Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 — Good Afternoon, Stay Safe
- - - - -
Cancer rate 15% higher than normal for 9/11 responders: study
Mount Sinai Hospital's World Trade Center Health Program has found an increase primarily in three types of the disease, thyroid, prostate and blood cancers.
By Heidi Evans — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The New York Daily News'
Cancer among 9/11 responders is 15% higher than among people not exposed to the Ground Zero toxins, a study by Mount Sinai Hospital's World Trade Center Health Program has found.
The increase was seen primarily in three types of the disease, thyroid, prostate and blood cancers, such as leukemia and lymphoma.
Researchers analyzing data from 20,984 participants in the WTC Health Program from 2001 to 2008 found 575 cases of cancer, compared with the 499 epidemiologists expected to see in the general population for that size sample.
The findings will be published online Tuesday in the medical journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
"Just seven years after the attack, our study has shown an increase in cancer even at this early stage," said Dr. Jacqueline Moline, one of the study's authors.
She said that cancers linked to carcinogens found at the World Trade Center site take many years to develop. "The fact that we are seeing early increases in many types of cancers makes it all the more critical for us to be vigilant in our medical surveillance of anyone who had WTC exposure and to provide treatment for them if necessary," Moline added.
The Mount Sinai findings echo a city Health Department study last year that also found a spike in prostate, thyroid and blood cancers.
And a previous study by the Fire Department found firefighters who worked at the collapsed twin towers have a 19% greater chance of getting cancer than those who did not work there.
While the federal government agreed after a long political fight to add 50 types of cancer to illnesses covered by the Zadroga compensation law, prostate cancer was not among them.
John Feal, who lost part of his foot in the attacks and now heads up the Feal Good Foundation, an advocacy group for 9/11 responders, said he was not surprised by the latest study.
"All of the studies are just proof of what we have been saying for years: 9/11 toxins have made these heroic men and women sick," he said.
He said advocates will not rest until prostate cancer is added to the Zadroga bill.
"It needs to be on the list like yesterday. I know more people with prostate cancer than any other cancer in the 9/11 community," Feal said.
The study looked at responders from New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Pennsylvania.
Responders were primarily male (85%), white (59%) and those who had never smoked (58%). They had a median age of 38 on 9/11.
Forty-three percent were exposed to the dust cloud on Sept. 11, 2001. Their median time working at the site was 57 days.
_______________________________________________________________________
N.Y.C. Homicides & Suicides
As Murder Rate Falls, Suicides Outnumber Homicides
By SAM ROBERTS — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The New York Times'
In 2012, for the first time in nearly 50 years, more people apparently killed themselves in New York City than were murdered, a byproduct in part of the city's plunging murder rate.
And while men died in disproportionate numbers from both causes, the victims of homicide and suicide come from very different universes.
Typically, most murder victims are young and black. Most suicides are older and non-Hispanic white.
"There's no explanations that I think are fully satisfying and explain what accounts for the contrast," said Dr. Sandro Galea, an epidemiologist at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health.
"What you're seeing is a reflection of the context in which homicides and violence are endemic," he said. "The myth of the unexpected homicide occurring to a wealthy person in a wealthy neighborhood is vanishingly rare."
"The vast majority of suicides are known to have had some psychopathology, and although the literature is muddy, depression is more common in majority groups," Dr. Galea continued. "The second reason may well be that there are different coping mechanisms among minorities that are more externalism than internalizing. But there's an interesting paradox: If we know that adverse living circumstances are associated with greater risk of depression why aren't minorities more prone to suicide?"
According to preliminary figures from the Police Department, 418 murders were recorded in 2012.
Among the victims, 84 percent were men, 60 percent were black, 27 percent were Hispanic, and 9 percent were non-Hispanic white. (Among the known assailants, 93 percent were men; 53 percent were black and 35 percent were Hispanic). More than two-thirds of the victims were 40 or younger.
In 2011, the city's health department recorded 509 suicides. Though the rate for 2012 is not yet available, city officials believe that, based on recent trends, suicides outnumbered murders last year.
While the homicide rate has been declining, the suicide rate has remained fairly steady in the last decade.
Homicide was the leading cause of death among New Yorkers 15 to 34, suicide was third among 15- to 24-year-olds and fourth among 25- to 34-year-olds.
Among people under 65, suicide was the third leading cause of death among Asians, fifth among non-Hispanic whites and non-Puerto Rican Hispanic people. It was not among the top 10 causes of death among blacks. Non-Hispanic whites recorded the highest death rates from suicide, blacks the lowest.
Louis B. Schlesinger, a professor of forensic psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said the shifting ratio of murders to suicides reflect two other factors: "A lot of suicides go unreported," he said, "and because of the increased sophistication of emergency medical technology, people who 10 years ago would be dead from murder are now living."
_______________________________________________________________________
Kelly: Videotape and Record Everybody
NYPD Commissioner Calls for More Surveillance Cameras
By Tracie Hunte, Annmarie Fertoli and Colby Hamilton — Monday, April 22nd, 2013 'WNYC News' / New York, NY
Could more cameras in New York City help prevent attacks like the one at the Boston Marathon? That's what Police Commissioner Ray Kelly says the NYPD is looking into.
The department already uses so-called smart cameras that hone in on unattended bags, and set off alarms.
Kelly dismisses critics who argue that increased cameras threaten privacy rights, giving governments the ability to monitor people in public spaces.
"The people who complain about it, I would say, are a relatively small number of folks, because the genie is out of the bottle," Kelly said. "People realize that everywhere you go now, your picture is taken."
Surveillance cameras helped authorities find the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing — giving more fuel to NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly's argument that the more cameras exist, the better.
The NYPD is touting its use of the so-called smart cameras that have been used for nearly a decade in Lower Manhattan to identify potential threats such as unattended bags left for too long.
"I'm a major proponent of cameras," Kelly said on MSNBC's Morning Joe. "I think the privacy issue has really been taken off the table."
The technology also has industrial applications, such as quality control at bottling plants and on car assembly lines.
But it hasn't been so effective in the past. The MTA proposed using similar cameras after the London Bombing in 2005. The project was abandoned a few years later when the software reportedly had difficulty differentiating stationary objects from moving ones.
Donna Lieberman, the executive director of NYCLU, says that, although high-tech cameras offer tremendous potential, they've been unable to stop attacks.
"There's no question but surveillance is here and it's here to stay," she said. "The question is how we reduce the risk that we turn into a society where the government knows everything there is about you."
_______________________________________________________________________
NYPD Stop, Question & Frisk Federal Trial
Kelly Too Busy?
'Stop' Judge Doesn't Have Time for Spokesman
By MARK TOOR — Monday, April 22nd, 2013 'The Chief / Civil Service Leader'
Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly is not testifying in the ongoing trial over the constitutionality of the way the NYPD runs its stop-and-frisk program; according to some reports, he said he was too busy.
Judge: Move It Along
A close aide, Deputy Commissioner for Public Information Paul J. Browne, had been scheduled to testify April 16, but word percolated through the Manhattan Federal Courthouse that Mr. Browne would not be called.
Mr. Browne said in an e-mail that he did not know why the request that he testify was withdrawn. But a spokeswoman for the Center for Constitutional Rights, one of the organizations that brought the class-action suit, referring to U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin said, "The Judge didn't want him to testify because he wasn't essential and she wanted to move the trial along."
With the exception of recently retired Chief of Department Joseph Esposito, almost all the NYPD witnesses have been officers who made stops or precinct bosses who supervised them. Mr. Browne, as a civilian press spokesman working out of Police Headquarters, fits neither category.
The trial ended its fourth week last Friday with plaintiffs still presenting testimony. Judge Scheindlin has intervened frequently in an effort to speed up examinations and cross-examinations of witnesses.
_______________________________________________________________________
In Stop-and-Frisk Trial, Reliance on Memory Hinders Efforts to Get to Truth
By JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The New York Times'
The two men appeared in quick succession, a police lineup turned on its head. The men were police officers, ordered to a courtroom on Monday so a witness could identify them as the officers who had stopped and frisked him.
The unusual scene underscored an emerging theme in the stop-and-frisk trial under way in Federal District Court in Manhattan: for those stopped and frisked, the experience is an ordeal they will long remember. But for the officers, it can be a nonevent, as their inability to recall these encounters shows.
Over the last month, a number of officers called to the stand have struggled to remember the precise details of street encounters that happened as long as five years ago. Indeed, forgetfulness has taunted the trial at nearly every turn, frustrating efforts to determine what really happened during many of the police stops that are the foundation of a case examining the constitutionality of the Police Department's tactics.
On Monday, forgetfulness itself was at issue. Judge Shira A. Scheindlin ordered the two officers, Sgt. James Mahoney and Detective Scott Giacona, back to court. The officers were accused of stopping a witness, Leroy Downs, on Staten Island in 2008, but they had previously claimed under oath that they had no recollection of stopping him.
On Friday, the judge raised the possibility of a perjury prosecution stemming from the Downs stop. "Somebody may not be testifying completely accurately under oath, and I'm troubled," she said.
Andrew Quinn, the lawyer for Sergeant Mahoney, responded that ordering the officers into the courtroom for the purposes of being identified by Mr. Downs would be "blatantly suggestive" that they were in fact the ones who stopped him. "If the police tried to do this, Judge," Mr. Quinn added, but the judge interrupted, saying that police eyewitness identification procedures did not apply to her.
"I'm not bound to any rules of lineup, show-ups, or anything else," Judge Scheindlin said, noting this was not a criminal trial. "I want the man to see these two people up or down, yes or no. That's the end of it."
So on Monday, the officers and Mr. Downs took the stand in quick succession: Sergeant Mahoney and Detective Giacona said they did not recognize Mr. Downs.
Mr. Downs, however, had no such difficulty, recalling the officers as the men who had stopped him on Staten Island.
Mr. Quinn told reporters there was no reason for officers to recall each stop from years ago. "No more than you would remember what you ate for breakfast five years ago," he said.
At times, officers have tripped over crucial details, and lawyers for the city have tried to suggest that time, rather than credibility, was at issue. One officer, Edward Arias, testified that he had stopped a man partly on the basis of the coat he was wearing: it fit the description of a suspect wanted in an unsolved robbery pattern. "I remember distinctly that the pattern mentioned a beige, yellowish, beige coat," he testified.
But the officer was confronted with a statement he gave several years ago in which he said he had been searching for a suspect wearing a blue coat, not a yellowish one.
At times, the stops have been hazy to even Judge Scheindlin, hearing the case for more than a month now. While listening to an officer describe a stop, the judge asked the lawyers if the court had already heard testimony from the man who had been stopped.
Yes, the judge was told, as lawyers gave details of his testimony: one stop occurred outside a Chinese restaurant, another on the subway platform. "I don't remember too much about it," the judge said. "It was a whole week ago."
_______________________________________________________________________
Shots Fired Confines of the 41 Precinct: Off-duty Manhattan Traffic Area P.O. Rafael Lora Allowed to Retire
His manslaughter conviction overturned, former NYPD cop reinstated for a day so he can collect pension
Claiming self-defense, Rafael Lora was convicted for fatally shooting Fermin Arzu in 2007 after the motorist crashed his van on the off-duty cop's Bronx block. He won an appeal in 2011. An attorney for the victim's family called the reinstatement 'disgraceful.'
By John Marzulli — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The New York Daily News'
The city's top cop allowed the one-day reinstatement of an NYPD officer whose conviction for fatally shooting an unarmed drunk driver was overturned, allowing him to retire with a pension, sources told the Daily News.
The highly unusual move came on April 5 after a deputy commissioner recommended that ex-cop Rafael Lora not be reinstated to the force.
But Patrolmen's Benevolent Association lawyer Stuart London convinced Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly to consider a compromise in which the cop could retire with his 15 years on the job. Under the deal, Lora will collect about 75% of the pension he would have been entitled to had he worked for 20 years. He'll get about $25,000 a year and medical benefits.
Lora said he was acting in self-defense when he shot Fermin Arzu, who had crashed his van on the off-duty cop's Bronx block in May 2007. Bronx Supreme Court Judge Margaret Clancy found Lora guilty of manslaughter and sentenced him to one to three years in prison.
The state Appellate Division tossed out the conviction in 2011, ruling the cop had not acted recklessly. It is unclear whether the NYPD Firearms Discharge Review Board ruled the shooting was within department guidelines.
Asked about Kelly's decision to reinstate the cop for a day, NYPD spokesman Paul Browne responded: "It was done in the best interests of the department."
Lawyer Sanford Rubenstein, who is representing the Arzu family in a wrongful-death lawsuit, called Lora's reinstatement "disgraceful."
"We look forward to a civil trial to get justice," Rubenstein said.
Lora will not be provided a so-called "good guy" letter that the NYPD gives police retirees so they can purchase firearms, according to London.
"It's unbelievable," said the victim's daughter, Katerin Arzu. "He wasn't punished. They're paying him for what he did."
_______________________________________________________________________
NYPD 'Operation Lucky Bag'
Tosses 'Bait-Car' Bust
Bronx Judge to NYPD: Fishing in Oily Waters
By MARK TOOR — Monday, April 22nd, 2013 'The Chief / Civil Service Leader'
A Judge's rebuke of an NYPD program aimed at arresting people who remove unguarded cash from a vehicle has revived memories of Operation Lucky Bag, another anti-crime program that critics have characterized as overreaching by police.
Bronx Criminal Court Judge Linda Poust Lopez dismissed charges of possession of stolen property and petty larceny earlier this month in an Operation Bait Car case. Allowing the case to continue "would greatly damage the confidence and trust of the public in the fairness and effectiveness of the criminal justice system, and rightly so," she wrote.
Fell for Police Ruse
The defendant, Deidre Myers, said she never even got near the bait money (which was actually a dollar bill wrapped around pieces of newspaper). She said she and her daughter were sitting on their front stoop when a driver pulled over, jumped out of his car and ran, with police apparently in pursuit. He left the car door open.
Ms. Myers's 15-year-old daughter walked up to the car, saw what she thought was a stack of bills and called for her mother to come over. As Ms. Myers approached the car, a van full of cops pulled up and arrested them. Officers had staged the chase scenario in an attempt to attract people to the car.
"I thought I was in the Twilight Zone," she told the Associated Press. She is suing the city, claiming the arrest traumatized her and her daughter. "You know how embarrassing and humiliating this was? I'd never been stopped by the police for anything in my life."
She said she had never even touched the bills.
The Bronx Anti-Auto-Theft "Bait Car" Program began in 1995 with the aim of reducing car theft and vehicle break-ins. A 2010 press release from State Sen. Jeff Klein, who obtained $125,000 in state funds for the program, did not mention leaving cash in open cars.
'Bizarre Set-Up Attempt'
Ms. Myers' lawyer, Ann Mauer, said her client's arrest was "the most extreme version of the operation that we've seen."
"It's such a bizarre and extreme attempt to set somebody up," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union. "It's like Lucky Bag on steroids."
In her ruling, Judge Lopez mentioned Lucky Bag, a similar tactic in which officers put money or valuables inside a wallet or purse and leave it opened in a public place, like a park bench. Anyone who takes the purse or the money is arrested.
Critics of the Police Department said this means people who are hoping to find the owner or turn the bag in at a police precinct are improperly arrested along with wrongdoers.
Another Dupe Suing
Yakov Dubin, 49, of suburban Atlanta, is suing the city for $1 million over his arrest in August 2011 after he removed $27 from a purse police had left under a bench in Central Park. He said he left the bag behind because it was old and smelled bad. Plainclothes officers stopped him as he was walking away.
He told them he planned to turn the money in to a Park Ranger, but he was arrested anyway. Mr. Dubin was charged with petty larceny and possession of stolen property, but the charges were reduced to disorderly conduct and he agreed to pay a $120 fine.
"I'm a law-abiding citizen," he told the Daily News. "I've never been arrested, and for them to put me in handcuffs in the middle of the day in front of my kids was humiliating."
Police spokesman Paul J. Browne defended the arrest. "Someone who opens a bag that doesn't belong to him, stuffs $27 in his pocket and walks away is no innocent," he told the News.
'Discourages Samaritans'
Grace Meng, a State Assemblywoman until she was elected to Congress last November, introduced a bill in the 2011-12 state legislative session that would have outlawed Lucky Bag. It said law-enforcement officers "shall be prohibited from engaging in enticement to possess stolen property."
"The practice commonly known as 'Operation Lucky Bag' discourages Good Samaritans from making good-faith attempts to return lost items because potential Good Samaritans may be discouraged from returning the items due to fears of false arrests," said a memo accompanying the bill, which died in committee. "The Operation Lucky Bag stings conducted by the NYPD revealed that many of those who picked up the left-behind property returned it or intended to return it, but were frisked and asked for ID for a background check."
Lucky Bag started out with a bang in 2006. Police arrested 220 people in the subways who did not return wallets and bags that had been planted. However, many of the cases were dismissed. A Brooklyn Judge said the law allows people 10 days to turn in found property and added that he believed police were encouraging otherwise law-abiding people to commit a crime. More than half those arrested had never been arrested before.
Narrowing the Criteria
Prosecutors and NYPD officials revised the program. A memo from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office stated, "Taking money out of a wallet and discarding the latter, which may contain owner information, searching through a bag to remove items of value and leave the rest behind, secreting the property or other furtive behavior or denying to an undercover officer posing as the owner that the taker found any property, are examples of facts that should support a larceny charge. . .Absent such circumstances we should decline to prosecute the cases as unprovable."
In spring of 2011, 34 people were arrested in Central Park as a result of Operation Lucky Bag.
Referring to the Bait Car case, attorney Raju Sundaran of the city Department of Law said in a statement, "We received the complaint and are in the process of assessing the claims. It's important to note that at this point, these are merely allegations and should be regarded as such. We cannot comment on the particular claims raised here, but generally speaking, undercover sting operations are lawful and help reduce crime."
Mr. Browne did not respond to a query about the status of the Lucky Bag program.
_______________________________________________________________________
Is the NYPD Entrapping Good Samaritans?
By Josh Crank — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'Lawyer.Com' / New Providence, NJ
If you find an unattended purse or wallet lying around New York City, you might want to be extra careful about your next move. There's a chance the NYPD is watching — and if they think you intend to pocket the money, you could go to jail.
That's what happened in 2010 to Bronx resident Deirdre Myers and her 15-year-old daughter, neither of whom even touched the money they were accused of trying to steal. Their arrests were the result of an elaborate sting that the NYPD says was part of an effort to deter thefts in public places.
But Judge Linda Poust Lopez dismissed Myers' charges of petty larceny and theft this month. AP reports Lopez wrote that upholding the charges "would greatly damage the confidence and trust of the public in the fairness and effectiveness of the criminal justice system, and rightly so."
Police Staged Car Chase
Myers said she was sitting on the front stoop of her residence with her daughter in 2010 when two cars raced down the street. The first car stopped abruptly and the driver got out and ran, leaving the door open. Two men in plainclothes got out of the second car, identified themselves as police, and gave chase.
But it was all for show. The driver of the first car was an undercover police officer who left what appeared to be a wad of cash on the front seat. Myers' daughter approached the car, saw the cash and called her mother over. That's when a third vehicle pulled up, carrying yet another set of police who forced Myers and her daughter to the ground, placing them in handcuffs.
Prosecutors don't intend to appeal the dismissed charges, so Myers' criminal case is over. But she could be back in court again soon: she's suing the city.
She's not the first to file such a suit. Last year, Atlanta resident Yakov Dubin was arrested while on vacation in New York City after taking $27 out of a purse left under a park bench. The purse contained no ID, and Dubin explained to officers that he intended to take the money to the police. He's suing the city for more than $4 million.
Dubin, a Russian immigrant who was once arrested by Soviet police for protesting, told the New York Post that "the only difference was in the Soviet Union they beat the crap out of me at the police station."
"Over-The-Top" Tactic
Police stings are nothing new, but the ruse that led to Myers' arrest is a variation on an NYPD initiative dubbed "Operation Lucky Bag." When theft reports increase in public places like parks or subway stations, officers leave unattended bags containing cash or other valuables. When someone appears to take the money, plainclothes officers move in.
"Certainly we can all recognize that some of these things serve to protect our communities," said New York criminal defense attorney Jeremy Saland. "These are being done because of real problems the police are trying to combat. But there could be some statistical reasons they're doing them, too. They may be trying to get some arrest numbers, and this makes it easy for them."
Saland called the sting tactic that ensnared Myers "over-the-top" and said, "unfortunately, it doesn't shock me at all that there was an arrest made that was not a proper arrest."
Saland said that prosecutors of "Operation Lucky Bag" defendants would want to prove an attempt at a crime, with "attempt" defined as "dangerous proximity to a criminal end."
"If you look in the bag, that's not a crime. If you open the wallet to check for an ID, that's not a crime. If you take cash out of the wallet and put it in your pocket, that's another thing," Saland said.
As for actual good samaritans who get caught in the NYPD's crosshairs, "there's probably little you can do or say to deter the police if they're determined to arrest you," Saland said. He recommends that you stay calm, cooperate with the officer's instructions and make your case with the help of an attorney.
"You have to be patient and fight this," Saland said.
_______________________________________________________________________
Off-duty Sgt. Donald Stewart
Off-duty NYPD sergeant busted on drunk-driving rap after Brooklyn accident
Sergeant hits double-parked car, which then strikes another car; he keeps going, court documents say
By Oren Yaniv AND Barry Paddock — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The New York Daily News'
An off-duty NYPD sergeant was busted on driving drunk charges after he hit a parked vehicle in Brooklyn early Monday, police said.
Donald Stewart, 33, crashed his 2011 Grand Cherokee into a double-parked Nissan Quest, which then hit a parked Volvo sedan on Putnam Ave. near Stuyvesant Ave. in Bedford-Stuyvesant about 9:20 p.m., according to court papers.
Stewart didn't stop after hitting the minivan, but was busted two blocks away in the rear seat of his SUV after the front tire came off, according to court documents. He had his vehicle's keys in his pocket.
He reeked of alcohol, had bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and walked unsteadily. He refused a Breathalyzer test, according to court papers.
Stewart was awaiting arraignment on charges of DWI and leaving the scene of an accident in Brooklyn Criminal Court Monday.
_______________________________________________________________________
'Drunk' cop allegedly stinking of booze crashes in Brooklyn, keeps driving
By JESSICA SIMEONE — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The New York Post'
An off-duty police sergeant was arrested after he drunkenly crashed his vehicle into a parked car in Brooklyn last night, cops said.
Donald Stewart, 33, slammed his 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee into a double-parked Nissan Quest as he swerved down Putnam Avenue at around 9:30 p.m. Sunday in Bedford-Stuyvesant, according to a criminal-court complaint. The crash caused the Quest to then hit a parked Volvo sedan, the complaint said.
Stewart allegedly continued driving for two blocks until his front wheel came off. He was found by cops in the back seat of his vehicle with his keys in his pocket, authorities said.
Stewart allegedly stunk of booze, and officers noticed his bloodshot eyes and slurred speech, according to the complaint.
Stewart refused a breathalyzer and was charged with DWI and leaving the scene of an accident.
_______________________________________________________________________
NYPD in Boston
Response to Patriot's Day Bombing
PBA Aids Boston Police While Mayor, Kelly Tighten Security
By MARK TOOR — Monday, April 22nd, 2013 'The Chief / Civil Service Leader'
As New York City was ramping up security after the bombings at the Boston Marathon, the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, reciprocating for help the city received from Boston officers after 9/11, sent a canteen and a crew to staff it up to Boston.
About 10 PBA board members and regular Police Officers, working on a rotating basis, will be there as long as the Boston Police Department needs the support, union spokesman Joe Mancini said last week.
'Returning the Favor'
"On 9/11, when our officers were needful, our brother and sister Boston police officers saw our need and responded," said PBA President Patrick J. Lynch, who visited that city last week. "They fed us, they comforted us, they backed us up. Now it's time for us to return the favor."
The Port Authority Police Benevolent Association did the same thing, for the same reasons. "Boston PD was there [after 9/11], which is one reason we were in such a hurry to get up here," Port Authority Police Officer Ray Butler, who helped to staff that canteen, told the Star-Ledger of Newark in a telephone interview. "We've been down the same road."
The two canteens served hundreds of police officers, firefighters and other first-responders. In addition to nine members to operate the canteen, the PAPBA also sent its stress counselor to Boston.
At a press conference April 16, the day after the bombing in Boston, Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly described precautions they were taking to block a possibly related attack on New York City.
'Mobilized to Protect City'
"I called [Boston] Mayor Thomas Menino and told him New York City will do everything possible to support Boston in the days ahead," Mr. Bloomberg said, harkening as the PBA did to the support provided after the attack on the World Trade Center. "...We have fully mobilized our resources to protect New York from any threat that might emerge."
Mr. Kelly said that although there were no specific threats to the city, "we prepared as if yesterday was a prelude to an attack on New York. That has been the standard protocol since 9/11."
Security was stepped up at hotels, houses of worship and landmarks such as Rockefeller Center and the Empire State Building. More cops were also assigned to the subways, and they were asked to step up searches of riders' bags.
"We ask the public to be vigilant, particularly as far as [possibly abandoned] packages are concerned," the Police Commissioner said. "After yesterday's events, we anticipated that there would be an increase in reports of suspicious packages, and indeed there was. We've had in the last 24-hour period 77 such reports. In a 24-hour period similar to this a year ago, we had 21 suspicious packages."
Monitoring Boston Probe
Mr. Kelly said he had sent two Sergeants to the Boston Regional Intelligence Center, an organization of police and fire departments in the area, to monitor the investigation. The goal was to pick up information that would help thwart an attack here.
"We want as much information as we can get as quickly as we can get it," Mr. Kelly said. "We get very granular information quickly. We believe and the intelligence community believes that we're the number-one target."
Asked by a reporter whether the NYPD would assist in the investigation, Mr. Kelly said, "If we were asked, we'd certainly be available." But, he said, "They have a lot of good people there,"
In Albany, Governor Cuomo ordered state agencies and authorities on a heightened state of alert. State Police patrols, particularly K-9 units, increased their presence and visibility at train stations and platforms in coordination with Amtrak and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
National Guard Dispatched
The New York National Guard sent 230 soldiers and airmen to assist NYPD Counterterrorism and the MTA, and provided personnel to augment security at the Port Authority Bus Terminal, PATH stations, Penn Station, Grand Central Terminal, Amtrak, the Queens Midtown Tunnel, the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel, and JFK and LaGuardia airports.
Port Authority Police increased their presence at transportation hubs and the World Trade Center site. The MTA also increased patrols by its officers.
_______________________________________________________________________
Deputy Inspectors Anthony Bologna and Johnny Cardona
Manhattan DA Won't Prosecute Top Cops On OWS Force Beefs
By MARK TOOR — Monday, April 22nd, 2013 'The Chief / Civil Service Leader'
The Manhattan District Attorney's Office said April 19 that it would not prosecute two NYPD commanders, Deputy Inspectors Anthony Bologna and Johnny Cardona, over allegations that they had used improper force against Occupy Wall Street demonstrators in 2011.
No sooner had the announcement been made than Roy Richter, president of the Captains Endowment Association, called for the Law Department to reverse its decision refusing to defend Mr. Cardona in a civil suit from a protester claiming that the cop had punched him.
'Cardona the True Victim'
"I am happy with the District Attorney's decision," Mr. Richter said. "Deputy Inspector Cardona is the true victim of the OWS fiasco. He is currently recovering from multiple surgeries to his body as a result of injuries sustained while policing the demonstration. Inspector Cardona has been cleared of all misconduct allegations lodged with the department and has fully cooperated with the Law Department in their civil review process. There is now no excuse the Law Department can identify to justify denial of representation to the Inspector."
The Law Department is no longer denying him representation. "Under state law, a city employee is entitled to Law Department representation in civil cases arising out of his or her work, as long as the action did not violate any agency rule or regulation," Corporation Counsel Michael A. Cardozo said in a statement April 22. "Last week, DA [Cyrus] Vance closed an investigation of Deputy Inspector Cardona without filing any charges, and the incident is not being investigated by anyone else. As a result, the Law Department is now able to defend him in the pending civil-court action."
In the Cardona case, a video posted on YouTube shows a white-shirted police officer advancing through the crowd, drawing back an arm and punching Felix Rivera-Pitre. The officer is mostly shown from the side, and his face is hidden at key points in the video. Mr. Rivera-Pitre's lawyers identified the officer as Mr. Cardona.
Misused Pepper Spray
Months before the city initially decided not to represent Mr. Cardona, it reached the same conclusion for Mr. Bologna, who was filmed dousing with pepper spray a group of young women standing peacefully behind a police barrier. Some of the women are suing.
Because Mr. Cardona was not disciplined by the Police Department, his situation is different from that of Mr. Bologna. The NYPD decided that Mr. Bologna had misused pepper spray and offered an administrative penalty of the loss of 10 days' pay. Mr. Bologna accepted, essentially pleading guilty.
Mr. Cardozo cited that in declining to represent Mr. Bologna. Mr. Richter called for reversal of that decision as well, saying it "highlights the perversion of the Law Department review process where any possible excuse is identified to abandon an officer who is sued as a result of his taking action in the performance of duty."
_______________________________________________________________________
City Says It Will Represent Officer in Occupy Protester's Lawsuit
By J. DAVID GOODMAN — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The New York Times'
Following a decision by the Manhattan district attorney not to prosecute a police commander for his actions at Occupy Wall Street protests in 2011, the city said on Monday that it was now in a position to represent him in a federal civil lawsuit.
The Law Department said it had been waiting for a decision on criminal charges from the office of Cyrus R. Vance Jr., the Manhattan district attorney, before stepping forward to represent the commander, Deputy Inspector Johnny Cardona.
"Last week, D.A. Vance closed an investigation of Deputy Inspector Cardona without filing any charges, and the incident is not being investigated by anyone else," said Michael A. Cardozo, the city's corporation counsel and top lawyer, in a statement on Monday. "As a result, the Law Department is now able to defend him in the pending civil court action."
Court papers filed earlier this month in the suit did not describe any representation for the commander, Deputy Inspector Johnny Cardona, and the Law Department said that its lawyers were not in a position to represent him "at the present time."
Mr. Cardona is named in a federal lawsuit brought by one protester, Felix Rivera-Pitre, who alleges that he was punched in the face during pitched street confrontations between protesters and the police in Lower Manhattan in October 2011.
He is one of two high-ranking police officers facing federal lawsuits stemming from their actions during the Occupy Wall Street protests. The other, Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna, is accused of indiscriminately pepper-spraying protesters. In that case, the Police Department found that Mr. Bologna had violated its guidelines. As a result, the Law Department is not representing him in his civil suit.
On Friday, Mr. Vance's office said that after a lengthy investigation it would not file any criminal charges in either matter.
Ronald Kuby, a lawyer for Mr. Rivera-Pitre, said that the continuing investigation by Mr. Vance's office had made it "difficult for us to obtain materials" related to the case from prosecutors. Mr. Kuby added, "Presumably someone told Vance that he was actually hurting Cardona because the city would not represent him, so Vance announced his phony investigation was over and the city flipped like a pancake."
Video shot at the protests made both men symbols for those who saw excessive force in the police response to the Occupy protesters.
In the case of Mr. Cardona, several videos shot from different angles on Oct. 14, 2011, appeared to show the inspector grabbing Mr. Rivera-Pitre as he was walking away from him and punching him in the face. The police said at the time that Mr. Rivera-Pitre had earlier attempted to elbow Inspector Cardona and was being sought for attempted assault.
"While I am pleased with the decision to indemnify Deputy Inspector Cardona, it highlights the perversion of the Law Department review process where any possible excuse is identified to abandon an officer who is sued as a result of his taking action in the performance of duty," said Roy T. Richter, the president of the Captain's Endowment Union, which represents high-ranking officers.
He also criticized the city for declining to represent Mr. Bologna, calling it "an equal injustice and one that should be corrected in light of the district attorney's review."
_______________________________________________________________________
112 Precinct
Forest Hills Home Burglaries Soar 93 Percent: Police
By Pei-Sze Cheng — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'NBC News' / New York, NY
Residents in Forest Hills, Queens are on edge after a recent rash of home break-ins that sent their neighborhood burglary statistics soaring by nearly 100 percent.
The most recent burglary was over the weekend on 69th Avenue. The homeowner, who wished to remain anonymous in order to protect her identity, said she returned home Saturday evening after having been gone all day to find her home ransacked.
Jennifer Bondanza also returned home Saturday to see that someone had tried to break the gate to her driveway. But the thief or thieves were unable to gain entry.
"Whoever it is, they should arrest them soon," she said.
The crime wave started in February of this year and has caused the number of burglaries to spike a whopping 93 percent in the 112th Precinct. At this time last year, there were 29 burglaries in the precinct; this year, there have already been 56, according to the NYPD.
"In most cases, we heard that jewelry and money were taken," said neighbor Charlie Crawbuck. "But two of them actually walked out with big screen televisions, which seems kind of brazen to me."
Police have held meetings with the community to caution them about the crimes and urged them to take precautions.
"I had an alarm system installed, I have safety doors," said resident Ronan Hogg. "I leave lights on during the day and nighttime."
Many people are reinforcing their windows and doors and even installing security cameras, something lifelong residents never would have considered in the past. Meanwhile, neighbors say the NYPD has increased its presence in the neighborhood, sending marked and unmarked cars to patrol the streets.
"I feel like there's been so many so many at this point they should have a lead or something," said Bondanza. "It seems like every day somebody's house is getting broken into."
_______________________________________________________________________
New York State
Inspector general rejects Syracuse police claims of misconduct at crime lab
By John O'Brien — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The Syracuse Post-Standard' / Syracuse, NY
Syracuse, NY -- The state inspector general today rejected claims of negligence and misconduct at the Onondaga County crime lab over the past seven years.
Catherine Leahy Scott, the acting state inspector general, said her office's investigation into a complaint from Syracuse police "found no serious negligence or misconduct" by the county's Center for Forensic Sciences.
The IG's investigation was in response to a complaint filed by Syracuse police Deputy Chief Shawn Broton, who alleged the lab often ignored police requests for evidence examination and that the lab was doing the bidding of the Onondaga County District Attorney's Office.
Rather than finding misconduct at the lab, the IG's office blamed Syracuse police for not communicating with the lab and for not understanding how it works.
The IG's investigation "found that in a number of instances, Syracuse police failed to adequately communicate with the crime lab and, at times, did not appear to fully understand the crime lab's procedures and authority," Scott wrote in an executive summary to the report.
The IG's office recommended that the crime lab offer training to Syracuse police officials.
The IG's office interviewed more than 20 employees of the lab, Syracuse police and the DA's office, the report said. The agency found that many of Broton's accusations appeared to be not directly related to the lab, but to an ongoing public feud between police administrators and District Attorney William Fitzpatrick.
"During interviews with both Deputy Chief Broton and District Attorney Fitzpatrick, it was clear that the relationship between the two offices is currently strained, with both offices publicly criticizing the other in recent months," the report said.
Broton's complaint, which he filed with a laboratory accrediting agency last year, says the crime lab relies too heavily on requests and guidance from the DA's office.
"However, it is clear that the crime lab does not, and should not, work for either entity," the IG's report said.
Broton complained about the lab's handling of a 2009 homicide investigation in which no arrests had been made when police asked the lab to perform fingerprint examinations on nine pieces of evidence. Those tests weren't done for three years. As a result, one of the suspects remained at large until August 2010, when he was arrested in an armed robbery in which a police officer was shot at, Broton's complaint said.
In that case, the IG's faulted the police for not notifying the lab that the 2009 case had changed from a "shots-fired" investigation into a homicide. But the IG also faulted the lab and the DA's office for the delay.
"This case demonstrates a breakdown in communication within the law enforcement community for which the Syracuse police, the Onondaga County District Attorney's Office and the crime lab share responsibility," the report said.
Fitzpatrick last year filed a response to Broton's complaint, blasting him for being incompetent in forensic science and for making false or incomplete allegations.
Fitzpatrick said today the report completely exonerates the lab and should prompt Mayor Stephanie Miner to take action regarding the leadership of the police department.
"We'll see how the city responds," Fitzpatrick said. "Certainly they should say "We've got to really look at who's the chief and who's the deputy chief.' "
He said he knew of no other case in the state where a police agency ever made such serious allegations against a crime lab. Now that they've been ruled unfounded, someone needs to explain to taxpayers, who had to foot the bill for a state investigation, he said.
"She can't do nothing," Fitzpatrick said of Miner. "She can't say again, 'I stand by my chief.' "
Miner said today she continues to stand by her chief and deputy chief, whom she called "extremely good leaders."
The report cited poor communication by not only the police, but the DA's office and the crime lab, Miner said. She blamed Fitzpatrick.
"We've tried in earnest to work with the district attorney," Miner said. "But his demeanor makes that more difficult, not less difficult."
Syracuse police officials had not yet reviewed the report today and therefore could not yet comment, Sgt. Tom Connellan said.
The clash over the workings at the crime lab is the latest in a yearlong public war between Fitzpatrick and the Syracuse police administration. The dispute surfaced more than a year ago in connection with the investigation of fired Syracuse University assistant basketball coach Bernie Fine, when Fitzpatrick called Police Chief Frank Fowler an "irrelevant" chief with "a juvenile mind."
The IG's report comes a month after the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors issued a report saying there was no basis to Broton's allegations..
The IG's office started another investigation last week into a Syracuse police officer's use of an unaccredited lab to run forensic tests on crime scene evidence in at least 11 cases from 2006 to 2010.
_______________________________________________________________________
New Jersey
Police can use 'flash-bang' device to search suspect's home, N.J. Supreme Court says
By Unnamed Author(s) (The Associated Press) — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013; 11:10 a.m. EDT
TRENTON — New Jersey's Supreme Court has upheld that police can use a "flash-bang" device in a search of a drug suspect's home in 2007.
The ruling released today overturns an appellate court decision and reinstates the conviction of a Manalapan man.
Police used a flash-bang device, which emits intense light and makes a loud noise, as a diversion when they executed a search warrant at the John Rockford's house. A judge who signed the warrant had rejected a police request for a "no-knock" warrant, meaning officers had to knock and announce their presence before entering.
The appeals court ruled the use of the device violated the terms of the warrant and excluded the drugs found during the search.
Today's ruling allowed the search. One justice dissented.
_______________________________________________________________________
U.S.A.
USA TODAY Poll: Public support for gun control ebbs
By Susan Page — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'USA Today'
WASHINGTON -- Four months after the shooting rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School, a USA TODAY Poll finds support for a new gun-control law ebbing as prospects for passage on Capitol Hill seem to fade.
Americans are more narrowly divided on the issue than in recent months, and backing for a bill has slipped below 50%, the poll finds. By 49%-45%, those surveyed favor Congress passing a new gun-control law. In an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll in early April, 55% had backed a stricter gun law, which was down from 61% in February.
The survey of 1,002 adults was taken Thursday through Sunday by Princeton Survey Research. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points.
Those who support a bill want advocates in Congress to hang tough and not compromise -- an attitude that also could complicate passing legislation. Sixty-one percent say members of Congress "should only agree to a stronger version of the bill, even if it might not pass." Just 30% say they should "accept a weaker law" they know can win approval.
"So much of the support for gun control is emotional, following the Newtown tragedy," says Stuart Rothenberg, editor and publisher of the non-partisan Rothenberg Political Report. The December shooting at the Connecticut school left 20 children and six adults dead. "The longer you get away from there, people start thinking of other issues. They start thinking about terrorism or jobs or immigration, and not surprisingly, then some of the momentum behind gun control starts to fade."
The Boston Marathon bombings last Monday also may have had an effect, he speculates. "It wouldn't be shocking if people sitting in their homes in Massachusetts cities and towns thought to themselves, 'Boy, I wish I had something to protect myself with if a terrorist came through the door now.'"
Last week in the Senate, a bipartisan proposal for expanding background checks for gun buyers failed to win the 60 votes needed.
Those surveyed who oppose a gun-control bill are split on whether senators who agree should use a filibuster to block debate: 44% back the idea of a filibuster; 41% oppose it.
On immigration, support for taking action is strong: 80% back "better border control" and 71% favor creating a pathway to citizenship for immigrants now in the United States illegally, if they meet certain requirements. Just 25% oppose creating a process to gain citizenship.
Americans remain more concerned about tough enforcement, however. By 55%-33%, they say they place a higher priority on preventing illegal immigration in the future than on dealing with immigrants who already are in the U.S. illegally.
_______________________________________________________________________
Lead abatement, alcohol taxes and 10 other ways to reduce the crime rate without annoying the NRA
By Dylan Matthews — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The Washington Post' / Washington, DC
With multiple Democrats opposing it and an initial cloture vote falling short of the 60 votes needed to proceed to final passage, it sure looks like Manchin-Toomey, the Senate's bipartisan compromise gun control legislation, is dead. That means the gun lobby won another round.
If you can't beat 'em, go around them. Here are a dozen policies that would cut assault and homicide rates — but that have nothing to do with guns. That said, while they won't annoy the NRA, they often have their own set of powerful lobbies to confront.
1. Get the lead out.
A lot of theories have been posed for explaining the fall in crime rates, and in particular violent crime rates, since the 1990s. Did "broken windows" policing work? What about data-driven approaches like CompStat? Was it that legal abortion allowed unprepared mothers to delay parenthood, and spare their kids childhood environments that might encourage criminality later on? Or does the falling price of cocaine explain it?
None of the above. The real answer, it's now becoming clear, is lead. In the 1970s, the environmental movement succeeded in getting lead out of gasoline and household paint, and the result has been smarter, less violent kids. Economist Rick Nevin has found that, if you add a 23-year lag, variations in lead exposure explain 90 percent of the variation in crime rates in the United States.
Jessica Wolpaw Reyes, an economist at the Amherst College, found that declining lead exposure caused a 56 percent decline in crime from 1992 to 2002, a decline that was reversed by other factors to leave the actual decline at 34 percent over that period. Wolpe Reyes has also found significant effects on childhood delinquency and academic performance. The correlations are simply staggering. Kevin Drum laid out the evidence in a long piece earlier this year, including this striking graph.
Neurological research has indicated how this effect works. Lead hurts the parts of the brain responsible for executive functioning (emotional control, control of impulses, etc.), and aggression control, and makes it harder for neurons to communicate with each other. It's no wonder it leads to all kinds of social maladies.
Drum suggests that a $20 billion a year investment in deleading, over the course of a few decades, would generate $30 billion a year in new income by increasing children's IQs going forward. He guesses that a 10 percent decline in crime is a reasonable outcome to expect.
2. Double, triple, quadruple the alcohol tax.
As criminologist Mark Kleiman told me last month, "Any sentence about drug policy that doesn't end with 'raise alcohol taxes' is an incoherent sentence." He's hardly the only one with that view. Economics, criminology and public health literature are rife with studies finding that raising the price of alcohol reduces violence, not to mention other causes of injury and death. Indeed, every self-reported survey of incarcerated criminals suggests that 36.8 percent of state-level violent offenders, and 20.8 percent of federal violent offenders, were drinking when they committed the crime for which they're incarcerated.
Economist Sara Markowitz, for example, found in a study of U.S. crime patterns that a "single percent increase in the beer tax decreases the probability of assault by 0.45 percent" and "a 1 percent decrease in the number of outlets that sell alcohol decreases the probability of rape by 1.75 percent." Researchers in Finland found that a 2004 cut in the country's alcohol tax caused a sudden 17 percent spike in fatalities relative to the previous year. There's preliminary evidence that alcohol taxes can reduce the number of U.S. female homicide victims. Kleiman cites findings of Duke's Philip Cook to the effect that a doubling of the federal excise tax on alcohol would reduce homicide and automobile fatalities by 7 percent each, for a net 3,000 lives saved. What's more, it would only cost twice-a-day drinkers (who, as it is, drink considerably more than average) $6 a month.
One common doubt surrounding this method of reducing violent crime is whether or not alcoholics really care what the price of alcohol is. If they don't, then raising the price would just cost them money without much social benefit. But the data suggests that alcohol consumers are, in fact, sensitive to the price of the product. Researchers at the CDC compiled a number of studies estimating "price elasticities" of different kinds of alcohol.
The elasticity (as Stringer Bell explains above) is the amount by which consumption changes when the price of a good changes. For example, if the elasticity is -0.5, then a 10 percent increase in price will reduce consumption by 5 percent. If the elasticity is 0 or positive, then consumers are either indifferent to the cost of the product or actually want it more because it's more expensive.
A few studies found that the elasticity of spirits is positive, perhaps because expensive Scotch or bourbon are Veblen goods: people buy them more when they're more expensive because their expense makes them better status markers. But generally, the elasticities are negative. Raising the price of alcohol, for example by raising the tax on it, is an effective way to reduce consumption, and thus alcohol-related fatalities and assaults:
Researchers Alexander Wagenaar, Amy Tobler and Kelli Komro also conducted a literature review on alcohol tax and price policies, scanning through 50 studies on the subject. Their conclusion: "Our results suggest that doubling the alcohol tax would reduce alcohol-related mortality by an average of 35%, traffic crash deaths by 11%, sexually transmitted disease by 6%, violence by 2%, and crime by 1.4%." The case for making higher alcohol prices a part of our approach to reducing violent crime, then, is pretty strong.
3. Foster care for young delinquents.
The one crime policy which the Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy rates as "top tier" — meaning it's been repeatedly shown to work in randomized controlled trials — is a program known as "Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care." In MTFC, severely delinquent children are removed from their homes for a period of six to seven months and placed with foster families. Under usual policy, such children tend to be placed in group homes with other delinquent youth, rather than in a family setting.
The foster parents are generally members of the child's community and are given special behavioral training to deal with troubled youth. The children receive both individual and group therapy (of the cognitive-behavioral variety which has itself been shown to work in randomized trials as well). Special care is taken to make sure the children aren't in contact with other troubled kids.
Three randomized studies have evaluated MTFC and all have found significant positive effects. A study on delinquent girls, average age 15, found that those in foster care, rather than a group home, spent 69 percent fewer days in jail or correctional facilities over the next two years, had 55 percent fewer criminal referrals, and had a 38 percent lower pregnancy rate. Another study found that boys in the program had 45 percent fewer criminal referrals and 68 percent fewer self-reported violent incidents. The third found strong effects on teen pregnancy, and has yet to follow-up on other measures.
4. Better police tactics
Yeah, "broken windows" probably didn't deserve the hype. But police really can reduce the crime rate. In their aptly named literature review, "What Can Police Do to Reduce Crime, Disorder, and Fear?" the criminologists David Weisburd and John Eck point to "hot spots" policing, in which police identify particular geographic locations with high crime and then focus efforts there, as a proven tactic. As I explained earlier this year, they found five randomized studies supporting both "hot spots" and a closely related method, "problem-based policing," as strategies.
The Minnesota Hot Spots Patrol Experiment, conducted from June 1987 to June 1988, found that a hot spots strategy resulted in a 6-13 percent reduction in total crime reports. The Kansas City Crack House Raids Experiment, undertaken from November 1991 to May 1992, found an 8 percent net reduction in crime, though those results decayed as the strategy continued. A study in San Diego found that a kind of hot spots policing in which police raids are followed up with visits to landlords to make sure activity has not started up again results in a 60 percent reduction in crime, relative to having no follow-ups with landlords.
But the most interesting studies they highlight focus on a "problem-based" policing, which tailors police methods to particular problems (like drug dealing, or gang violence) and tries to incorporate other government services in the process. Both randomized experiments in this area focused on Jersey City, N.J. One found that hot spot policing combined both with target-specific tactics (videotape surveillance of public spaces, confiscating guns stashed in public areas) and with social service intervention (including aid to the homeless, street trash removal, and better enforcement of liquor and housing codes) resulted in significant crime reduction. The second compared a normal hot spot intervention to one that incorporated local regulatory agencies and "problem-oriented" tactics, and found the latter to be more effective.
Of course, all these techniques require an increase in the police force, which may be costly and hard to push through politically.
5. After-school sports.
The University of Chicago's Crime Lab evaluated a program called "BAM — Sports Edition," which provides 7th-10th-grade boys with small group instruction in social and life skills in school, and sports programming after school. The study, which used a randomized design, found that the program reduced violent crime arrests by 44 percent. The authors estimate that the program's social benefit probably total "$49,000 to $119,000 per participant from increased lifetime earnings, tax payments, and lower public benefit use."
6. Preschool.
Yep, that too. There's some reason to believe that high-quality preschool programs reduce crime rates among their participants. Of the two marquee experiments on the topic, the Perry project found significant reductions in crime by age 40, while the Abecedarian project did not find any effects. Then again, the last follow-ups in Abecedarian were conducted when participants were only 21, so it's possible that a gap opened up later on.
So this area is less conclusive than others. But the Perry intervention, at the very least, had a real effect on crime rates, which suggests that replicating such an impact in another preschool program is at least possible. As Nobel laureate and preschool advocate James Heckman has written, "In evaluating drugs to control blood pressure, we do not dwell on the failures except to learn from them. We should implement the successes."
7. Target gangs.
In a paper coauthored with Duke's Phil Cook, the University of Chicago Crime Lab's Jens Ludwig suggests that "gang-based deterrence," in which gangs are collectively held responsible by police and other government and civil society respondents for violence committed by their members, might be more effective than targeting individual perpetrators.
The Kennedy School's Anthony Braga, David Kennedy, Anne Piehl and Lehman College's Elin Waring found that the Boston Ceasefire program, an intervention in the mid-1990s that used a gang-based approach, was associated with reductions in violence, though their evidence is non-experimental and cannot determine what specific parts of the ceasefire program caused the reductions.
8. Take away already illegal guns.
I suppose this qualifies as gun control, but Ludwig and Carnegie Mellon's Jacqueline Cohen have also argued that police patrols designed to confiscate illegal guns being carried in the street can be an effective crime policy. Like gang-based deterrence, highly rigorous experimental evidence doesn't exist on this topic, but their analysis of a Pittsburgh program found that it "may have reduced shots fired by 34 percent and gunshot injuries by as much as 71 percent in the targeted areas."
9. Reach out to parents.
The Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy also touts an Oregon program called "Parent Management Training". It targets single mothers of boys ages 6 to 10 who recently separated from the children's father. Both mothers and sons in the program were less likely to be arrested than those in the control group.
Another program called Linking the Interests of Families and Teachers (LIFT), which combines classroom training of children in basic social skills with weekly training for parents, was found to significantly decrease child aggression. "Parent-Child Interaction Therapy," a kind of intervention targeted at parents with a history of child abuse, has been found to cut recurrence rates of abuse in half. The Adolescent Transition Program, which entails universal outreach to parents coupled with more focused checkups on parents of children who might be having behavioral problems, has been found to significantly reduce arrests.
10. Mentors and teachers can help.
Mentees in Big Brothers / Big Sister programs were found in a randomized evaluation to be 32 percent less likely to have hit someone in the past 12 months.
More generally, specialized education has a pretty good track record at keeping down crime rates. "Positive Action," an in-school program meant to encourage "positive" behaviors, has been shown to cause significantly lower rates of violent behavior according to both teachers and students. An abuse prevention program known as "Safe Dates" was found in a randomized evaluation to lead to lower self-reports of psychological, physical, and sexual abuse.
11. Therapy.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, it turns out that a lot of violent youth just need a good therapist.
Multi-systemic therapy (MST), for instance, intensively targets juvenile offenders with four months of therapy, occurring multiple times a week with therapists with very small caseloads. Three randomized trials have found positive effects. Around 14 years on, one study found youth participating had spent 57 percent fewer days incarcerated than the control group. Another found that arrest rates for aggressive crimes were 75 percent lower in the treatment group four years on than in the control group. The third found 39 percent fewer arrests in the treatment group after only two years.
Aggression Replacement Training is a similar program that lasts ten weeks and 30 hours total, meeting with juveniles three times a week. It's been shown to reduce felony recidivism among the delinquents who receive it by 16 percent.
Same goes for adults. Behavioral couples therapy for couples in abusive relationships has been shown to reduce partner violence.
12. Street lighting.
Quasi-experimental trials in Britain have found that even something as simple as lighting the streets at night can reduce crime rates considerably. One trial in Dudley saw crime fall 41 percent in the treatment area and 15 percent in the control area, with no evidence of displacement (that is, crime wasn't just getting pushed to other areas). Another in Stoke-on-Trent saw crime fall 43 percent in the treatment area and 2 percent in the control area.
_______________________________________________________________________
Buff-O-Mania
Police scanner sites see surge in traffic after Boston
By Heather Kelly (CNN News) — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013; 10:32 a.m. EDT
(CNN) -- For listeners of police scanners, last week's tragic events offered one real-time drama after another.
During the fertilizer plant explosion in Texas that claimed 14 lives and the Boston Marathon bombings and subsequent manhunt, dispatchers' static-filled audio feeds offered periodic clues about what was happening on the ground. Listeners hungry for the most up-to-date police reports didn't need a scanner to keep up with the news -- many scanner feeds are available online, while some Twitter users type out what they hear on scanners in real time.
Technology has given people more access to what's being said on scanner feeds, often to the dismay of law enforcement agencies worried about the spread of misinformation and criminals eavesdropping on authorities' tactical plans.
Early Friday, as the night's manhunt for the bombing suspects stretched into daylight, Broadcastify, the primary online source for scanner feeds, did something it had never done before: It voluntarily took all the Boston law enforcement feeds offline.
Broadcastify licenses its streams to mobile apps such as 5-0 radio for iPhone or Scanner Radio on Android and is powered by an army of hobbyist volunteers -- local reporters, neighborhood watch members, off-duty public safety officers -- who just want to share what they're hearing. They plug their scanner or radio into a computer and use special software to broadcast it online.
Broadcastify streams around 3,500 scanner channels, including local law enforcement, fire departments, weather service, emergency medical services and the International Space Station. During peak traffic times last week, some 180,000 listeners were tuned in to Broadcastify feeds at once -- by far the most traffic the service had ever seen, said founder Lindsay Blanton.
But when the Boston police posted a plea on Twitter asking that people not compromise the safety of officers by broadcasting what homes were being searched, Broadcastify obliged.
Online, the curious quickly found alternative ways to tune in. Some people with their own scanners started live video streams of chatter from the radios in their homes. Others with access to scanners began tweeting out snippets of what they heard.
Concerns about the safety of broadcasting police feeds have been amplified as technology has moved from clunky, home-bound radios to handheld radios, the Web and now mobile apps available on any smartphone. While law-abiding citizens can now listen in anywhere, criminals can, too.
"They (criminals) always carry radios or carry cellphones that have police scanners on them," said Sgt. Richard Lewis of the Santa Monica, California, police.
Broadcastify's Blanton stands by his decision to take down the Boston channels, but he maintains that scanner feeds do more public good than harm. "You're going to be hard-pressed to evade law enforcement (by) reading stuff on Twitter," said Blanton, who added he has never heard of a criminal successfully using the service to escape police.
Safety first
Even so, a number of safety precautions are already in place. More sensitive public safety information is often communicated over discreet channels, not the well-known dispatch channels. There is no law requiring public agencies to keep feeds publicly available, so many cities have opted to encrypt some or all of their transmissions.
"The decision to go encrypted was for the safety of officers and security of the community, because when you can hear us on a scanner so can bad guys," said Lewis, the Santa Monica police sergeant.
His department made the move from open radio channels to an encrypted system in 2008. Since then, most complaints about being cut off have come from local reporters who use scanners to get tipped off to crimes.
Upgrading to an encrypted system isn't a quick fix. The new equipment is expensive, and encryption comes with its own issues. It makes it difficult to communicate with other departments and agencies during an emergency. For example, the manhunt in Boston was a multiagency effort, involving federal and local command centers and various groups all trying to communicate with each other, which couldn't have been done using just encrypted communication channels.
For its part, Broadcastify time-delays all feeds for 30 to 90 seconds. Its terms of service prohibit providers from streaming sensitive feeds such as tactical, SWAT, narcotics and fire investigation channels as well as most federal government channels.
A bad game of telephone
The bigger concern for some is the spread of misinformation, which can contribute to confusion, panic and, in the case of the Boston bombings, mistaken identity. People communicating over the radio are often just as confused about fluid situations as their listeners are. Officials say anyone tuning into a live scanner feed, or reading a transcription of a feed on social media, should not assume that everything they're hearing is accurate.
Lewis said the earliest information to come across scanners can often be wrong, and that the first eyewitness reports can vary wildly from what investigators eventually discover to be true. "You have to be very careful of what we hear," he said.
For example, a tweet surfaced Thursday night that incorrectly named a missing Brown University student as one of the suspects, citing police scanners as the source. The missing student's family temporarily took down a Facebook page asking for help finding him after being bombarded by negative comments.
In this way, an incorrect tweet can take on a life of its own as it is quickly retweeted and quoted. Any subsequent correction is seen only by people following that original person.
Even with these challenges, Blanton has found that many agencies are happy to have people following the nonsensitive channels. A number of departments even share their official feeds with Broadcastify.
"On the law enforcement side, they welcome public involvement; more eyes and ears on the ground," Blanton said. "A lot of agencies see the benefit of making available what they do."
_______________________________________________________________________
Homeland Security
Canada Thwarts Alleged Plot to Attack Train
Authorities Say Two Suspects Had 'Guidance' From al Qaeda-Linked Operatives in Iran; New York Route Is Called a Target
By ALISTAIR MACDONALD, SIOBHAN GORMAN and DAVID GEORGE-COSH — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The Wall Street Journal' / New York, NY
TORONTO—Canadian police said they foiled a plan to attack a passenger train in Toronto that they said was supported by al Qaeda operatives in Iran, and charged two men with conspiracy to carry out the alleged attack.
Investigators believe the train to be targeted was either bound for or leaving from New York, said a person familiar with the investigation.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police said the two men planned to derail the train on Canadian soil, but the plot had been thwarted before it became an imminent threat to passengers.
At a news conference here Monday, a police spokesman said authorities believe the two men were receiving "guidance" and "direction" from al Qaeda-related elements in Iran. Al Qaeda has had a limited but potent presence in Iran, experts say, but such involvement in operations abroad would be a departure for the group. Canadian officials declined to provide specifics.
Canada has seen a number of recent cases where its citizens have been linked with terror attacks abroad, sparking fears of homegrown extremists in the country. This month, the RCMP confirmed that the corpses of two men from southern Ontario had been found at the Algerian gas plant that terrorists attacked in January. People familiar with the matter said the two men were part of the terror group. But Monday's plot is the first attempted attack on the country to be made public since 2010.
In 2011, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper warned that Islamic militants represent the biggest threat to the nation's security. Canada has long been a target of Islamist rhetoric. Ottawa maintains close relations with the U.S. and Israel and took an active role in the war in Afghanistan. Late last year, Canada also closed Iran's diplomatic mission in Ottawa, a public rebuke that angered Tehran.
At this stage, Canadian officials don't believe Iran was involved in the attack, a person familiar with the matter said.
Iran disputed allegations of any Iranian connection to the plot.
"Iran's position against this group is very clear and well known," said Alireza Miryousefi, spokesman for Iran's U.N. mission. "Al Qaeda has no possibility to do any activity inside Iran or conduct any operation abroad from Iran territory and we reject strongly and categorically any connection to this story."
The two men alleged in the plot were identified as Chiheb Esseghaier, 30 years old, of Montreal, and Raed Jaser, 35, of Toronto. They aren't Canadian citizens, an RCMP spokesman said, although police declined to give other details about them.
Police on Monday searched Mr. Jaser's apartment in a Toronto suburb. One neighbor said Mr. Jaser lived there with his wife and, at several times, other men. He once put a copy of the Quran into the neighbor's mailbox, the neighbor said. The neighbor, a Hindu, said he sent the Quran back but a week later was given a fruit basket with as many as six Qurans in it.
Attempts to reach the two men, or their representatives, weren't successful on Monday. The police said a bail hearing for the two men is set for Tuesday.
Police said the plot targeted the VIA Rail train service in the greater Toronto area. The RCMP led an investigation team that included members of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the country's main intelligence body, and the Canada Border Service Agency. Canadian officials said they worked closely with U.S. officials on the case, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Canadian authorities had been monitoring the men for a round a year, a person familiar with the matter said.
VIA Rail, which is owned by the Canadian government, provides passenger-train service throughout Canada and offers a cross-border link with New York and Seattle. A VIA spokesman said passengers' safety was at no time at risk. A representative for Amtrak, the U.S. rail operator that provides U.S. service in conjunction with VIA Rail, didn't return requests for comment.
Although Canada has seen comparatively few deadly terror strikes, the country has been targeted by terrorists ranging from a Quebec separatist movement to radical Islamist groups. In August 2010, Canadian authorities foiled an alleged terrorist bomb-making plot in which three men were arrested after raids on their houses turned up schematics, videos, drawings, books and manuals for making explosives.
The trio was working with an "ideologically inspired terrorist group'' with links in Iran, Afghanistan, Dubai and Pakistan, the RCMP said at the time.
In 2006, Canadian police arrested 18 Toronto youth for plotting attacks against a series of domestic targets like Canadian military bases and Parliament.
Some al Qaeda operatives fled to Iran following the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and the Iranian regime, in effect, has provided sanctuary to several senior leaders, known as the management council. Al Qaeda's Iranian wing was allegedly involved in the 2003 bombings of a compound in Riyadh. Seth Jones, an al Qaeda specialist at the Rand Corp., said its role has been far more limited in the past several years.
"They've been pretty careful," he said, because they didn't want to make a move that would invite U.S. pressure on Iran to do something about al Qaeda operatives operating from its soil.
Still, U.S. officials said they believe that last year Iran gave new freedoms to the group, including the option for management-council members who had been under house arrest since 2003 to leave the country.
In an interview, U.S. Rep. Peter King (R., N.Y.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Counterintelligence and Terrorism, said the Iranian connection is striking.
"They've made alliances of convenience over the years" but they have also had competing goals, he said. "We know very little about al Qaeda's relationship with Iran."
_______________________________________________________________________
U.S. and Canada foil Al Qaeda terrorist plot to derail New York to Toronto passenger train, two suspects arrested
The suspects, who had planned the attacks more than a year, appear unrelated to the Boston Marathon bombers.
By David Knowles, Greg B. Smith And Corky Siemaszko — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The New York Daily News'
Two suspected Al Qaeda terrorists were busted Monday in Canada before they could wreak havoc on the rails by blowing up a New York-to-Toronto passenger train.
The plan hatched by Chiheb Esseghaier and Raed Jaser — and directed by Al Qaeda operatives based in Iran — was derailed by the Mounties before it ever got out of the station, officials said.
But it threw a scare into the Canadians, who have charged the alleged trainspotting terrorists with "terrorism-related offenses."
"This is the first known Al Qaeda planned attack that we've experienced in Canada," said Superintendent Doug Best of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
Esseghaier, 30, lived in Montreal. Jaser, 35, lived in Toronto. And both were getting "direction and guidance" from their Al Qaeda handlers in Iran, the RCMP reported.
"Had this plot been carried out, it would have resulted in innocent people being killed or seriously injured," Assistant RCMP Commissioner James Malizia said.
While the Canadians did not divulge the details of the terror train plot, sources familiar with the "Operation Smooth" investigation told the Daily News the plotters were targeting an Amtrak passenger train bound for Canada out of Penn Station in Manhattan.
When Amtrak trains cross the border, passengers switch to Canadian Via Rail trains.
Sources said the pair intended to attack the trains only after they'd left the U.S. and crossed into Canada.
But it wasn't clear precisely where the attack was to take place.
"There was not an imminent threat to Amtrak passengers, employees or the general public," Amtrak said in a statement.
Canadian officials said there did not appear to be any connection between the plot and the Boston bombings.
Esseghaier and Jaser are charged with conspiring to carry out an attack and murder people in association with a terrorist group. Both have a Tuesday court date.
Best did not divulge their homelands. But while neither are Canadian citizens, both have lived in Canada for "a significant amount of time" and had been planning their attack for more than a year, he said.
When the Canadians realized what the target was, the FBI and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security were alerted and joined in the probe.
"I commend our Canadian counterterrorism partners, particularly the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, for their efforts in stopping a major terrorist plot which was intended to cause significant loss of human life including New Yorkers," said Rep. Pete King (R-Long Island), the chairman of the House Counterterrorism and Intelligence subcommittee.
"The Police Commissioner and the NYPD counter-terrorism officers have been kept apprised of this since early on in the Canadian investigation," NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said.
_______________________________________________________________________
Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The New York Post' Editorial:
Obama's 'war'
Is Dzhokhar Tsarnaev an "enemy combatant"? The Obama administration says "No." Then again, it almost had to.
From the day he ran for president, Barack Obama has advanced two certainties: that military commissions are bad, and that the way his predecessor prosecuted the War on Terror was not just wrong but immoral, unconstitutional and perhaps criminal.
He staffed his White House with people who thought the same. Attorney General Eric Holder launched a criminal investigation against the CIA interrogators. Harold Koh, once State's legal adviser, worried Bush's legal structure could "license genocide." And let's not forget Obama's pick for the Office of Legal Counsel at Justice, Dawn Johnsen, a lawyer who called for "outrage" over the supposedly lawless nature of virtually every aspect of Bush war policy.
As these views hardened into policy, we have had incoherence in the face of attack. A man tries to blow up a plane as it is landing over Detroit — and we discover that a new elite interrogation unit designed for such terrorists is not yet in place. An attack on Fort Hood soldiers by an Army major shouting "Allahu Akbar!" is labeled "workplace violence." Even if we accept the administration's version of events in the Benghazi killings on 9/11, its first instinct was to blame an anti-Muslim video.
And with the Boston bombing and the apparent foiling of what Canadian authorities yesterday called "an al Qaeda-supported attack" on a passenger train, the White House dances around the obvious: the planned murder of innocent Americans by men inspired by radical Islam.
The Bush administration made its mistakes. But it did recognize something Obama has not: Our legal system was not designed to handle this new threat. So among the Bush goals was to pass on a legal infrastructure that would make it easier for succeeding presidents to defend this nation against attacks.
For years, President Obama has done all he could to de-legitimate these efforts. By now, even some on his own team must recognize that the effect has been to limit Obama's own options. The disturbing part is that so long as he makes his political point, the president doesn't seem to care.
_______________________________________________________________________
Heat is on FBI over handling of bombing suspect
By Jim Acosta. Ted Barrett and Tom Cohen (CNN News) — Monday, April 22nd, 2013; 6:15 p.m. EDT
Washington (CNN) -- When Russia asked the FBI in 2011 to check out Tamerlan Tsarnaev because of his shift toward increasing Islamic extremism, the bureau interviewed him and his family as part of a review that found no ties to terrorism.
Two years later, Tsarnaev, 26, and his younger brother allegedly set off two bombs at the Boston Marathon that killed three people, then killed a university police officer and sparked a manhunt that paralyzed the city last week.
Now members of Congress want to know how someone who was brought to the attention of authorities and who exhibited increasingly radical leanings never came under further monitoring or questioning.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein announced Monday that the Senate Intelligence Committee she heads will look into the FBI's handling of Tsarnaev.
The hearing with FBI intelligence officials, expected to be closed to the public and media, could happen as soon as Tuesday, said Feinstein, D-California.
An aide to the House Homeland Security Committee said its chairman, Republican Rep. Mike McCaul of Texas, also intended for the panel to examine the issue.
The Tsarnaev case raised questions about the efficiency of overall security efforts, particularly involving people brought to the attention of federal authorities.
Tsarnaev, who died after a shootout with police on Thursday night, was an immigrant from the volatile Caucasus region of southwest Russia who had legal residence in the United States and sought last year to become fully naturalized, like his brother Djhokhar, 19.
However, the Department of Homeland Security rejected the citizenship request due to his past questioning by the FBI before a trip to Russia.
An FBI statement said a foreign government -- later identified by legislators as Russia -- asked for information on Tsarnaev "was based on information that he was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer, and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country's region to join unspecified underground groups."
In response, the FBI said, it "checked U.S. government databases and other information to look for such things as derogatory telephone communications, possible use of online sites associated with the promotion of radical activity, associations with other persons of interest, travel history and plans, and education history."
"The FBI also interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev and family members," it said in the statement on Friday. "The FBI did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign, and those results were provided to the foreign government in the summer of 2011."
In addition, the FBI "requested but did not receive more specific or additional information from the foreign government," its statement said.
That failed to satisfy Feinstein and other legislators.
"I have asked the staff director of Intelligence this morning to set a hearing, particularly with FBI intelligence," Feinstein told CNN on Monday, adding she hoped for answers about what Tsarnaev did during the trip.
"And when he came back to this country, why didn't it ring a bell with the FBI intelligence unit that he should be checked out and vetted again?" she asked.
Feinstein also noted that Homeland Security officials later denied Tsarnaev's application for citizenship, raising another question about who knew what about him.
The purpose of the hearing was "not to criticize, because I am a big fan of the FBI's, but to go back and see that we plug loopholes," Feinstein said.
Tsarnaev, who's ethnically Chechen but came to the United States from Kyrgyzstan, spend six months in Russia, causing some legislators and analysts to speculate he may have received training during the trip.
Conservative Sen. Lindsey Graham, who said Sunday the FBI may have dropped the ball in its investigation of Tsarnaev, began easing off that claim on Monday.
The South Carolina Republican confirmed he talked to the assistant director of the FBI and learned how the bureau interviewed Tsarnaev, his parents and classmates in 2011.
"They put his name through the system and they sent back this information to the Russians and said, 'Do you have anything else?' And they never got a reply back," Graham said.
Graham also noted that Tsarnaev wasn't flagged upon returning from Russia because of an apparent misspelling of his name by the Russian airline Aeroflot.
"It didn't get into the system because of a misspelling," Graham said. "Now whether or not he intentionally changed his name or Aeroflot just got the spelling wrong, I don't know. That's to be determined."
As for apparent warning signs that occurred within the last year, such as YouTube postings of radical Islamists, Graham said the FBI told him "they have limitations on what they can do."
"So maybe it's the system failed, didn't provide the FBI with the tools, or maybe they didn't use it properly," he added. "That's why maybe we need to find out what happened."
His comments sounded similar to those made by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, who defended the FBI on Sunday.
Rogers told NBC the agency "did their due diligence" but Russian authorities "stopped cooperating" when the United States sought further clarification. Rogers also said he believed Tsarnaev may have traveled overseas using an alias.
CNN law enforcement analyst Tom Fuentes, a former FBI official, said there was little the bureau could do once Russia failed to respond to its request for further details .
"If they don't give you more, then everything that can be done has been done unless you know that there should be more to the story,"Fuentes said.
He detailed how the FBI employs what amounts to "triage" to deal with what he said were tens of thousands of similar inquiries a year that require some level of bureau investigation.
"If you are getting this from a hot place like Afghanistan or the tribal area of Pakistan or places where we have had specific training camps and people deployed on purpose to come and attack us, then that is the highest priority," he said. "And even there, many of the people that go back and forth are visiting family. I mean, they are not always going back to be trained to be terrorists or always going back for refresher courses on terrorism."
Regarding Russia, Fuentes noted the ongoing conflict with Chechen separatists that may have caused Moscow's request for information on Tsarnaev.
"That's been an ongoing fight, but it's been localized," he said, adding that he couldn't recall a case in which a Chechen trained at home came to attack the United States.
However, Fuentes noted that al Qaeda had sent people to the Caucasus region for training that included bomb building.
Now U.S. investigators need to find out if the Tsarnaevs "had connections, were they deployed by a bigger group, and are there other terrorists in the United States," Fuentes said.
"Are there other explosive devices hidden somewhere or booby traps created, a cache of weapons?" he wondered. "That'll be the task."
_______________________________________________________________________
Officials Say They Had No Authority to Watch Older Suspect
By ERIC SCHMITT and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The New York Times'
WASHINGTON — Amid questions about whether the F.B.I. missed an opportunity to discover that one of the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombings may have become an extremist, law enforcement officials defended their actions on Monday, saying they had no legal basis to monitor him in the months leading up to the attack.
The agency first looked into the suspect, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, in 2011 in response to a request from Russia, which told the F.B.I. that he "was a follower of radical Islam." But once investigators closed the background check on Mr. Tsarnaev after concluding that he posed no terrorist threat, a senior law enforcement official said, it would have been a violation of federal guidelines to keep investigating him without additional information.
"We had an authorized purpose to look into someone based on the query we received," the official said. "You can do a limited investigation based on that request."
Senior F.B.I. and intelligence officials will be forced to explain to the Senate Intelligence Committee in a classified briefing on Tuesday the steps they took — and did not take — before and after Mr. Tsarnaev returned last July from a six-month trip to Chechnya and Dagestan, predominantly Muslim republics in the North Caucasus region of Russia.
In a statement Monday, Senator Mark Udall, a Colorado Democrat on the panel, said: "There are many questions I want answered, such as how and when the suspects became radicalized, details of the F.B.I.'s initial investigation into Tamerlan Tsarnaev's activities, the nature of the terrorist threat in southern Russia, and more information on our counterterrorism cooperation with Moscow."
The exchange between the F.B.I. and Russian authorities on Mr. Tsarnaev's potential links to extremist groups has cast a spotlight on a counterterrorism relationship that has endured even as diplomatic relations between the countries have gone through ups and downs.
However, it also reflects what Daniel Benjamin, the State Department's former top counterterrorism official, said on Monday was "a culture of wariness" between the two former cold war rivals. Even as the United States responds to Russian requests for details on potential extremists, Mr. Benjamin said, the authorities must be careful not to provide information that could "expose sources and methods or get us involved in an abuse of human rights that we couldn't condone."
Soon after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Moscow and Washington created a special counterterrorism working group to help improve cooperation.
James W. McJunkin, a former top F.B.I. counterterrorism official, recalled a long-running investigation a few years ago into possible money laundering and other material support to terrorist groups by American citizens of Chechen or Russian origin in several Northeastern states.
Russian authorities provided the F.B.I. with cellphone numbers and e-mail addresses of several possible suspects, and even though the inquiry in the end did not yield any arrests, Mr. McJunkin said, "we now have a better understanding of how these kinds of cases work and how we can better recognize trends and patterns."
In Mr. Tsarnaev's case, the Russian government expressed fear that he could be a risk "based on information that he was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer, and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country's region to join unspecified underground groups," the F.B.I. said in a statement.
The F.B.I. responded by checking government databases for any criminal records or immigration violations as well as activity on Web sites that promote extremist views and activities. The investigators found no derogatory information, officials said.
When they asked the Russians for more information to justify a search of Mr. Tsarnaev's phone records, travel history and other more restricted information, they received no reply, a senior United States official said.
As a last resort, the F.B.I. sent two counterterrorism agents to interview Mr. Tsarnaev and members of his family. According to an F.B.I. statement, "The F.B.I. did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign."
After Mr. Tsarnaev's visit to Dagestan and Chechnya, signs of alienation emerged. One month after he returned to the United States, a YouTube page that appeared to belong to him was created and featured jihadist videos.
Posting such videos alone, without overt threats of violence, should not necessarily sound alarms, some counterterrorism specialists said Monday.
"I tend to view this stuff as certainly interesting, and evincing some degree of extreme beliefs, but probably not exactly a flashing warning sign," said Evan F. Kohlmann, a terrorism analyst with the consulting company Flashpoint Global Partners.
Anecdotes suggest that Mr. Tsarnaev became more religious in the last several years and may have embraced more conservative Islamic ideas.
On Monday, a spokesman for the Islamic Society of Boston, a Cambridge mosque, said Mr. Tsarnaev disrupted a talk there in January, insulting the speaker and accusing him of deviating from Islam by comparing the Prophet Muhammad to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. It was the second time he had disrupted an event at the mosque because he felt that its religious message was too liberal, said the spokesman, Yusufi Vali, according to a report in The Boston Globe.
_______________________________________________________________________
Boston Lockdown 'Extraordinary' But Prudent, Experts Say
By Brian Naylor — Monday, April 22nd, 2013; 5:20 p.m. 'NPR News' / Washington, DC
Local officials have defended the decision to essentially lock down the city of Boston on Friday while law enforcement searched for a suspect in the Boston Marathon bombing.
Residents were told to remain indoors during the hunt for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who survived an early morning shootout with police in the suburb of Watertown during which his brother, Tamerlan, was killed.
Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick announced the decision to lock down Watertown and the surrounding areas, including Boston, at a dawn news conference Friday.
"We're asking people to shelter in place — in other words, to stay indoors with their doors locked and not to open the door for anyone other than a properly identified law enforcement officer," he said.
It is not unusual to lock down schools and other institutions when there are reports of gunfire. And after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the nation's air traffic was halted and some other sites thought to be potential targets, such as the New York Stock Exchange, were closed. But to shut down a large part of a metropolitan area is another thing, says Frank Cilluffo, director of the Homeland Security Policy Institute at George Washington University.
"In terms of both scale and scope, the shelter-in-place that was enforced was extraordinary, perhaps even unprecedented, but so too were the circumstances," Cilluffo says.
There is no indication that the lockdown decision was anything but a local one.
Cilluffo says it's the kind of call that local officials are elected to make. "These sorts of situations are a reminder [that], whereas terrorism may be national or even international, the consequences are local, and many of those decisions are local," he says. "I think what you saw here was a prudent number and series of steps that were taken that very well could have saved lives."
A Balancing Act
But officials were walking a fine line in Boston. While deserted streets made the manhunt easier and safer for law enforcement agencies and residents, causing massive disruption is the very objective of many terrorists.
"The payoff to the would-be terrorists is the most disruption you can get," says Stephen Flynn, who directs Northeastern University's George J. Kostas Research Institute for Homeland Security. "So on the one hand, you're trying to obviously safeguard life and property. On the other, you want to make sure that you're not creating, essentially, future motivation for follow-on attacks to take place because [of] the possibility [that] if you carry out one of these horrific acts, you can shut down a major city."
Flynn says he also believes officials made the right call given the circumstances, noting there is no rule book for dealing with armed individuals who may be carrying explosives.
Patrick, the Massachusetts governor, made a similar point defending the lockdown as he announced its lifting Friday evening.
"There was a firefight out here last night [with] some 200 rounds and explosives, so we were very justified, I believe, based on what we understood about the investigation, in taking what we knew was a big step," he said.
The irony is that it wasn't until the lockdown was lifted that a Watertown resident found Dzhokhar Tsarnaev hiding in a boat in his backyard.
_______________________________________________________________________
In Questions at First, No Miranda for Suspect
By ETHAN BRONNER and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT — Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 'The New York Times'
A senior United States official said Monday that federal authorities invoked a public safety exemption to standard criminal procedures and questioned Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Sunday without telling him that he had the right to remain silent, in order to learn whether he knew of remaining active threats.
Once the authorities felt satisfied that no such threat existed, a magistrate judge was brought to Mr. Tsarnaev's bedside at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center on Monday. He was informed of his rights and the charges against him in the presence of a lawyer.
Mr. Tsarnaev, 19, nodded his understanding and during the proceedings spoke only one word — "no" — when asked if he could afford a lawyer. One was appointed for him.
The charges — use of a weapon of mass destruction that caused death — were recited to him by William Weinreb, a federal prosecutor, who also told Mr. Tsarnaev that they carried a maximum penalty of death. Under federal law, the term "weapon of mass destruction" refers to virtually any explosive charge aimed at harming people.
The magistrate, Marianne B. Bowler, said toward the end of the short proceedings, "I find that the defendant is alert, mentally competent and lucid. He is aware of the nature of the proceedings."
The extraordinary developments — a public safety exemption followed by a bedside initial court appearance — were the opening moves in what promises to be a contested and complex legal case that could end in a federal death penalty in a state that does not have one.
There was already much debate about whether a public safety exemption could be invoked and what kinds of questions Mr. Tsarnaev could be asked during the exemption.
A federal official said that Mr. Tsarnaev admitted to a role in the bombings during the exempted questioning. Whether that statement could be admitted in court later remained murky. The exemption would have to be upheld by a judge who determined that it was properly invoked. The judge would also have to rule whether the questioning hewed closely to public safety issues.
On the other hand, it remained unclear whether such an admission would be needed, given video and other evidence against Mr. Tsarnaev and his brother, Tamerlan, 26, who was killed.
Whether the case will come to trial also remains unclear. Daniel C. Richman, a law professor at Columbia University, said Mr. Tsarnaev's lawyer would do all he could to persuade his client to cooperate fully with the authorities in order to mitigate his punishment to life imprisonment.
"The first conversation between him and his lawyer will be the lawyer saying it will serve you to speak up now," Mr. Richman said.
But Christopher Slobogin, a law professor at Vanderbilt University, said he doubted the government would be interested in much of a deal.
"He could plead guilty and hope to get something less than the death penalty, but there would be a public uproar if he got life in prison," Mr. Slobogin said.
He added, however, that Mr. Tsarnaev's lawyer could try to assert that his client was insufficiently sentient during the federal investigation on Sunday night and that his statements were coerced in an unconstitutional manner even if there was a legitimate concern for public safety and even if the next day the magistrate asserted that he was able to follow the proceedings.
Donald A. Dripps, a law professor at the University of San Diego, said the description of the bombs used in Boston last week as weapons of mass destruction was completely appropriate.
"If the device had gone off at a slightly higher altitude, there would have been a lot more deaths," Mr. Dripps said. "These bombs were clearly built for that purpose."
Federal authorities said they had made proper use of the public safety exemption to the Miranda rule.
"When you uncover a plot like this, you need to quickly be able to find out if there are other threats," a senior official said.
_______________________________________________________________________
Feds delay policy to allow small knives on planes
By JOAN LOWY (The Associated Press) — Monday, April 22nd, 2013; 11:16 p.m. EDT
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Airline passengers will have to leave their knives at home after all. And their bats and golf clubs.
A policy change scheduled to go into effect this week that would have allowed passengers to carry small knives, bats and other sports equipment onto airliners will be delayed, federal officials said Monday.
The delay is necessary to accommodate feedback from an advisory committee made up of aviation industry, consumer, and law enforcement officials, the Transportation Security Administration said in a brief statement. The statement said the delay is temporary, but gave no indication how long it might be.
TSA Administrator John Pistole proposed the policy change last month, saying it would free up the agency to concentrate on protecting against greater threats. TSA screeners confiscate about 2,000 small folding knives from passengers every day.
The proposal immediately drew fierce opposition from flight attendant unions and federal air marshals, who said the knives can be dangerous in the hands of the wrong passengers. Some airlines and members of Congress also urged TSA to reconsider its position.
The delay announced by TSA doesn't go far enough, a coalition of unions representing 90,000 flight attendants nationwide said Monday.
"All knives should be banned from planes permanently," the group said in a statement.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who opposed the policy, said TSA's decision is an admission "that permitting knives on planes is a bad idea." He also called for a permanent ban.
Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., another opponent, said he will continue to push TSA to drop the proposal entirely.
"People with radical ideas can use everyday objects to cause great harm," Markey said. "If there is an opportunity to decrease risks to Americans, we have a duty to protect our citizens and disallow knives from being taken onto planes."
The proposed policy would have permitted folding knives with blades that are 2.36 inches (6 centimeters) or less in length and are less than 1/2-inch (1-centimeter) wide. The policy was aimed at allowing passengers to carry pen knives, corkscrews with small blades and other small knives.
Passengers also would have been be allowed to bring onboard as part of their carry-on luggage novelty-sized baseball bats less than 24 inches long, toy plastic bats, billiard cues, ski poles, hockey sticks, lacrosse sticks and two golf clubs, the agency said.
Security standards adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organization, a U.N. agency, already call for passengers to be able to carry those items. Those standards are non-binding, but many countries follow them.
The proposal didn't affect box cutters, razor blades and knives that don't fold or that have molded grip handles, which are prohibited.
Passengers were prohibited from carrying the small knives onboard planes after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Some of the terrorists in those attacks used box cutters to intimidate passengers and airline crew members.
It's unlikely in these days of hardened cockpit doors and other preventative measures that the small folding knives could be used by terrorists to take over a plane, Pistole told Congress last month.
There has been a gradual easing of some of the security measures applied to passengers after the 9/11 attacks. In 2005, the TSA changed its policies to allow passengers to carry on airplanes small scissors, knitting needles, tweezers, nail clippers and up to four books of matches. The move came as the agency turned its focus toward keeping explosives off planes, because intelligence officials believed that was the greatest threat to commercial aviation.
And in September 2011, the TSA no longer required children 12 years old and under to remove their shoes at airport checkpoints. The agency recently issued new guidelines for travelers 75 and older so they can avoid removing shoes and light jackets when they go through airport security checkpoints.
_______________________________________________________________________
Mike Bosak
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment