Angela Nikolau and Ivan Kuznetsov, the Russian couple accused of climbing the Empire State Building, face possible deportation and prison time as their criminal case continues in Manhattan. Their attorney says a proposed misdemeanor plea agreement that could have reduced immigration consequences was withdrawn before a November 12 court hearing. The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office disputes that characterization and says the charges and any offer remain unchanged. The couple has denied intending to damage property or endanger anyone.
The pair drew widespread attention after scaling the New York landmark on July 1, 2026, and displaying a black flag with a message about love and peace. Kuznetsov proposed to Nikolau immediately afterward, and the stunt was recorded on camera.
| Article Subheadings | |
|---|---|
| 1) | Climb and viral proposal |
| 2) | Charges in Manhattan case |
| 3) | Defense claims immigration stakes |
| 4) | Prosecutors dispute offer withdrawal |
| 5) | Court appearance and next steps |
Climb and viral proposal
Angela Nikolau, 33, and Ivan Kuznetsov, 32, climbed the Empire State Building in New York City on July 1, 2026. The pair displayed a black flag carrying the message, “when the power of love beats the love of power the world knows peace.” The act was filmed and spread online, making the couple the focus of intense public attention.
Immediately after reaching the top, Kuznetsov proposed to Nikolau. The couple, who are engaged, have described the act as a message of love rather than an attempt to cause harm. Their public statements have become part of a criminal case involving alleged unauthorized access to the landmark.
Charges in Manhattan case
The couple faces felony counts of first-degree reckless endangerment, second-degree criminal mischief and third-degree burglary. They also face a misdemeanor charge of unlawful climbing. The charges relate to how they entered and climbed the building, the alleged risks created by the stunt and the potential impact on property.
Nikolau and Kuznetsov appeared at a criminal courthouse in New York City on November 12 for another hearing. Outside court, Kuznetsov rejected the allegations that they caused damage or intended to put people in danger.
“We didn’t damage any property. We didn’t intend to put anyone in danger.”
Defense claims immigration stakes
Attorney Noam Biale said the defense had accepted a proposed agreement under which the climbers would plead guilty to misdemeanor charges. According to Biale, the arrangement was intended to protect them from what he described as severe immigration consequences.
Biale said the immigration stakes were especially serious because both defendants are Russian nationals. He stated that deportation could result in significant consequences for each client, including possible military service for Kuznetsov if he were sent back to Russia and imprisonment for Nikolau because of her artistic expression. Those claims were presented by the defense and were not independently established in the court information provided.
“We just wanted to send message of love, and we’re ready to defend ourselves.”
Prosecutors dispute offer withdrawal
Biale said the proposed plea arrangement was removed from consideration the night before the November 12 hearing. His account suggested that the couple arrived in court expecting a negotiated resolution but instead faced continued exposure to the original charges and possible immigration consequences.
A spokesperson for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office disputed that description in a statement. The office said it was inaccurate to say that an offer had been withdrawn and emphasized that the charges remained the same. The conflicting accounts leave the status and terms of any plea discussions disputed.
Court appearance and next steps
The defendants attended the hearing together and left the courthouse holding hands. Kuznetsov spoke to reporters outside, while Nikolau became emotional. Their appearance marked another stage in a case that has continued since the July climb and has attracted attention because of the stunt, the proposal and the couple’s immigration concerns.
Based on the information available, the criminal charges remain pending and no final resolution was announced at the hearing. The case will continue through the Manhattan court process, with the defense and prosecutors maintaining different accounts of whether a misdemeanor plea offer was available.
| Number | Key Point |
|---|---|
| 1 | Nikolau and Kuznetsov are charged after allegedly climbing the Empire State Building on July 1, 2026. |
| 2 | Their attorney says a misdemeanor plea agreement intended to limit immigration consequences fell apart. |
| 3 | The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office says it is inaccurate to claim that an offer was withdrawn. |
Summary
The Empire State Building climbing case remains unresolved after the defendants’ attorney and Manhattan prosecutors offered differing accounts of plea negotiations. The couple faces felony and misdemeanor charges, while their defense warns of serious immigration consequences if they are convicted or deported. Prosecutors maintain that the charges remain unchanged, leaving the case to proceed through the court system.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who are the defendants?
Angela Nikolau, 33, and Ivan Kuznetsov, 32, are Russian nationals who are accused of climbing the Empire State Building in New York City.
What charges do they face?
They face felony charges of first-degree reckless endangerment, second-degree criminal mischief and third-degree burglary, along with a misdemeanor charge of unlawful climbing.
What is disputed about the plea negotiations?
Their attorney says prosecutors withdrew a proposed misdemeanor plea agreement before the November 12 hearing. A spokesperson for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office says it is inaccurate to describe the situation as an offer being withdrawn.
Why are immigration consequences part of the case?
The defense says the couple’s Russian citizenship means a conviction or deportation could have severe consequences. Those concerns were cited in support of a proposed agreement, but the prosecution’s statement focused on the charges and did not endorse the defense’s account.
