Daniel Penny: The Good Samaritan?

Daniel Penny is a 26-year-old Long Island native and former marine. Some call him hero. Others, view him as the villain of the story. A murderer, in fact.

Here’s the story: On May 1, 2023, Jordan Neely, a homeless man with schizophrenia and a history of drug abuse and violence, had boardered a Manhattan subway train and then proceeded to threaten passengers, shouting that he didn’t care if he went to jail or died.

Penny, along with a few other passengers, intervened, with Penny placing Neely in a chokehold to restrain him. This resulted in death, a homicide due to “compression of neck,” according to the medical examiner.

Penny was charged with second-degree manslaughter, which sparked outrage amongst those who viewed him as a hero—the epitome of a ‘good samaritan’—and claims that this prosecution is not only unjust but will lead to others avoiding intervening to help protect those in need. His supporters raised nearly $3 million for his legal defense through crowdfunding platforms.

But not everyone agrees, of course.

Did Penny exceed the physical force necessary to contain Neely? Was Neely truly a threat at the moment (he made threats, but didn’t actually attack anyone)? What force is acceptable to use? Is this a dangerous precedent when it comes to how we deal with mental health crises?

One is allowed to protect themselves—and others—but if their actions aren’t proportional to potential danger, what’s to stop people from choking out or shooting others for merely threatening them or being menacing. Most such altercation do not lead to violence.

That isn’t to say that Penny had no right to protect passengers on that train, but we must determine whether his precise actions were justified based on Neely's threat that day (he wouldn’t have been aware of Neely’s violent priors). If there were several men restraining Neely, why was he put in a chokehold rather than held by them until police arrived? Was it truly necessary? Or was it an issue of their own safety as well? Why was this type of chokehold ("blood choke”) held for so long (over three minutes, though, arguably loosening the grip intermittently) when Marines are typically trained to use this hold for no longer than five seconds during practice? Is that negligence? Is there more of an expectation to get it ‘right’ from someone who is a marine than a civilian?

Mental health plays a big role in this case’s context. Most of us have likely been in situation where we felt uncomfortable or in danger around people who are either high on drugs, or having mental breakdowns. Their erratic behavior can feel truly threatening, yet how do we judge whether that threat is real or perceived? Again, most such situations are deeply unsettling but do not lead to any physical violence. And yet, sometimes they do. Like when a man who stopped taking his medication had beheaded a passenger on a Greyhound bus after hearing what he thought was "the voice of God." According to FOX 5 New York, in the year before Neely's death, over 20 people had been shoved onto the subway tracks in New York City.

How are we to know until it goes too far?

---

---

Penny's attorneys argued that passengers testified they were extremely fearful of Neely and perceived his outburst as atypical.

There’s little evidence to suggest that Penny had any desire to kill Neely. He’s not even charged with a crime based on intent, but rather, essentially, negligence.

Penny received a Humanitarian Service Medal for his work during the Hurricane Florence response in 2018. By all accounts he’s an upstanding citizen, member of his community, son, and friend. And now he faces up to 15 years behind bars.

Is Penny really a threat to the public? Does he need to be put behind bars to protect society? Or is his case more of an arbitration on whether some defensive force is excessive?

This brings us back to this idea of others not wanting to step in to help in the future. To that, I’d query: How often do interventions actually lead to manslaughter? Is not every case unique? And if you saw a person being attacked and were in the position to help, would you really turn a blind eye because you might be charged with using excessive force?

“Danny doesn’t have to be a hero,” Penny’s defense attorney Thomas Kenniff told FOX5. “But he’s someone who did the right thing. He’s someone who stood up for his fellow man, for his fellow New Yorkers.”

For his part, Penny does not feel that he had acted improperly.

A recently released video of his interrogation also shows that he was misled by police officers, with whom he spoke openly and cordially. While not technically illegal, it is uncomfortable (at the least) to observe how the officers had built up a rapport with him by exploiting the fact that another officer is a fellow marine, acting as if he’s just being questioned as a witness, and withholding the fact that Neely had died. All without a lawyer present because Penny was clearly not under any impression that he needed one. He wasn’t even aware of a death.

When Penny let go of the chokehold, Neely still had a pulse, but according to the forensic pathologist conducting his autopsy, it’s normal for someone’s heart to keep beating even after death when choked.

In court, his defense team disputes that the cause of death was actually the choke, rather than the synthetic marijuana in Neely’s system and his sickle cell condition. It’s possible that these things have been contributing factors, but without the prolonged chokehold, would he have died?

Ultimately, it is up to the jury to decide on the facts of the case. However, this is far from an open and shut case because there’s a broader question to answer: What actions are justified when we are afraid for our own life or that of others? Is each situation unique and should be judged as such? And what if we inadvertently get it wrong?

Is Daniel Penny a ‘good samaritan’ or someone who had good intentions but overstepped? Leave your thoughts below.

The trial of Daniel Penny, charged with second-degree manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide in the death of Jordan Neely, began on November 1, 2024 and is expected to conclude by early to mid-December.

PLEASE CONSIDER UPGRADING…

Writing takes time and effort. Good writing takes even more. And independent writing, unfortunately, is impossible without fiscal support (because: life isn’t free). If you enjoy reading my essays, get some value out of them, want to read even more, and can afford to support my work, please consider upgrading to a paid subscription.

I will continue to provide both free and paid posts for readers for as long as I can, but your support will help keep this Substack going, and hopefully, see it grow—eventually even pursuing investigative pieces (which take even more time and effort).

☕️ By popular request, you can also support my work by making a one-off donation via Buy Me a Coffee.

---

Order my book, No Apologies: How to Find and Free Your Voice in the Age of Outrage―Lessons for the Silenced Majority —speaking up today is more important than ever.