Long Island Man Found Not Guilty in Fatal NYC Stabbing, Even After Confession and Courtroom Testimony
In a verdict that stunned the public, a Manhattan jury on Thursday cleared 21-year-old Gianluca Bordone of charges related to the fatal stabbing of New Jersey high school football star Rocco Rodden, despite Bordone himself admitting on the witness stand that he delivered the lethal blow. The decision comes after a dramatic three-week trial where evidence, surveillance footage, and emotionally charged testimony all played pivotal roles. Bordone, from Oyster Bay, was accused of plunging a knife into Rodden’s chest outside the Live Axe bar in TriBeCa on the night before Thanksgiving 2023. Prosecution described that act as cold and intentional — but the defense countered that Bordone acted in self-defense amid a chaotic brawl in which he believed his life was in danger.
On cross-examination, Bordone acknowledged to jurors that he stabbed Rodden, but insisted he did so only to protect himself from what he said was an imminent attack. He painted a vivid picture of being chased, fearing that he would be “stomped, killed, or struck with a bottle.” His defense contended that the surveillance footage and witness accounts indicate Rodden and his party were pursuing Bordone aggressively, giving credence to his claim of life in peril. The jury deliberated only about four hours before returning a unanimous verdict of not guilty.
Prosecutors emphasized the severity of the wound: the knife had penetrated Rodden’s chest, slicing through ribs and piercing his heart. They argued that Bordone’s actions were neither necessary nor reasonable under any claim of self-defense. The defense, however, seized on ambiguity in the evidence, the chaos of the scene, and the lack of indisputable proof that Bordone had a clear escape route. They urged the jury to see that, in the heated confrontation, reasonable doubt loomed large.
Public reaction to the outcome was swift and polarized. Supporters saw the acquittal as a vindication of the principle of self-defense — a recognition that even horrific outcomes cannot automatically equate to guilt when a defendant credibly fears for his life. Critics, meanwhile, decried what they viewed as a miscarriage of justice: that a young man lost his life and the attacker walked free, despite admitting culpability. The Rodden family expressed their grief and disappointment, saying they will continue to fight for accountability and remembering Rocco as a talented athlete and beloved brother.
The case underscores how delicate and fraught self-defense disputes can be in court. Even when admissions are made, the burden remains on the prosecution to convince jurors beyond a reasonable doubt. In this trial, Bordone’s narrative of fear, combined with conflicting witness testimony and video uncertainty, left room for doubt. The defense’s approach to humanizing him — depicting a frightened young man reacting under pressure — appeared to resonate in the jury room.
Though Bordone walked free, the emotional scars and public memory of the case endure. Rocco Rodden’s life, abruptly taken, remains central to debates over justice, youth violence, and the standards we hold for lethal self-defense. The decision will likely fuel discussions about how juries interpret threats and how society balances empathy for defendants with the rights of victims.
As the courtroom cleared and headlines blazed across media outlets, one truth stood out: in conflicts that end in death, the line between tragedy and justice can be as thin as the blade itself.
