This week, a jury will begin deliberations in the trial of a former Marine accused of fatally choking a man on the Manhattan subway. Daniel Penny has pleaded not guilty to manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter charges in connection with Jordan Neely’s death.

A video that captured several minutes of the chokehold went viral and sparked debate about whether Penny was acting as a hero or a vigilante. The case before a Manhattan jury touches on issues that are deeply personal – and politically charged – for many New Yorkers, including subway safety, homelessness and mental illness.

While we wait for a verdict, Gothamist has put together this recap so you can catch up on the highlights of the trial.

What happened?

On May 1, 2023, Jordan Neely stuck his hand through the closing doors of an uptown F train and boarded just before it departed from the Second Avenue station on the Lower East Side, witnesses testified. People sitting on the subway said Neely was screaming that he was hungry, thirsty and ready to die or go to prison. A defense attorney said Penny heard Neely’s threat, “I’m going to kill,” as she approached a mother and her child, although the mother testified that she never heard Neely say those words.

Less than 30 seconds later, Penny put his arm around Neely’s neck, pulled him to the ground and held him in a chokehold. According to evidence presented in court, Penny held Neely there for about six minutes. When Penny let go, Neely was limp. Shortly thereafter, Neely was pronounced dead at a hospital. Police found a muffin in his bag, but no weapons.

Penny, 26, is a former Marine from West Islip. Neely, 30, once performed as a Michael Jackson impersonator on the subway and in Times Square. When Neely died, he was homeless, suffering from severe schizophrenia and regularly using synthetic cannabinoids, according to court documents.

What does each side argue?

Prosecutors say Penny had noble intentions to protect other subway riders, but went “way too far” when he continued to keep his arm around Neely’s neck for several minutes – even after the subway doors opened and the train stopped and for almost a minute afterward Neely had practically stopped moving. They have relied on the findings of the medical examiner who conducted Neely’s autopsy and determined that Penny’s chokehold directly caused Neely’s death, arguing that Penny should have known that continuing the chokehold for so long could have killed Neely.

Defense attorneys say Penny didn’t mean to kill Neely and was simply trying to hold Neely until police arrived because Penny and other passengers were afraid of Neely. They also called their own medical expert to cast doubt on the cause of Neely’s death, arguing that other factors, such as a genetic condition and his drug use, could have killed him.

Who were some of the key witnesses in the case?

Jurors heard from several people who were on the subway the day of the chokehold, including the independent journalist who shot the cell phone video that brought this case to light. Several commuters said they were terrified – that Neely’s behavior went beyond a typical subway outburst – and that they were relieved when Penny restrained him. Others said they didn’t like how Penny was holding Neely and tried to convince him to let go, to no avail.

A man who helped detain Neely spoke publicly for the first time and told jurors that he lied to law enforcement about the incident. Eric Gonzalez, who held Neely’s arms during part of the incident, said he told police and prosecutors that Neely hit him on the train and that’s why Penny put him in a chokehold. But Gonzalez was actually not on the subway at the time and got into the car at the Broadway-Lafayette station when Neely was already on the ground. Prosecutors agreed before trial not to prosecute Gonzalez for his role in the incident.

Each side also called several experts. Prosecutors brought in the Marine Corps martial arts instructor, who taught Penny chokehold techniques. He testified that Penny did not follow his training and restrained Neely in a manner inconsistent with the types of chokeholds he had learned to use. Defense attorneys called a psychiatric expert who reviewed thousands of pages of Neely’s medical records and informed the jury about Neely’s schizophrenia and drug use.

Prosecutors must prove that Penny was responsible for Neely’s death. What evidence did they provide? And how did the defense react?

The medical examiner who performed Neely’s autopsy testified for three days, including intense cross-examination by Penny’s defense attorney. Dr. Cynthia Harris told jurors that Penny’s chokehold blocked Neely’s oxygen supply and caused him to suffocate. She said Neely would not have died if his neck had not been compressed, and she and her colleagues were certain the chokehold was the cause of death after watching video of the incident.

Defense attorneys called their own forensic pathologist, whom they paid nearly $100,000, to review Neely’s autopsy and make his own assessment of the cause of death. Dr. Satish Chundru testified that a cascade of factors contributed to Neely’s death, including his schizophrenia, the medications in his body and a genetic trait called sickle cell, which can make it difficult for blood cells to carry oxygen in extreme conditions. He said the chokehold itself did not kill Neely.

Did Penny testify?

No. And that’s pretty typical in criminal trials, since the defendants are not required to testify. Instead, defense attorneys brought in several of Penny’s relatives to testify about his character. Penny’s mother said her son had a “very soft side” and a childhood friend described him as friendly and peaceful.

In several videos played in court, jurors heard directly from Penny. They observed Penny’s brief interactions with police on the subway immediately after he placed Neely in a chokehold. Later that day, the jury also saw his 30-minute recorded interview with investigators at the station. In that conversation, Penny called Neely a “crackhead” and said Neely was “acting like a lunatic.” Penny also said that he is not normally “a confrontational guy” and that he intervened to protect women and children on the train.

“I’m not trying to kill the guy,” he told investigators. “I’m just trying to de-escalate the situation.”

What happens next?

The closing speech is scheduled for Monday morning. A judge will then inform the jury about the laws they must consider in this case. The jury deliberates to reach a unanimous verdict.