The trial of Daniel Penny has reignited fierce debates on the intersections of law, race, and accountability. Penny, a white former Marine, placed Jordan Neely, a Black homeless man, in a fatal chokehold on a New York City subway, claiming he acted to protect himself and others. Penny was charged with second-degree manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide, but this case transcends legal definitions, inviting deeper conversations about racial justice, historical trauma, and the role of Black communities in shaping the justice system.
The Legal Landscape: Manslaughter vs. Criminally Negligent Homicide
The charges against Penny illustrate varying degrees of culpability under New York law:
- Second-Degree Manslaughter: This charge requires proof that Penny acted recklessly—consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk of causing death. Prosecutors argued that Penny’s prolonged chokehold on Neely demonstrated a conscious indifference to the risk of fatal harm.
- Criminally Negligent Homicide: This lesser charge involves failing to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk, constituting a gross deviation from the standard of care expected of a reasonable person. Penny’s defense claimed he did not recognize the danger his actions posed, framing his conduct as negligent rather than reckless.
The jury’s inability to reach consensus on the manslaughter charge highlights the challenge of applying legal standards that hinge on subjective interpretations of intent and risk. While the courtroom focused on these distinctions, the broader societal questions about race and justice loom large.
The Weight of Racial History and Trauma
For Black people, this case is not merely about the tragic death of Jordan Neely; it is a flashpoint in the ongoing struggle for racial justice in America. The historical context cannot be ignored: the legacy of violence against Black individuals, especially Black men, often at the hands of white men, has been met with systemic impunity for centuries. From the lynching of Emmett Till to the modern killings of Trayvon Martin, George Floyd, and Kenneth Chamberlain Sr., Black lives have repeatedly been devalued, and perpetrators have often escaped justice.
This history gives Black activists and communities every right to scrutinize Penny’s actions and the judicial system’s response. When Penny’s actions are analyzed through the lens of racial bias and historical inequities, they become emblematic of a broader pattern where Black lives are perceived as threats rather than human beings deserving of dignity and protection.
Yet, as valid as these critiques are, the fight for justice must also include practical strategies to ensure that the system operates fairly. One of the most impactful ways to effect change is by increasing Black participation in jury service. Jury duty is a cornerstone of the justice system, where ordinary citizens make decisions that profoundly impact lives and communities. The absence of diverse perspectives in jury pools contributes to systemic bias, as Black defendants and victims are too often judged by juries that do not reflect the diversity of society.
It is not enough to merely label the system as racist, as many so-called activists often do these days, chasing social media likes and providing entertainment for uninformed followers. While these critiques may generate attention online, they lack the substance to bring real change. These actions remain performative and hollow without engaging in the mechanisms that can make the system more just. True activism requires rallying communities to actively participate in meaningful ways, such as embracing jury duty as a tool of empowerment. Encouraging Black individuals to step up for jury service—especially in high-profile or racially charged cases—provides a direct and impactful way to ensure that justice is served with fairness, representation, and accountability.
In my 30 years of fighting for justice against police crimes targeting Black people, it has always been disheartening to walk into a courthouse and see only one or two Black jurors—or, far too often, none at all. This absence means the Black perspective is lost in many cases, leaving critical voices unheard when justice is on the line. The truth is simple: if we want the system to deliver justice, we must ensure we are in the room where decisions are made. Protesting injustices after the fact is important, but it is equally crucial to take proactive measures, like encouraging greater Black participation in jury duty, to influence outcomes as they unfold.
The Penny-Neely case reveals failures on multiple levels. Jordan Neely’s life, marked by homelessness and mental health struggles, highlights the systemic neglect of vulnerable populations, particularly Black men, by a society that claims to value justice but fails to provide adequate support. Neely’s struggles are a stark reminder of how mental health issues among Black men are too often ignored, compounding their marginalization and leaving them without the help they desperately need. If Black lives truly mattered, we would prioritize addressing the glaring gaps in mental health services and resources for Black men, ensuring they receive care rather than condemnation. Penny’s actions, whether reckless or negligent, reflect not only a personal failure of empathy and restraint but also a societal failure to intervene before the situation escalated unnecessarily. Justice demands not just holding individuals accountable but also confronting and reforming the systemic conditions that allowed this tragedy to occur.
At the same time, Black people must be taught that justice is a process that depends on participation. Black people are right to question Penny’s actions and the legal system’s response, but that righteous anger must be channeled into solutions, not just rhetoric. By stepping up for jury service, Black citizens can challenge implicit biases, amplify diverse perspectives, and make the justice system more reflective of the society it serves.
Justice and Representation Go Hand in Hand
The trial of Daniel Penny is about more than legal definitions of culpability; it is a referendum on how society values Black lives and confronts systemic inequities within the legal system. Black people are justified in their skepticism of a system that has historically failed to protect them. However, achieving true justice requires more than critique—it demands active engagement with the mechanisms that shape outcomes. This includes understanding state penal codes and the legal standards that govern culpability, which are crucial to effectively navigating and influencing the justice system. Without this knowledge, we risk being misled by protest profiteers who focus solely on crying racism without offering meaningful solutions to the problems within the legal system.
Even though they haven’t made the racial makeup of the jury public. If we truly want justice, we have to stop playing checkers in a game of chess. Flooding the jury pool with diverse voices remains one of the most impactful ways to counteract systemic bias and ensure fairness in every case. If we want a justice system that works for everyone, we must move beyond protest alone and actively participate in its processes. This means serving on juries, understanding the law, and engaging with the judicial system to empower Black communities to shape justice in real-time. It also requires taking action at the ballot box by electing judges, district attorneys, and mayors who appoint police commissioners who will prioritize transparency and accountability in law enforcement. Supporting leaders who hire police commissioners committed to reform and fairness is critical to creating systemic change. Only by stepping up to serve, vote, deliberate, and decide can we build a justice system where every life, regardless of race, is valued equally under the law. If not, we are just talking loud and saying absolutely NOTHING!
