PHILADELPHIA —Former labor leader John Dougherty's federal extortion trial ended in a mistrial Thursday after jurors declared they were at a stalemate and unable to reach a unanimous verdict, offering an inconclusive ending to the ex-union chief's third trial in as many years.

So, what happens now?

Why was a mistrial declared?

After 11 hours of deliberations spanning well into the evening Thursday, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey L. Schmehl dismissed the panel of six men and six women, thanking them for their "yeoman's work" in attempting to render a verdict and declaring a "mistrial by manifest necessity."

Based on the length of the weeklong trial and on the extent of the jury's deliberations, the judge said at the end of the day that it was appropriate to declare a mistrial.

By Thursday night, Schmehl said, jurors had sent the judge two notes saying they had reached an impasse in deciding the fates of Dougherty and his nephew, Greg Fiocca. One by one, Schmehl asked each member of the panel whether they were hopelessly deadlocked.

"The court believes that based on these responses, that [the jury] cannot agree," Schmehl said.

Is this the end of the case?

As of Thursday night, that remained unclear. Prosecutors did not immediately say whether they intend to retry the case, and they declined to comment as they left the courthouse. Attorneys for Dougherty and Fiocca said they hoped the government would not pursue the case.

"For now, we're happy with the result," said Fiocca's attorney, Rocco Cipparone. "We were hopeful for a not guilty, but we'll take the hung jury at this stage."

If the government decides to move forward with a retrial, it would give both sides an opportunity to rethink their presentations, witnesses, and revise their strategies before a second trial would begin.

What was the split among the jurors?

That remained unclear Thursday night. The judge did not poll the jury on the reason for their deadlock, or how they were split. Members of the panel were escorted out of the courthouse by security staff.

Throughout the day, jurors asked the judge questions on what the government had to prove for them to convict on extortion. At another point, the jury asked for clarification on a 1973 Supreme Court decision that recognized the legitimate use of economic threats or force to achieve legitimate labor union objectives.

What does this mean for Dougherty?

While the uncertainty of a retrial on extortion charges now looms, the former labor leader still faces the likelihood of a significant prison sentence for his previous prior bribery and embezzlement convictions.

The most serious counts of which Dougherty was convicted carry maximum penalties of 20 years in prison. However, it's likely he could end up serving far less time.

The judge is likely to stack the labor leader's multiple sentences to run concurrently, and he's not required to sentence Dougherty to the maximum time on each charge. For example, former City Councilmember Bobby Henon faced the same 20-year maximum penalty, but was sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison last year.

Most of Dougherty's codefendants in his previous trials have already been sentenced, and former Local 98 political director Marita Crawford was released from prison this week after serving a 15-day term.

Former Local 98 President Brian Burrows, convicted of embezzlement alongside Dougherty last year, is scheduled to be sentenced in June. Anthony Massa, the contractor-turned-star government witness who testified against both men, is slated to face sentencing later this month.

But on Thursday, as Dougherty left the federal courthouse in Reading, the embattled labor leader said he was focused on spending the rest of the evening on his 64th birthday back in Philadelphia.

"I'm going home to spend the last two hours of my birthday with my wife," he said.

©2024 The Philadelphia Inquirer, LLC. Visit at inquirer.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.