Assistant District Attorney Dafna Yoran, who is leading the prosecution against Marine veteran Daniel Penny for the 2023 death of Jordan Neely, has a history of advocating for “restorative justice” in certain cases. However, her approach seems to shift dramatically when it comes to Penny’s case, raising questions about the consistency of her prosecutorial stance.
In 2019, Yoran was involved in the case of Michael Lee, who murdered Dr. Young Kun Kim, a professor at Lehman College, during a robbery at an ATM in New York City. Despite Lee being charged with murder, Yoran reached out to the victim’s family to ask if they would be open to pursuing “restorative justice”—a practice that encourages leniency and focuses on rehabilitation rather than punishment. She suggested that the victim’s son meet with Lee’s family, allowing them to hear Lee’s explanation for his actions. In the end, Lee pleaded guilty to manslaughter rather than murder and was sentenced to 10 years in prison.
Yoran’s office has sought to expand its “restorative justice program,” which seemingly involves reducing sentences for some offenders based on personal or family circumstances. Yet, this approach appears not to extend to Daniel Penny, who has been vilified by progressive media for intervening to stop an allegedly dangerous, homeless man, Jordan Neely, from terrorizing subway passengers.
Neely, who had a history of mental health issues and homelessness, boarded a subway train in May 2023, where he reportedly began threatening passengers, making women fear for their safety, and screaming that he didn’t care if he died. Witnesses described Neely as “trying to attack everybody,” and one woman testified that she feared for her life after Neely began making violent threats, including saying, “Kill me, lock me up.”
In response, Penny, who was on the train, stepped in to restrain Neely, placing him in a chokehold until police arrived. Penny, aided by other passengers, subdued Neely for several minutes while he was not actively attacking anyone. However, Neely later died, and Penny was charged with second-degree manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide.
Yoran’s approach to the case contrasts starkly with her previous stance in the 2019 robbery-murder case. In her closing arguments in Penny’s trial, Yoran emphasized that Penny had used “way too much force for way too long,” accusing him of being reckless and showing a lack of recognition for Neely’s “humanity.” She suggested that Penny saw Neely as someone who needed to be “eliminated,” despite no hate crime charges being filed.
Yoran’s comments about Penny’s alleged disregard for Neely’s humanity raise questions, especially when compared to her treatment of Lee, who had taken an elderly man’s life during a robbery. In that case, Yoran sought a more lenient sentence and advocated for restorative justice, while in Penny’s case, she has pushed for a harsh prosecution despite Penny’s actions being in response to a dangerous and erratic individual.
Witnesses who testified in Penny’s defense described Neely as visibly agitated and dangerous, making alarming statements and appearing to be a direct threat to others. One woman recalled how Neely’s rantings seemed “satanic” and said she feared for her life. Another witness mentioned that Neely had soiled his clothing and was threatening to harm others, contributing to the atmosphere of fear on the train.
Yoran’s prosecution of Penny, a man who stepped in to protect innocent subway riders, contrasts with her previous efforts to offer leniency to a man who committed a cold-blooded murder. This inconsistency in her application of justice is drawing attention, especially as it relates to her stance on the treatment of violent offenders. Penny, in Yoran’s eyes, is the problem, despite acting to stop a violent threat in a public setting. The question remains: why does Yoran seem willing to offer leniency to a murderer but pursue harsh charges against a man who acted in self-defense and to protect others?
