What is ‘stop-and-frisk’ — and why does President Trump want it to happen in Chicago?

Leave a comment

President Donald Trump said at a police conference on Monday that Chicago should implement a “stop-and-frisk” law to help cut down on crime.

“The crime spree has a terrible blight on that city, and we will do everything possible to get it done,” Trump said at the International Association of Chiefs of Police Annual Convention in Florida, according to ABC. “It works and it was meant for problems like Chicago. It was meant for it. Stop and frisk.”

But just what is the law — and why do some see it as racist?

And why do others see it as just being tough on crime?

What is stop-and-frisk?

Stop-and-frisk describes a divisive policy in New York City that allowed officers to stop anyone they believed “committed, is committing, or is about to commit a felony or a Penal Law misdemeanor” if they have a “reasonable suspicion,” The Washington Post wrote.

Some other states have adopted “stop and identify” laws that require people who are detained by police to identify themselves if an officer has reasonable suspicion that they were involved in a crime.

But the law in New York City, first implemented in 1999, gained nationwide attention — and Trump hailed the city as proof that the policy can cut down on crime.

“Rudy Giuliani when he was mayor of New York City had a very strong program of ‘stop and frisk,’ and it went from an unacceptably dangerous city to one of the safest cities in the country,” Trump said Monday, according to ABC. “And I think the safest big city in the country. So it works.”

In New York City, more than 500,000 people were stopped each year from 2008 to 2012 — with more than 5 million stopped since 2002, according to the New York Civil Liberties Union.

So, did it work in New York City?

It depends on whom you ask, and what you define as “work.”

Supporters of the law will tell you that the stop-and-frisk policy can help take guns off the streets. As reported by Forbes, the New York Police Department said the policy led to the recovery of 770 guns in 2011 alone. That meant a gun was found 1.9 percent of the time during a stop.

And the following year, 715 guns were found in New York City because of the policy, according to FiveThirtyEight. As noted by the outlet, data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives found that 18 percent of all guns seized in 2012 in New York City were found during a stop-and-frisk session.

Data also show violent crimes and murders decreased along with the implementation of stop-and-frisk in New York City, according to The Washington Post.

Critics point out that the rate of crime and murder remained level even after a federal judge ruled the city’s specific stop-and-frisk policy unconstitutional in 2013, according to The Washington Post.

But Heather Mac Donald, a political commentator, argued in The Wall Street Journal that “proactive policing” under the law led to a decrease of murders by nearly 80 percent.

What are the critiques of stop-and-frisk?

Many point to apparent racial profiling in who gets stopped.

In 2011, for example, 685,724 people were stop-and-frisked, according to data from the New York Civil Liberties Union.

Of those people, 88 percent were found to be innocent. Overall, just 9 percent of those stopped were white, while 53 percent were black and 34 were Hispanic. The 2010 census reported that 33 percent of New York City residents are white, while 26 percent are black and another 26 percent are Hispanic.

Black people make up a majority of those stopped for every year there is data, while white people barely make up 10 percent of those stopped on average. In a report, Jeffrey Fagan, from Columbia Law School, examined police data on stop-and-frisk and found that race has a “marginal influence” on who gets stopped — even when accounting for “the social and economic characteristics” of the area.

Fagan also said there is little evidence that the policy helped prevent crime or reduce murders.

“Anyone who says we know this is bringing the crime rate down is really making it up,” Fagan told The Washington Post in an interview.

Why was New York City’s stop-and-frisk law ruled unconstitutional?

For the same reason as Fagan’s concerns.

Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled in 2013 that the law violated the Fourth Amendment rights of citizens, and that the practice was “racially discriminatory” because of the disproportionate numbers of people of color stopped by police because of it, according to the Center for Constitutional Rights.

After her ruling, the number of police stops of people of color dropped to 18,449 in 2015 — even though that number was just more than 160,000 in 2013, according to The New York Civil Liberties Union.

This is a 96 percent decrease from the height in 2011 of more than 600,000 stops,” Scheindlin wrote in the National Black Law Journal in 2016. “And what has happened with crime statistics in the meantime? They have remained steady!

“The enormous decrease in stops has clearly not caused an upsurge in crime despite alarmist predictions by our former Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelley,” she continued.

By Josh Magness/MiamiHerald
Posted by The NON-Conformist

Philadelphia Officers Are Illegally Searching Young Black Men’s Underwear

Leave a comment

Philadelphia police officers have been stopping young Black men and illegally searching their underwear for years, according to the ACLU, which sued the city in 2011 over its stop-and-frisk policy.

After reading a May 25 article about two young men who were victims of the invasive searches, Asa Khalif and six other protesters stood outside the Philadelphia Police Department for hours on May 31 handing out underwear to the officers. According to Khalif, the activists settled on this particular action to drive home the point of how perverted it is to purposefully — and illegally — search somebody’s underwear.

“It encouraged a lot of people to come forward who have been in the situation to file a complaint and tell their story from the protest,” Khalif said. “I know it’s very difficult being a Black male having that image of being ‘stopped and frisked,’ especially when you’re young trying to figure out who you are as an individual.”

Khalif made sure the unusual and unprecedented protest was recorded in order to ensure that this gross violation of Black men’s human rights and dignity did not go undocumented.

 “This is a new generation of activist and we are not going to do business as usual, because we will confront you, put our bodies on the line at this point,” Khalif said, adding that modern-day activists like himself and the BLM movement were inspired by past civil rights leaders and the Black Panther organization.

“We will sacrifice that just to make sure to get change from how law enforcement treats Black and brown people.

Khalif said many of the young men who have been victims of the violation are now in therapy to deal with the emotional fallout.

By Desmond Andrews/AtlantaBlackStar

Posted by The NON-Conformist

NYC Stop-And-Frisk Appeal Could Be Over After Election

Leave a comment

Image: CBS New York

A federal appeals court block of a judge’s ruling that found the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policy discriminated against minorities may be short-lived, depending on the outcome of next week’s mayoral election.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Thursday that the ruling by U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin would be on hold pending the outcome of an appeal by the city, a fight that could be dropped if Democrat Bill de Blasio, who is leading the polls by 39 points, has his way.

He has said he would drop objections to the decision, which calls for a monitor to oversee major changes to the police tactic.

“I said repeatedly that what Judge Scheindlin did was correct,” De Blasio said. ”We had a situation that could not continue.  The specific remedies she offered were fair and a first step toward the kind of reforms we needed.”

His Republican rival, Joe Lhota, said the city’s next mayor must push forward with the appeal.

“We’re going to move forward to have it completely overturned upon appeal,” he said. “This is good for New Yorkers because it’s going to continue the proactive policing that has driven crime down.”

More from CBS New York

Posted by Libergirl

Judge Rejects New York’s Stop-and-Frisk Policy

Leave a comment

Image: NY Times

A federal judge ruled on Monday that the stop-and-frisk tactics of the New York Police Department violated the constitutional rights of minorities in the city, repudiating a major element in the Bloomberg administration’s crime-fighting legacy.

The use of police stops has been widely cited by city officials as a linchpin of New York’s success story in seeing murders and major crimes fall to historic lows. The police say the practice has saved the lives of thousands of young black and Hispanic men by removing thousands of guns from the streets.

But the judge, Shira A. Scheindlin, found that the Police Department resorted to a “policy of indirect racial profiling” as it increased the number of stops in minority communities. That has led to officers’ routinely stopping “blacks and Hispanics who would not have been stopped if they were white.”

The judge called for a federal monitor to oversee broad reforms, including the use of body-worn cameras for some patrol officers, though she was “not ordering an end to the practice of stop-and-frisk.”

More from the New York Times

See also: Eugene Robinson: Stop and Frisk Might Work Better on Wall Street

Posted by Libergirl

Ray Kelly: The NYPD: Guilty of Saving 7,383 Lives

Leave a comment

Since 2002, the New York Police Department has taken tens of thousands of weapons off the street through proactive policing strategies. The effect this has had on the murder rate is staggering. In the 11 years before Mayor Michael Bloomberg took office, there were 13,212 murders in New York City. During the 11 years of his administration, there have been 5,849. That’s 7,383 lives saved—and if history is a guide, they are largely the lives of young men of color.

So far this year, murders are down 29% from the 50-year low achieved in 2012, and we’ve seen the fewest shootings in two decades.

To critics, none of this seems to much matter. Sidestepping the fact that these policies work, they continue to allege that massive numbers of minorities are stopped and questioned by police for no reason other than their race.

Never mind that in each of the city’s 76 police precincts, the race of those stopped highly correlates to descriptions provided by victims or witnesses to crimes. Or that in a city of 8.5 million people, protected by 19,600 officers on patrol (out of a total uniformed staff of 35,000), the average number of stops we conduct is less than one per officer per week.

Racial profiling is a disingenuous charge at best and an incendiary one at worst, particularly in the wake of the tragic death of Trayvon Martin. The effect is to obscure the rock-solid legal and constitutional foundation underpinning the police department’s tactics and the painstaking analysis that determines how we employ them.

In 2003, when the NYPD recognized that 96% of the individuals who were shot and 90% of those murdered were black and Hispanic, we concentrated our officers in those minority neighborhoods that had experienced spikes in crime. This program is called Operation Impact.

From the beginning, we’ve combined this strategy with a proactive policy of engagement. We stop and question individuals about whom we have reasonable suspicion. This is a widely utilized and lawful police tactic, upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1968 decision, Terry v. Ohio, and authorized by New York State Criminal Procedure Law and the New York state constitution. Every state in the country has a variant of this statute, as does federal law; it is fundamental to policing.

It’s understandable that someone who has done nothing wrong will be angry if he is stopped. Last year, the NYPD announced a series of steps to strengthen the oversight and training involved in this tactic. The number of civilian complaints in 2012 was the lowest in the past five years. That’s progress—and we always strive to do better.

In a similar vein, our detractors contend that the NYPD engages in widespread, unwarranted spying on Muslim New Yorkers. Again, this is a sensational charge belied by the facts.

Since 1985, the police department has been subject to a set of rules known as the Handschu Guidelines, which were developed to protect people engaged in political protest. After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, we were concerned that elements of the guidelines could interfere with our ability to investigate terrorism. In 2002, we proposed to the federal court that monitors the agreement that it be modified. The court agreed.

Handschu entitles police officers to attend any event that is open to the public, to view online activity that is publicly accessible and to prepare reports and assessments to help us understand the nature of the threat.

As a matter of department policy, undercover officers and confidential informants do not enter a mosque unless they are following up on a lead vetted under Handschu. Similarly, when we have attended a private event organized by a student group, we’ve done so on the basis of a lead or investigation reviewed and authorized in writing at the highest levels of the department, in keeping with Handschu protocol.

Anyone who implies that it is unlawful for the police department to search online, visit public places or map neighborhoods has either not read, misunderstood or intentionally obfuscated the meaning of the Handschu Guidelines.

The NYPD has too urgent a mission and too few officers for us to waste time and resources on broad, unfocused surveillance. We have a responsibility to protect New Yorkers from violent crime or another terrorist attack—and we uphold the law in doing so.

As a city, we have to face the reality that New York’s minority communities experience a disproportionate share of violent crime. To ignore that fact, as our critics would have us do, would be a form of discrimination in itself.

Mr. Kelly is the New York City police commissioner.

Posted by The NON-Conformist

New York City Council passes measures to put a leash on stop-and-frisk

Leave a comment

The city of New York has passed two measures meant to rein in NYPD’s stop-and-frisk program by expanding the definition of racial profiling and enacting a seven-year departmental audit program. Mayor Bloomberg has vowed to veto both.

The New York City Council is seeking to create an independent inspector general with the sole purpose of monitoring the New York Police Department for seven years going forward. Such an inspector would also be charged wtih proposing recommendations on how to improve the department’s operation.

In addition, the council will expand the definition of racial profiling, thus allowing residents who believe they have been a target to sue in state court.

According to Reuters, shortly after the vote Bloomberg promised to veto both measures and force the council to hold another vote to override his veto. Each of the measures passed through the 51-member council with at least 34 votes, which suggests they should have the necessary two-thirds majority to override Bloomberg’s veto.

More from Russia Today

Posted by The NON-Conformist

Second NYPD whistleblower testifies he was called a ‘rat’ for protesting stop-and-frisk quotas

Leave a comment

This story saddens me. I guess we must tell our children, this is what happens when you do the right thing; HUH!

A second NYPD whistleblower testified Wednesday that department brass pressured cops for arrests and stop-and-frisk quotas and that he was smeared as a “rat” for bucking the system.
Officer Pedro Serrano said he was ostracized for protesting the quotas demanded at the 40th Precinct in the South Bronx. “They said, ‘Hey, this is the way it is, you can’t fight a losing battle,’” Serrano testified in Manhattan Federal Court.
Serrano, 43, a member of the police force since 2004, followed Officer Adhyl Polanco to the witness stand in the class-action lawsuit against the controversial stop-and-frisk tactics.
Like Polanco, Serrano said the quota demanded by supervisors is 20 summonses and one arrest a month. He did not specify how many stop-and-frisks he was required to make.
He also backed Polanco’s claim that the quota system had the support of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association.
Serrano testified that he was once criticized by supervisors for failing to make any stop-and-frisks in a month when he surpassed his quota, issuing 20 summonses and making three arrests.

He said that since going to the Internal Affairs Bureau recently to complain, his stationhouse locker was tattooed with stickers proclaiming him a “rat.”
He said he also found the word “rat” next to his name on a roster list outside the stationhouse cafeteria. “I fear they’re going to set me up and get me fired,” Serrano testified.
Earlier Wednesday, secret recordings made by Polanco at the 41st Precinct stationhouse, also in the South Bronx, were played in court to bolster his testimony.
In the tapes, one of Polanco’s supervisors is heard demanding that cops make their “20 and 1” quota and lambasting those who came up short.
“If you want to be a zero, I’ll treat you like a zero,” patrol Sgt. Marvin Bennett fumed on tape.
Polanco also recorded his patrol commander, Lt. Andrew Valenzano, telling officers to meet their quotas by ticketing bicyclists.

“If you see people over there on bikes, carrying the bags, you know, good stops,” Valenzano says on tape. “That’s what we need.”
Officer Angel Herran, a union delegate, was taped telling officers the quota was agreed to “in this last contract.”
“They’re telling you to ‘go make money,’ ” Herran is heard saying.

Recordings of NYPD officers were played in Manhattan Federal Court on Wednesday pressing cops into quotas.
In this instance, patrol Sgt. Marvin Bennett warns those who want to buck the system, calling them “zeros.”
“So we’re going to start correcting and treating those who want to fight the cause and fight the power — that’s no problem. No problem. Your names, each one of your names are important …. Trust me, your name is important.”
On another tape, Officer Angel Herran, a union delegate, pleads for solidarity.
“The union’s agreeing on it and we’re unionized here, this is what we do. You know? ”

By Robert Gearty AND Bill Hutchinson / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Posted by The NON-Conformist

%d bloggers like this: