Critics Warn of ‘Daniel Penny Effect’ on Crime in NYC
New York City is facing a potential surge in crime as a result of the growing trend of District Attorneys across the country deciding not to prosecute low-level crimes, according to critics. The phenomenon, known as the “Daniel Penny effect,” is named after a young man who was arrested multiple times for low-level offenses, including trespassing and disorderly conduct, before ultimately being released with no charges.
The critics, including law enforcement officials and victim advocates, claim that the decline in prosecutions for low-level crimes is contributing to a sense of impunity among perpetrators, leading to an increase in more serious offenses. They point to data showing that the number of people being arrested and charged with low-level crimes has declined significantly in recent years, even as the city’s overall crime rate has risen.
One district attorney, Bronx DA Darcel Clark, has been a vocal critic of the trend, arguing that it sends the wrong message to the public and undermines public safety. “When we fail to hold individuals accountable for even the most minor offenses, it can have a ripple effect throughout the criminal justice system,” Clark said. “It can make people feel that they can commit crimes with impunity, and that’s not good for anyone.”
Other critics point to the economic costs of not prosecuting low-level crimes, arguing that it is a waste of taxpayer dollars and resources. “When we’re not holding people accountable for their actions, we’re not sending a message that crime doesn’t pay,” said one critic. “We’re sending a message that crime can be a get-out-of-jail-free card, and that’s not the kind of message we want to send.”
In response to the criticism, many district attorneys argue that the decision not to prosecute low-level crimes is driven by a desire to focus resources on more serious and violent offenses, and to address systemic issues in the criminal justice system. They point to the fact that many low-level crimes are committed by people who are struggling with mental health issues, addiction, or poverty, and argue that punishment alone is not an effective way to address these underlying issues.
Despite the ongoing debate, critics of the trend remain concerned about the potential impact on public safety and the perception of crime in the city. “The message we’re sending to the public is that we’re not going to hold people accountable for their actions, and that’s a recipe for disaster,” said one critic.