Penny acquitted: After Daniel walks free, what legal options remain for Jordan Neely’s family? – Times of India

Andre Zachary, the father of Jordan Neely, speaks outside State Supreme Court in Manhattan after Daniel Penny, who choked Neely on an uptown F train last year, was acquitted on a charge of criminally negligent homicide.

Manhattan jury’s acquittal of Daniel Penny in the chokehold death of Jordan Neely has left Neely’s legal team grappling with the next steps. The high-profile case, which reignited debates over mental health, crime, and race, has now shifted to the question: What legal recourse remains for Neely’s advocates?
A civil suit for accountability
With the criminal trial concluded, Neely’s lawyers may focus on filing a civil lawsuit. Unlike a criminal case, a civil suit would not aim for incarceration but instead seek financial damages or a declaration of wrongdoing. Civil cases operate on a lower burden of proof—requiring only a “preponderance of evidence” rather than “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
This option could provide Neely’s family with a sense of justice and potentially highlight systemic failures that led to his tragic death.
Grounds for an appeal
While criminal acquittals cannot typically be retried due to double jeopardy protections, Neely’s lawyers could explore the possibility of appealing procedural issues from the trial. If they believe the court erred in admitting or excluding evidence, or if juror conduct was questionable, an appeal might be pursued to challenge the fairness of the process.
Public pressure for reform
Beyond the courtroom, Neely’s legal team and supporters may amplify public pressure to address broader issues raised by his death. Advocates could push for reforms in mental health services, subway safety protocols, or policies governing the use of force by civilians.
Why Penny was acquitted
The defense argued Penny acted in self-defense, claiming Neely, who was homeless and experiencing a mental health crisis, posed a threat to passengers. The jury was persuaded by the defense’s narrative that Neely’s erratic behavior was frightening and justified Penny’s actions. Video evidence and testimony played pivotal roles, but the dismissal of the manslaughter charge after a deadlocked jury likely sealed Penny’s fate.
Prosecutors countered that Penny’s chokehold was excessive and reckless, with Neely immobilized for nearly a minute before his death. The medical examiner’s report confirmed the chokehold caused Neely’s death, but the defense pointed to other factors, including a genetic condition and synthetic marijuana in Neely’s system, as contributing causes.
What’s next?
As Penny walks free, Neely’s name is set to remain central to discussions about justice and accountability in a divided city. Whether through a civil suit or broader advocacy, Neely’s legal team is unlikely to let this case fade quietly. The outcome may serve as a catalyst for change—or yet another chapter in an ongoing debate about crime, race, and mental health in America.