We've already noted in several spaces here on the blog and on the Women's Self-Defense Community YouTube channel the growing reluctance for men to come to the defense of women in public.
Recent developments in the Daniel Penny trial reveal important changes that may continue to discourage people from stepping in to protect others in dangerous situations. It's complicated, but this latest ruling could continue to provide negative incentives for those who take action to defend others in public spaces.
The Latest on the Daniel Penny Trial
On Friday, Dec. 6, 2024, the judge dismissed the more serious charge against Daniel Penny, manslaughter in the second degree, after the jury couldn’t agree on a verdict. This charge allowed Penny to argue that his actions were justified—that he was protecting others on the subway when he restrained Jordan Neely. With that charge now gone, the jury is left to decide on a lesser charge, criminally negligent homicide, which doesn’t require as much evidence to convict.
The jury’s deadlock shows that some members believed Penny acted reasonably, but the remaining charge makes it easier for the jury to compromise by convicting him on the lesser count, even if they aren’t fully convinced he’s guilty. This kind of compromise can discourage others from intervening in similar situations, fearing they’ll still face punishment even if their actions are justified.
How The Daniel Penny Trial Affects Public Self-Defense
This case sends a message that could make people, especially men, hesitate to step in during emergencies. Here’s why:
Fear of Legal Trouble
Even if you act to protect others, like Penny did, you could still face charges, long trials, and potential jail time. This is especially true when the law allows people to question your actions after the fact, even if you were trying to help.
Uncertainty About Outcomes
The Penny trial shows that even if some people believe your actions were justified, you could still be found guilty of a lesser charge. This uncertainty makes it hard to know if stepping in is worth the risk.
Pressure to Stay Out of It
If juries can “compromise” and convict someone on a lesser charge just to break a deadlock, it creates an environment where good intentions don’t guarantee protection from punishment. This makes many people second-guess their decision to help.
A Shift in Public Expectations
Increasingly, people who step in to help are being scrutinized more than the aggressors. For men, this means hesitating to defend women or others in danger because they fear becoming the focus of blame.
Why The Daniel Penny Case Matters for Protecting Others
The Penny case could make it harder for people to feel confident stepping in to protect others, particularly women, in public. For example:
Men as Protectors: Men used to feel a strong responsibility to step in during dangerous situations. But with cases like Penny’s, they may worry about the personal and legal risks of intervening.
Public Safety: If people feel discouraged from helping, dangerous individuals may face less resistance, putting everyone—especially vulnerable people—at greater risk.
What Can You Do in a Self-Defense Situation?
If you’re ever in a situation where you need to protect someone, it’s important to:
Stay Calm and Assess the Threat
Act only if it’s clear that someone is in immediate danger. Avoid escalating the situation if possible.
Assess your physical abilities and skills to decide if you can make a physical intervention work.
Try to De-escalate First
Use your voice and body language to calm things down before resorting to physical action. Now, here's the rub -- de-escalation only works when the attacker is rational. The time to use your verbal judo and relaxed, non-threatening posture is usually way gone by the time the attacker has already escalated to physical threats and attacks. But, yes, start with de-escalation tactics first. Your prosecutors will use this against you if you don't.
Know the Risks
Be aware that any intervention could lead to legal questions later, so try to act in a way that’s clearly defensive and protective.
What people miss here is the very real physical risk you take with anyone. Violent people are, well, violent. You might be surprised to know how many violent people carry weapons. Spoiler alert: assume everyone is armed.
Document Everything
If possible, ensure witnesses or video evidence can support your actions. This can be vital if your actions are later questioned.
As we saw in this case, a video from a witness prompted one of the other men involved in restraining Neely to recant his original statement to the police that he was not involved. This witness admitted on the stand that he was originally afraid of what could happen to him when he was initially interviewed by the police. It would appear that he was having second thoughts about his initial actions when faced with potential legal action. If not for the video, this man would have essentially lied about his involvement.
Conclusion: A Chilling Effect on Helping Others?
The Daniel Penny trial is a clear example of how complicated self-defense cases can get, even when someone acts to protect others. Many men might think twice before stepping in to help women or others in danger, fearing legal or social backlash.
As this trial continues, it raises an important question: Will society support those who step up to protect others, or will the risks discourage them from helping at all?
For now, the case is a reminder to be cautious, prepared, and aware of the potential consequences before taking action.
And as another disincentive for us as protectors to get involved:
The father of Jordan Neely, the man who died after a Marine veteran on a New York City subway car put him in a chokehold, has announced a lawsuit against the man facing charges of manslaughter in his son’s death.
Comments