a sickle cell crisis in his body.

“He was not dying due to Danny squeezing him to death. He was dying because he was being deprived of oxygen internally due to his medical condition,” said Raiser.

“Danny could not foresee [Neely’s] sickling death so he is not guilty.”

Raiser laid out Neely’s extensive mental illness, which was described by their expert witness as a “severe” case of paranoid schizophrenia. Also his belief that rapper Tupac Shakur, who died in 1996, was “using him to change the world.”

The defense then tried to put the jury in the subway car of the uptown F train as it approached the Broadway-Lafayette station in May 2023.

He wove a montage of witness accounts: many describing their levels of fear so as high, they created physical reactions.

“You go nowhere because you can’t…Everyone was frozen with fear,” said Raiser, adding that his client “stepped up, not knowing if Neely was armed. And he held him in place until the police came.”

And it took a long time for them to arrive.

Raiser brought up, again, the case of the medical examiner ruling Neely’s death was from a chokehold even before all the tests, including the toxicology, had been completed. 

“I submit to you there was a rush to judgment based on something other than medical science,” he said, suggesting that this case was brought to satisfy protesters.

He claimed the video taken by journalist Juan Alberto Vazquez only helped their case – and that the government simply did not deliver the goods they promised.

Countering for the prosecution, Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Dafna Yoran tried to paint Penny as someone who had a “real blind spot” for Neely – and he “used way too much force for way too long, in way too reckless of a manner.”

Then she went after his character and got personal. She said Penny, who has been described by family as “calm” was callous when speaking to police in a now viral police interrogation video. In the video, she claimed he showed no remorse or regret and lied to police. 

Penny, who didn’t realize that he was at that time a suspect had willingly spoken to cops, thinking he had mitigated a potential disaster. He was not aware at that point that Neely had died.

“Our society cannot allow citizens or the police, for that matter, kill people based on empty threats” said Yoran adding, “The defendant could easily have restrained Mr. Neely without choking him to death.”

After sitting in the courtroom for the last month, I’ve come to the conclusion that Penny didn’t choke him to death. What happened to Neely is a tragedy, a sad ending for a troubled man, who yes, had a history of violence on the subway. But I could not, beyond reasonable doubt, pin Neely’s death on Penny. 

“Who would you want on the next train ride with you?” Raiser asked. “The government wasn’t there. The police weren’t there when the people on that train needed help. Danny was.”

And I hope those 12 Manhattanites on the jury return the favor.