Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 — Good Afternoon, Stay Safe
- - - - -
NYPD Stop, Question and Frisk Search Federal Trial
Cop cams eyed
Mini-devices for stop-and-frisks
By BRUCE GOLDING — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Post’
NYPD officers could be equipped with tiny cameras, under a plan being weighed by the judge overseeing the stop-and-frisk case.
Manhattan federal Judge Shira Scheindlin said yesterday that she may order city cops to don “body- worn cameras” to ensure they’re stopping suspected criminals by the book.
Scheindlin said she was “intrigued” by the idea when it was mentioned last week during testimony by a city expert on police operations, who noted that the technology was being used by police departments elsewhere in the country.
“It struck me when he said it, that if the officer knew it was being recorded on video, it would solve a lot of problems,” Scheindlin said.
“Everybody would know exactly what occurred.”
Scheindlin floated the proposal near the end of closing arguments at a 10-week, nonjury trial over claims the NYPD illegally targets minorities for stops.
Plaintiffs in the case want Scheindlin to impose a series of reforms, including appointment of an outside monitor to oversee the controversial stop-and-frisk program, which Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly credit for the Big Apple’s record-low crime rate.
But Scheindlin caught both sides flat-footed when she suggested the body cameras, which she said could be used “at least on an experimental basis, maybe in a precinct.”
Plaintiffs’ lawyer Jonathan Moore initially called the proposal “something that should be considered” before agreeing that “it certainly would be an effective way to get at the problem.”
“We would recommend it . . . as something to look into and to implement on a pilot basis to see if it would work,” he said.
City lawyer Heidi Grossman strenuously objected, noting that city witness James “Chips” Stewart, a former director of the National Institute of Justice, hadn’t recommended the cameras as a “remedy here in New York.”
Asked for reaction to Scheindlin’s remarks, NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said, “That’s 20,000 more police cameras. How long would it be before some of the same plaintiff’s attorneys would sue us on privacy grounds?”
Earlier during the day-long summations, Grossman called the plaintiffs’ evidence in the case “woefully lacking,” insisting that they had “failed to show a single constitutional violation, much less a widespread pattern or practice.”
Grossman also urged Scheindlin not to “handcuff” the NYPD by imposing an outside monitor, saying it could “fatally undermine the chain of command.”
Plaintiffs’ lawyer Gretchen Hoff Varner argued that the NYPD’s use of stop-and-frisk “has laid siege to black and Latino neighborhoods” and was “making people of color afraid to leave their homes.”
_______________________________________________________________________
Court decision pending in NYPD stop-and-frisk case
By COLLEEN LONG (The Associated Press) — Monday, May 20th, 2013; 8:45 p.m. EDT
NEW YORK (AP) -- A federal judge must now decide whether the nation's largest police force has been unjustly stopping black and Hispanic men under a polarizing tactic known as stop, question and frisk, and whether changes are needed to department policy, training and supervision.
During a 10-week civil rights trial that ended Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Shira Schiendlin heard testimony from 12 witnesses, all minorities, who said they were stopped by New York City police chiefly because of their race. She also heard from police who made the stops and from policy experts.
About 5 million stops have been made in New York in the past decade, with frisks occurring about half the time. In order to make a stop, police must have reasonable suspicion that a crime is about to occur or has occurred, a standard lower than the probable cause needed to justify an arrest. Only about 10 percent result in arrest or summonses and a weapon is recovered a fraction of the time.
The tactic has become a city flashpoint, with the mayor and police commissioner defending it as a necessary crime-fighting tool, and other city lawmakers calling for major change.
During the trial, minority witnesses told of frightening encounters with callous officers they said were so bent on numbers that everyday New Yorkers were harassed. The toll has been massive, lawyers challenging the New York Police Department policy argued.
"They laid siege to black and Latino neighborhoods over the last eight years ... making people of color afraid to leave their homes," Gretchen Hoff Varner, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said Monday during summations.
She said that blacks and Latinos make up a little more than 50 percent of the city population, but 85 percent of the people stopped by police as part of the tactic are black and Hispanic.
In their testimony, many of the officers who stopped the dozen witnesses spoke of dangerous crime patterns, crime suspect descriptions and observations they made while on patrol that led them to use the tactic. City attorney Heidi Grossman said those clear explanations for many of the stops - none were solely based on race - prove officers were not profiling.
"They failed to show a single constitutional violation, much less a widespread pattern or practice," she said of the plaintiffs, adding there was "no indication of racial motivation whatsoever."
Grossman said the witnesses in the class-action case had faulty memories and were "woefully lacking" considering that lawyers had years to find the best examples of people who said they were stopped because of their race.
"The alleged complaints of racial profiling are more fiction than reality," she said. "It is not the NYPD's policy to target black and Hispanic youth to instill fear in them so they feel they can be stopped at any time."
Scheindlin is not being asked to ban the tactic because it has already been found to be legal. She has been asked to order changes in how stop-and-frisk is implemented. She has already said the profiling accusations are troubling. She gave no time frame on when to expect her ruling.
On Monday, the judge played devil's advocate, interrupting both sides to ask questions. She asked the plaintiffs, for example, if most of the crimes were committed by minorities, why would it be a surprise that those stopped were mostly minorities. She asked city lawyers whether the argument that crime suspects are mostly minorities then leads to profiling by police.
She even raised the possibility of ordering the NYPD to make officers wear cameras to help dispel discrepancies between encounters. Neither side had suggested body-worn cameras as a potential fix, but a policing expert who testified made passing reference to it as being useful in another city.
The case delved into NYPD policy and procedure - and the difficulty of explaining intuition that comes with being an officer. Grossman said the phrase "the right people, at the right time in the right location," repeated by most of the officers on the stand was shorthand for a comprehensive reason for stopping.
The phrase first appeared early in the trial on a recording made secretly by an officer of his superiors. The officer says the tapes prove illegal quotas were in place and said he felt pressure to make stops and were punished for falling short. Another officer said the NYPD wanted "quantity not quality."
Grossman argued the city did not link illegal quotas to any wrongful stops. More than 30 other officers, including former Chief of Department Joseph Esposito, testified there were no quotas, but motivating performance goals were necessary because some cops avoid engaging with the public.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs said the department was turning a blind eye to the issue.
"The police department has said over and over and over again that there's no problem," said plaintiffs' attorney Jonathan Moore.
He said a court-appointed monitor was needed to shepherd changes in training, policy and supervision because the department could not be trusted to do it alone.
---
Associated Press Writer Larry Neumeister contributed to this report.
_______________________________________________________________________
Judge Criticizes ‘High Error Rate’ of New York Police Stops
By JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Times’
After listening to two months of testimony on the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk practices, Judge Shira A. Scheindlin left little doubt about her views of their effectiveness in helping detect criminal behavior.
“A lot of people are being frisked or searched on suspicion of having a gun and nobody has a gun,” Judge Scheindlin, of Federal District Court in Manhattan, said on Monday during closing arguments in the trial. “So the point is: the suspicion turns out to be wrong in most of the cases.”
Judge Scheindlin’s remarks punctuated more than five hours of summations, as civil rights lawyers and those representing the city offered dueling interpretations of many weeks of testimony from scores of witnesses. And her remarks were far more critical and blunt than those she had previously made during the trial.
Observing that only about 12 percent of police stops resulted in an arrest or summons, Judge Scheindlin, who is hearing the case without a jury, focused her remarks on Monday on the other 88 percent of stops, in which the police did not find evidence of criminality after a stop. She characterized that as “a high error rate” and remarked to a lawyer representing the city, “You reasonably suspect something and you’re wrong 90 percent of the time.”
“That is a lot of misjudgment of suspicion,” Judge Scheindlin said, suggesting officers were wrongly interpreting innocent behavior as suspicious.
During closing arguments, civil rights lawyers and those representing the city picked over the accounts of 10 black or biracial men and one woman who testified about being stopped, and the explanations of the officers who stopped them. They discussed the revelations of whistle-blowing officers and the contents of station house recordings in which supervisors can be heard exhorting officers to issue more summonses and conduct more stops. And the lawyers invoked the explanations of police commanders who testified about the day-to-day crime-fighting efforts of a 34,000-member Police Department, most of whose officers are members of minorities themselves.
But Judge Scheindlin, who will decide the case, Floyd v. City of New York, within a few months, frequently interjected with questions and impressions of her own. The class-action lawsuit, brought by the Center for Constitutional Rights and other civil rights lawyers, claims that the Police Department had long been stopping and frisking black and Hispanic New Yorkers without evidence they were engaged in criminality.
On Monday, Judge Scheindlin asked the lawyers what evidence was required before she could conclude that a police officer’s decision to stop someone had been influenced by race. It is a critical question, particularly because there is no evidence that the officers used racial slurs or overtly racial language when stopping any of the individual plaintiffs who testified in court.
In the absence of overt racial slurs, Judge Scheindlin repeatedly asked a city lawyer, would it be appropriate to infer that a police encounter was racially motivated if an officer stopped a black man with no apparent basis? “If the court were to conclude there was no fair basis for the stop, but the stop was made, there has to be a reason,” Judge Scheindlin said, suggesting it might be a fair inference to find that it was a race-based stop.
Heidi Grossman, the city’s lead lawyer, cautioned Judge Scheindlin, “You’re speculating what the reason is.” She noted that an improper stop could have been a mistake or based on an officer’s misunderstanding of the law, rather than a racial motivation.
Other moments revealed Judge Scheindlin to be struggling with an essential difficulty of the case: how to measure the constitutionality of not one single street stop — that is a familiar task for judges — but millions of stops conducted over many years. The lawsuit claims to represent all the minority men and women who have been stopped not because their behavior was suspicious, but because of the color of their skin.
As it is impossible to consider the individual circumstances of each stop, lawyers for each side instead relied on their own statisticians to measure the circumstances and outcomes of those stops, and assess their constitutionality.
Much of the statistical testimony revolved around a single, stark fact: black and Hispanic people represent an overwhelming majority of people stopped, more than 85 percent most years. The city has long argued that this reflects crime patterns. City lawyers claim that the percentage of stops involving black individuals either mirrors, or is lower than, the percentage of violent crimes committed by black suspects.
But when a lawyer for the city, Brenda Cooke, raised this on Monday as evidence that the city was not engaged in racial profiling, Judge Scheindlin took issue with it.
Calling it a “worrisome argument,” Judge Scheindlin wondered if this line of thinking could lead police officers to rely on racial profiling in deciding whom to stop for suspicious behavior. She said a police officer might lean toward stopping a black person because “it’s more likely that he’s going to be committing a crime than a white person, so that gives me further reasonable suspicion.’ ”
_______________________________________________________________________
NYC Police’s Low Arrest Rate From Stops Troubles Judge
By Bob Van Voris (Bloomberg News) — Monday, May 20th, 2013; 7:14 p.m. EDT
A federal judge expressed concern over the number of stops conducted by New York City police that fail to result in arrests, summonses or the seizure of illegal weapons.
U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin in Manhattan today asked a lawyer for the city about data showing that 90 percent of people stopped and questioned or frisked by police aren’t found to have done anything illegal.
New Yorkers challenging the practice claim that officers often make the stops, particularly of black and Hispanic men, without the reasonable suspicion of illegal activity required by law.
“What troubles me is the fact that the suspicion seems to be wrong 90 percent of the time,” Scheindlin said during closing arguments by the city in a trial challenging the so-called stop-and-frisk policy. “That’s a high error rate.”
Scheindlin made the remarks as both sides summed up their cases following a nine-week trial. The plaintiffs have asked Scheindlin, who is hearing the case without a jury, to order sweeping changes to New York City Police Department policies, training and supervision.
Black Men
Four black men who said they were stopped and questioned or frisked by New York police without reasonable suspicion filed the lawsuit in 2008. They represent a citywide class of New Yorkers who claim they were illegally stopped since January 2005. New York police made more than 500,000 such stops in 2012.
David Floyd, Lalit Clarkson, Deon Dennis and David Ourlicht, who represent the citywide class, also claim the department fails to train officers in proper procedures and imposes quotas that encourage illegal stops.
“The NYPD has laid siege to black and Latino neighborhoods over the past eight years,” Gretchen Hoff Varner, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in her closing argument today.
Varner said that 85 percent of the 4.3 million people stopped and frisked by police are black or Hispanic. Police recover illegal guns in only .14 percent of the stops, she told Scheindlin.
During the trial, the plaintiffs presented testimony from 12 members of the class who claim they were stopped illegally a total of 19 times.
Reduced Crime
The city has rejected claims that its policies are illegal. City lawyers claim the police department’s stop-and-frisk policies have helped reduce crime rates to record lows. Lawyers for the city claimed the individuals representing the class failed to show their stops violated the law or were the result of improper quotas.
“There is no race-based reason that the plaintiffs can come forward with,” said Heidi Grossman, a lawyer for the city.
Brenda Cooke, another city lawyer, criticized the testimony of Jeffrey Fagan, a Columbia University professor who analyzed police stop-and-frisk data from 2003 through the first half of 2012, as “biased, flawed and unreliable.”
Scheindlin didn’t say when she will rule in the case.
The Floyd case is one of three federal court challenges to the department’s stop-and-frisk practices. In Ligon v. City of New York, Scheindlin in January ordered that police cease making suspicionless “trespass” stops outside privately owned buildings in the borough of the Bronx.
Public Housing
She suspended that order while the city appeals. Davis v. City of New York, also in Scheindlin’s court, challenges police stops in public housing.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that police must have “reasonable suspicion” of crime to justify such stops. New York state appeals courts last year threw out at least two convictions of teenagers who were found with guns in stop-and-frisk searches.
The New York Civil Liberties Union said in a statement in March that police made 97,296 street stops in 2002, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s first year in office. The number of stops grew to 685,724 in 2011, the group said. The police made 533,042 stops last year, according to the NYCLU.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News.
The case is Floyd v. City of New York, 08-cv-01034, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).
_______________________________________________________________________
City slams lawsuit alleging racial discrimination in stop-and-frisk during closing arguments
A new report shows the stops have been far more effective against whites than African-Americans and Hispanics.
By Shane Dixon Kavanaugh AND Erica Pearson — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Daily News’
Witnesses who alleged racial bias in the NYPD’s use of stop-and-frisk didn’t prove their case, lawyers for the city said Monday in closing arguments in a nine-week trial over the controversial tactic.
Twelve witnesses told Judge Shira Scheindlin about their frightening encounters with police, but city lawyer Heidi Grossman said officers had a reason to stop all of them.
Gretchen Hoff Varner, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, disagreed, saying the Police Department “has laid siege to black and Latino neighborhoods over the last eight years . . . making people of color afraid to leave their homes.” She said that blacks and Latinos make up a little more than 50% of the city population, but 85% of the people stopped by police as part of the tactic are black and Hispanic.
As the trial concluded, a new report obtained by the Daily News shows the tactic has been far more effective against white people than African-Americans and Hispanics.
The report by city Public Advocate Bill de Blasio’s office shows that roughly one out of 49 stops of white New Yorkers turned up a weapon, while one in 93 stops of African-Americans turned up weapons.
It also notes that while the NYPD has touted the decrease in the overall number of stops in 2012 — 532,911 compared with 685,724 the year before — the agency still had roughly the same hit rate with the searches.
“City Hall is trying to pitch the modest reduction in stops as real reform, but that just doesn’t fit with the reality we’re still seeing on the ground,” de Blasio, who is running for mayor, said.
“Profiling is clearly still happening when we see disparities not just in quantity of stops, but in quality as well.”
But NYPD spokesman Paul Browne blasted de Blasio’s remarks as nothing more than election-year maneuvering.
“We can expect the NYPD to be used increasingly as a political football as the silly season advances.”
With Dareh Gregorian
_______________________________________________________________________
Final Arguments in Case
City: No Proof a Quota Led to Stop-and-Frisks
By MARK TOOR — Monday, May 20th, 2013 ‘The Chief / Civil Service Leader’
A lawyer defending the city in a class-action lawsuit charging that the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk program is shot through with constitutional violations summed up May 20 by arguing that the plaintiffs had simply failed to prove their case.
“They can’t prove that a single stop was the result of a quota,” said Heidi Grossman, the city’s lead attorney in the case. She was responding to allegations that the disproportionate number of blacks and Latinos stopped stemmed from racial profiling driven by superior officers’ productivity demands, rather than by the U.S. Supreme Court dictate that there be reasonable suspicion that a crime is being committed or a subject is armed.
Emphasizes Inconsistencies
The plaintiffs produced “one officer out of 35,000,” Pablo Serrano, who testified that officers were punished for not meeting quotas, she said, adding, “And there is no evidence that even if there was a quota requirement anyone made unconstitutional stops.”
She devoted half her closing argument to attacking the stories told by plaintiffs who said they were stopped because of racial profiling, pointing out inconsistencies told over a period of as many as seven years of dueling statements, depositions and testimony provided by the subjects of the stops and the police officers who stopped them. “Their stories are not reliable,” she said of the plaintiffs.
U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, who will decide the case, asked several questions aimed at clarifying Ms. Grossman’s arguments, including one seeking to explain why only 12 percent of the stops resulted in an arrest or a summons. “That’s a high error rate,” she said.
“The hit rate doesn’t impact whether an officer has reasonable suspicion,” Ms. Grossman replied, saying that in some cases police intervention may have headed off a crime before it could be committed.
Say NYPD Now Vigilant
Since the suit was filed, she said, the NYPD has developed its own methods of policing stop-and-frisk, obviating the need for the outside monitor requested by the plaintiffs. Such a monitor would be expensive and would burden officers with such heavy paperwork requirements that they would not be able to do their jobs, she said.
The plaintiff attorneys offered their closing statements later that afternoon.
The case, Floyd vs. New York, was brought on behalf of five city residents who said they were stopped by police because of their race, not, as U.S. Supreme Court decisions require, because they were suspected of committing a crime or being armed. That dispute goes to the crux of the stop-and-frisk debate, with Mayor Bloomberg maintaining that every stop is justified and civil libertarians saying that police quotas forced officers to make stops on the basis of racial and ethnic profiling, which is illegal.
No Money Damages Sought
Testimony ended May 17 after nine weeks. The trial originally had been expected to take four to six weeks. U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin is ruling on the case without a jury because the plaintiffs are not seeking monetary damages. She is also ruling in two other suits challenging the way the city employs stop-and-frisk.
In January, ruling in a case that involved unlawful trespassing stops at privately-owned apartment buildings in The Bronx, Judge Scheindlin said that at the conclusion of the Floyd case she expected to order additional paperwork and supervisory oversight of the stops to make sure they were conducted legally.
Eli B. Silverman, a Professor Emeritus at John Jay College who has studied the NYPD and other police departments, said testimony by witnesses for the city showed that the NYPD de-emphasized safeguards against racial profiling and indications that it was occurring in favor of raising the number of stops.
“Crime-fighting took not only the front burners but all the burners,” Mr. Silverman, who testified for the plaintiffs, said in an interview. “If anyone is objective about it they would conclude that [racial profiling] was an issue that was not of great concern to the Police Department.”
Police supervisors described “multiple examples of benign neglect,” he said in an interview. “While I still believe the neglect was benign, I also believe the consequences are malevolent.”
Mr. Silverman cited a study of 2,000 retired city officers of all ranks that he and his research partner, John Eterno, a former NYPD Captain who now teaches at Molloy College, released last year. Many of the more-recently-retired officers complained about stop-and-frisk, saying that “what started as an investigate tool has metastasized into a numbers game,” he said.
The Daily News last week published a leaked memo from Mr. Bloomberg’s office tarring Judge Scheindlin as anti-police. The memo said that since ascending to the bench in 1994 she had ruled against law-enforcement officials 60 percent of the time in 15 search-and-seizure cases involving evidence that the defense argued was illegally seized. That rate was higher than that of 15 other current and former Judges the study examined.
Didn’t Count Oral Rulings
Judge Scheindlin said the study was wrong because it counted only written opinions, not those issued orally. In fact, she said, she rules for prosecutors in nearly all her oral opinions.
The Center for Constitutional Rights, which is representing the plaintiffs, called the leak of the memo an “inappropriate stunt.” Defenders of stop-and-frisk, led by the city’s tabloid editorial pages, have painted Judge Scheindlin as anti-police because of her insistence that stops be made following U.S. Supreme Court guidelines.
At the trial, Deputy Inspector Christopher McCormack, commander of the 40th Precinct, defended a statement he made that was surreptitiously recorded by a former member of his command, Police Officer Pedro Serrano, during a conversation about Mr. Serrano’s performance. On the tape, Mr. Serrano asked, “So what am I supposed to do? Is it stop every black and Hispanic?”
‘Stop the Right People’
“This is about stopping the right people, the right place, the right location,” Mr. McCormack replied. “...Again, take Mott Haven, where we had the most problems. And the most problems we had, they were robberies and grand larcenies... The problem was, what, male blacks. And I told you at roll call, and I have no problem telling you this, male blacks [ages] 14 to 20, 21...The problem is that you don’t know who to stop and how to stop.”
The Police Department and city attorneys objected to news stories that said Mr. McCormack was encouraging racial profiling. The city said he was describing suspects in burglaries and robberies in a specific part of the precinct. “The message was for the officer to go to where the robberies and burglaries occurred, keep his eyes open and take appropriate action in response to suspicious or criminal behavior,” police spokesman Paul J. Browne said after the tape was played during Mr. Serrano’s at the end of March.
Mr. McCormack testified that the simple description of a black male aged 14 to 21 would “absolutely not” be sufficient to justify a stop. “You just need a little more,” he said. “You’re just trying to give the officers enough tools to go out there and see if something develops into possibly leading them to reasonable suspicion to stop them.”
Fear of Misunderstanding?
“And are you concerned that your officers, taking that description, would regard every male black 14 to 20, 21 as suspicious?” asked plaintiffs’ attorney Jonathan Moore.
“Absolutely not, because the information I gave them at roll call would not do that,” Mr. McCormack responded. He had testified earlier in the day that he gave officers rough locations at which people meeting the description had been involved in grand larcenies and robberies around the Mott Haven projects.
_______________________________________________________________________
For The Record
By Richard Steier — Monday, May 20th, 2013 ‘The Chief / Civil Service Leader’
(Op-Ed / Commentary)
The Bloomberg administration’s attempt to build a case in the court of public opinion against stop-and-frisk trial judge Shira Scheindlin crossed a new threshold last week when an internal report accusing her of being biased against the NYPD was leaked to the Daily News.
A chart compiled under the heading of “Comparing Fourth Amendment Violation Determinations Against Current [Southern District of New York] Judges With More Than 10 Decisions Reported Since 1990” showed she had ruled against the department far more often than 15 colleagues.
In 15 such cases that came before her, District Court Judge Scheindlin eight times ruled against the NYPD, and in a ninth case produced a ruling the chart listed under “mixed.” That 60-percent unfavorable rate was twice as high as the two judges next on the list of adverse actions, Lewis Kaplan and Colleen McMahon. A District Judge who handled nearly three times as many of those cases as Ms. Scheindlin, Robert Patterson, ruled only twice that the NYPD had violated the Fourth Amendment governing searches and seizures, while four other times producing a “mixed” ruling.
But Chris Dunn of the New York Civil Liberties Union told the News that those numbers were deceiving. They had to be considered in the context of the ultimate outcome of Judge Scheindlin’s rulings: just one of the nine the Mayor’s staff used to make a case that she was biased was actually reversed on appeal.
“Nothing about these cases remotely suggests any sort of bias against police officers or the NYPD,” Mr. Dunn told News reporter Greg Smith. “What actually is remarkable here is that the city would attempt to sully or intimidate Judge Scheindlin.”
She clearly wasn’t amused, however. The article was published May 15; later that day, according to the News, she summoned Corporation Counsel Michael Cardozo to her chambers for a chat, and later told the News that the statistics compiled by the administration were “completely misleading.”
The article turned out to be even less of a publicity coup in its ex parte verbal war with her than administration officials might have imagined. In describing her history of cases involving the NYPD, it noted that the first one involved the civil-rights case brought against Police Officer Francis Livoti. Following his 1998 conviction for actions causing the death of a Bronx man, Anthony Baez, she went above the sentencing guidelines that would have put Mr. Livoti behind bars for a maximum of 57 months by giving him a 90-month term.
It’s hard to imagine anyone at the NYPD would want the circumstances of this case to be publicly aired. Mr. Livoti had a long string of excessive-force complaints against him—including another one that earned him a separate jail sentence—and had shoved a Lieutenant in his precinct during an argument. His commanding officer had urged him to seek counseling and ordered him transferred to a quieter precinct, only to be overruled because Mr. Livoti was a Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association delegate who had ingratiated himself with a top Bronx commander.
That left him free to take offense at a football striking his patrol car and attempt to arrest Mr. Baez, whose resistance led Mr. Livoti to place him in a chokehold that had been banned by the NYPD.
The bottom line on that case was that Ms. Scheindlin took strong punitive action after the NYPD had acted weakly—clearly not the example the Mayor’s people were hoping to highlight.
_______________________________________________________________________
Another Politician Having It Both Ways a/k/a Two Faced Buffoonery
Thompson’s NYPD about-face
By SALLY GOLDENBERG — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Post’
Bill Thompson was in favor of the inspector-general proposal to oversee the NYPD before he was against it.
The Democratic mayoral candidate is now denouncing the City Council bill as he woos law-enforcement unions and moderate voters.
“The current legislation on racial profiling and an inspector general astride the Police Department are the wrong solutions to the problem,” he wrote on his campaign Web site on April 30. He’s since become a favorite to be endorsed by the unions.
But in March, at a candidate forum, he supported Council Speaker Christine Quinn’s IG bill, saying, “Parts of this legislation, particularly an inspector general, go a long way to . . . create that openness and transparency and repair that rift [between cops and communities].”
His campaign strategist, Jonathan Prince, explained that Thompson supports an IG but only within the NYPD, for “an outside IG blurs the lines of authority.”
_______________________________________________________________________
NYPD's ‘Operation Lucky Bag’
Lawsuit challenges NYPD's anti-theft sting tactics
By Unnamed Author(s) (The Associated Press) — Monday, May 20th, 2013; 4:46 p.m. EDT
NEW YORK — A lawsuit in Brooklyn is challenging the New York Police Department's anti-crime tactic of leaving wallets, cash and bags in plain sight to tempt thieves.
Lawyers who filed the lawsuit Monday in Brooklyn federal court say they'll seek class-action status. They say they want to represent innocent individuals swept up in a practice meant to entice thieves.
The police department places the items in high-theft areas, hoping to attract the attention of thieves interested in cash or cellphones. Police have tried it on subway platforms, park benches and in cars.
The lawsuit seeks to have the tactic declared in conflict with existing law. The city law department said it was waiting to receive a copy of the lawsuit before commenting.
_______________________________________________________________________
Lawsuit targets NYPD sting tactic Operation Lucky Bag, which tempts people to steal
Last May, Spiridon Argyros spotted a wallet protruding from a backpack. He placed it in a plastic bag, intending to return it, he says. But he was arrested. Now he's filing a class action lawsuit.
By John Marzulli — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Daily News’
The NYPD's “Operation Lucky Bag,” a sting that tests the honesty of everyday New Yorkers by tempting them with the chance to grab what looks like easy money, is the target of a class action lawsuit.
In May 2012, Spiridon Argyros spotted a backpack propped against the wall of a wireless phone store on Main St. near Roosevelt Ave. in Flushing, Queens, according to the suit filed Monday in Brooklyn Federal Court.
A wallet was protruding from a pocket in the backpack.
Argyros said he picked up the backpack and placed the wallet in a plastic bag without opening it. It was the deed of a good Samaritan, he said — he planned to bring it home and contact the owner.
“I turned around, it was seconds, and I was surrounded by five people in plainclothes,” Argyros, 37, told the Daily News. “They said they were police.”
“I couldn’t believe it. I’ve never been in trouble in my life. I’ve never even been in a police station before,” he said.
But five months before Argyros was nabbed, Andrew Schaffer, then the NYPD deputy commissioner of legal matters, wrote a memo spelling out how police should handle such stops.
Any person who finds lost money or property valued at more than $10 has 10 days to turn it in at a police station under state and city law, said the memo, which was obtained by Argyros’ lawyer, Norman Siegel.
“A person picking up property that they find cannot be charged with larceny simply because they fail to return the property to a police officer who is located near the site at the time that the property was found,” Schaffer advised the NYPD’s chief of patrol.
Schaffer notes that for the operation to be conducted legally, cops have to establish the person who found the item intends to steal it and suggested several scenarios that would make the sting legal.
Siegel filed the class-action lawsuit Monday on behalf of Argyros that could also include hundreds of others who have been wrongly arrested after taking the police bait.
The lawyer is also seeking a federal injunction to stop the sting operation.
“The sting operation traps its victims, treating good Samaritans as criminals,” Siegel said.
The NYPD, which did not comment on the suit, has defended the program as a tool to catch people with larceny in their hearts by presenting them with the opportunity to do the wrong thing.
A spokesperson for the city Law Department released a statement, “We are awaiting formal service of the complaint.”
Argyros said he has returned numerous valuables to customers who left them behind at the Gemini Diner in midtown, where he is the manager, including a wallet containing $600, cellphones and credit cards.
He spent four hours at the 109th Precinct, where he was fingerprinted, photographed and sent packing with a desk appearance charging him with petty larceny. The charge was later dismissed, according to the suit.
_______________________________________________________________________
Homi Trial in the Death of 75 Pct. Hero Peter Figoski
Hearing of Robbery Plan That Led to Killing
By MOSI SECRET — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Times’
Ariel Tejada, an occasional stickup man, described a night that began like many others had for him: He and a few friends were sitting in an apartment smoking marijuana when someone casually suggested that they rob a Brooklyn drug dealer. Hours later, everything had gone wrong, and a police officer, Peter J. Figoski, was shot dead.
The account of Mr. Tejada lasted for hours on Monday, during the trial in State Supreme Court in Brooklyn of two of his friends, Nelson Morales and Kevin Santos, who are both charged with murder and burglary. Mr. Tejada had previously testified at the trial of Lamont Pride, who admitted to shooting Officer Figoski and was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 45 years to life in prison.
Under state law, if someone is killed during the commission of a felony, the person who committed the felony can be charged with murder even if they did not directly cause the death.
Officer Figoski’s death in December 2011 was the first fatal shooting of a New York police officer since 2007, a reminder of the risks police officers face on seemingly ordinary calls.
Mr. Tejada testified at both trials after pleading guilty to murder and burglary charges as part of a cooperation agreement. Prosecutors said they would drop the murder charge when they were satisfied with his cooperation. During cross-examination lawyers for Mr. Santos and Mr. Morales tried to portray Mr. Tejada as untrustworthy and willing to say anything to save himself.
Though the account was not new, Mr. Figoski’s family and other officers listened intently. Mr. Tejada described how he was at the Queens home of Mr. Morales, watching football and smoking marijuana on Dec. 11, 2011. Mr. Morales suggested the robbery. Mr. Pride supported the idea, saying he was pressed for cash. Mr. Santos and Mr. Tejada also agreed.
Mr. Tejada said he and Mr. Morales had pulled off a string of robberies together of drug dealers whom Mr. Morales met during his own time dealing.
They had pushed through air-conditioning units, broken windows and doors, for a reward of drugs, cash, televisions and jewelry. The dealers were perfect targets “because we felt safe they wouldn’t contact the police about it,” Mr. Tejada said. They brought guns to the robberies, but before that December night in 2011, they had never used their weapons, he said.
The men called a friend, Michael Velez, to drive. During the earlier trial Mr. Velez was acquitted of burglary and murder charges after claiming he did not know the group was going to a robbery.
On the way from the apartment in Ozone Park to the home of their target in Brooklyn, the five men hardly spoke, Mr. Tejada testified. When they arrived at the house in East New York and got out of the car, Mr. Pride drew his gun. Mr. Tejada said he had robbed many homes before but never with Mr. Pride, and said he felt uncomfortable. “I didn’t know what he was capable of, and as you can see it turned out to be the worst,” he said.
Mr. Tejada said he balked before following his associates in. But his friend persuaded him to follow the others inside the basement apartment, he said. When he got there, his accomplices had already shoved a man onto the ground and bloodied his face. When the man did not quickly direct him to money and drugs, Mr. Tejada also punched him.
He stood guard over the man while the others searched the place. Finally the man said there was marijuana in the freezer. After they retrieved the stash, Mr. Tejada heard walkie-talkies. Mr. Velez hid in the bathroom.
Two police officers with guns drawn told him to come out.
The rest of the men fled, including Mr. Pride, still clutching the loaded gun. Mr. Pride would later say that he bumped into Officer Figoski on the way out and accidentally pulled the trigger, shooting him once in the face. Next, Mr. Tejada heard the officer’s body thump to the floor. “All I heard on the radio was, ‘Officer down,’ ” he said.
_______________________________________________________________________
Thug gives testimony in murder trial of Officer Peter Figoski
Ariel Tejada, a one-time Crip, was involved in the 2011 botched drug robbery that ended in the fatal shooting of Figoski. During cross-examination, Tejada admitted to initially lying to authorities about the incident.
By Oren Yaniv — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Daily News’
He says he's telling the truth — this time.
Ariel Tejada, 24, a one-time Crip, gave testimony in a Brooklyn court Monday that implicated two pals in a botched drug robbery that ended in the killing of NYPD cop Peter Figoski.
Tejada, a part of the robbery crew who got a reduced sentence in return for his testimony, detailed the planning of the 2011 crime. He placed defendants Nelson Morales and Kevin Santos squarely in the mix — contrary to their denials. Both face a murder rap.
Tejada acknowledged under cross-examination that he initially told authorities a bunch of whoppers.
“I admit to telling plenty of lies, but I’m telling the truth when it counts,” he said.
_______________________________________________________________________
NYPD Intel and Counterterrorism / Text Messages Contradict Department's Legal Filings
New York City police department defends itself in court over surveillance of Muslims
By MATT APUZZO and ADAM GOLDMAN (The Associated Press) — Monday, May 20th, 2013; 4:02 p.m. EDT
NEW YORK – A New York Police Department detective told a federal judge that he's seen no evidence that one of his informants brought up the subject of jihad as a way to bait Muslims into making incriminating remarks. But text messages obtained by The Associated Press show otherwise.
And while the detective, Stephen Hoban, described the activities in a new legal filing in U.S. District Court as narrowly focused on a few people under investigation, text messages show a wide-ranging effort. Eager to make money, Shamiur Rahman, the informant, snapped pictures during prayer sessions, rallies and a parade; recorded the names of people who signed petitions or protested; and reported fellow Muslims who volunteered to feed needy families.
When the detective responded, his text messages nearly always sought more information:
"Did you take pictures?"
"I need pictures from the rally. And I need to know who is there."
"Get pictures"
Rahman told the AP last year that he made about $9,000 over nine months spying widely on friends and others. He said the NYPD encouraged him to use a tactic called "create and capture." He said it involved creating conversations about jihad or terrorism, then capturing the responses and sending them to the NYPD.
Now, as the NYPD defends itself from allegations by civil rights lawyers that such tactics violated a longstanding federal court order, the department said Rahman was either lying or didn't know what he was talking about.
"Rahman was never tasked to, nor did he as far as I know, engage in what he refers to as a 'create and capture' methodology," Hoban wrote. "There are 57 field reports documenting Rahman's work as an informant. In reviewing those field reports, it is clear that Rahman did not use what he refers to in his declaration as a 'create and capture' strategy."
Rahman allowed the AP to review months of text messages with Hoban from January to September 2012.
"Hey bro," Rahmnan told Hoban in one message. "I think I'm going to bring up jihad with these guys tonight, see what they say and know and then go home because everyones really just praying and stuff."
Hoban did not respond to that message. Rahman previously said his NYPD handler only encouraged him to use the tactic, never dissuaded him. Rahman did not respond to messages for comment from AP after Hoban's filing in federal court in Manhattan.
The different accounts of Rahman's activities are significant. Taken with the NYPD's use of plainclothes detectives assigned to the Demographics Unit to catalog Muslim business and eavesdrop on conversations, civil rights lawyers say that Rahman's tactics show the NYPD is violating court-imposed rules about what files it can keep on activities protected by the First Amendment.
The NYPD strongly denies that and Hoban's affidavit is central to their defense.
The NYPD's court papers also reveal for the first time the scope of the monitoring by its Demographics Unit, now called the Zone Assessment Unit. In the past three years, the unit has filed more than 4,200 reports, or about four per day.
Each report typically describes a clandestine visit to a business or mosque, the ethnicity of the clientele and, in some cases, what conversations the officers overheard. The detectives reported details from more than 200 conversations, or about one a week.
Thomas Galati, the commanding officer of the Intelligence Division, said most of those conversations were used to gauge people's reactions to overseas events. The AP has previously reported that Demographics detectives were extremely interested in people's reactions to U.S. drone attacks.
The civil rights lawyers want a federal judge to appoint an outside monitor to oversee the NYPD's intelligence-gathering operations, which the police department is strongly resisting. Such a monitor, the NYPD says, "would have rippling negative effects with dire consequences."
David Cohen, the NYPD's top intelligence official, argued in court documents that he and a battery of lawyers review all investigations. Oversight from outside the department, he said, would make New York a more dangerous place to live.
As evidence that New York was under constant threat of terrorism, he said the suspects in last month's Boston Marathon bombing were headed to Times Square, where he said they might have carried out an attack deadlier than the one in Boston.
Coupled with other thwarted and aspirational plots against New York in recent years, Cohen said the Boston attack showed "the need for a vibrant intelligence program that uniquely addresses the counterterrorism security equities of New York City."
Informants such as Rahman were central to Cohen's effort to identify terrorists before they attacked.
Rahman sent Hoban pictures: Imams. The sign-up list for an Islamic study group. People at rallies and parades. And bags of rice and boxes of Cheerios that his mosque was collecting for the needy.
"This is what they give to each family plus flour, cookies, pudding, and meat," Rahman wrote.
And he collected phone numbers. One belonged to an elderly neighbor who worked in a woman's shelter. Two more were people who signed a petition and were "probably organizing a rally" for Muslims suffering in Myanmar.
Rahman collected information on the Muslim student group at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and the non-profit Muslim American Society. Hoban, however, said those groups were never his informant's focus.
Instead, Hoban said Rahman kept tabs on a small group of people. That effort happened to take him into mosques and student groups, Hoban said.
For instance, he said Rahman went to a Brooklyn youth center run by the Muslim American Society "spontaneously." Hoban said he found out about it later.
In one text message, however, Rahman said he was heading to Friday prayers.
"Afterwards I might go to the mas center," he writes, a reference to the center.
"Ok," Hoban responds, "let me know who is there."
_______________________________________________________________________
Text Messages From NYPD's Secret Muslim Spying Program Revealed
By Christopher Robbins — Monday, May 20th, 2013; 5:36 p.m. ‘The Gothamist’ / New York, NY
The AP has obtained text messages sent from a former NYPD informant who spied on Muslim communities across the city. Shamiur Rahman, who later expressed regret over his police cooperation, was paid $9,000 from January through September of 2012 to monitor various mosques, businesses, and Muslim groups. Rahman's NYPD contact was Detective Stephen Hoban, who would text Rahman messages like, "Did you take pictures?" "I need pictures from the rally…And I need to know who is there…Get pictures."
According to court documents related to an ongoing civil rights lawsuit, Rahman filed 57 surveillance reports with the NYPD during his time as an informant—over the past three years 4,200 total reports were received by the NYPD's Demographics Unit (now called the Zone Assessment Unit), which amounts to around four each day. Around 200 of those reports contained conversations overheard by informants.
The managing director of the NYPD's Intelligence Division, Assistant Chief Thomas Galati, has said in court filings that the conversations detailed in the reports were used to determine people's reactions to events that happened overseas, especially drone strikes.
Yet Rahman's text messages seemingly cast a wider net:
"Hey bro," Rahman told Hoban in one message. "I think I'm going to bring up jihad with these guys tonight, see what they say and know and then go home because everyones really just praying and stuff."
And who was Rahman spying on?
Rahman sent Hoban pictures: Imams. The sign-up list for an Islamic study group. People at rallies and parades. And bags of rice and boxes of Cheerios that his mosque was collecting for the needy.
"This is what they give to each family plus flour, cookies, pudding, and meat," Rahman wrote.
And he collected phone numbers. One belonged to an elderly neighbor who worked in a woman's shelter. Two more were people who signed a petition and were "probably organizing a rally" for Muslims suffering in Myanmar.
Yeah, the NYPD doesn't need an Inspector General or a federal monitor.
_______________________________________________________________________
NYPD announces new restoration plan for Police Arlington burial ground in Cypress Hills Cemetery
The Police Department's Honor Legion says plans are in the works to restore stolen and vandalized memorial plaques at the historic site
By Lisa Colangelo — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Daily News’
On Saturday, retired and active police officers are set to gather at the Police Arlington in Cypress Hills Cemetery at 11 a.m. for a somber annual remembrance ceremony.
And for the first time in years, plans are in the works to restore at least some portions of the little-known NYPD burial ground on the Brooklyn-Queens border.
The once-grand site was pillaged decades ago when vandals stole bronze plaques and a statue.
Officials from the NYPD Honor Legion said this week they are planning to replace some of the plaques.
Replacing the massive statue of a Metropolitan Police officer — which mysteriously disappeared in the 1960s — is another story.
But the announcement marks some progress in the four-year campaign by a group of dedicated volunteers to get some attention for the site by the Honor Legion.
“I’m encouraged they are looking to become active,” said Dan Carione, a retired NYPD deputy inspector, who has helped lead efforts to restore the site since 2009.
“But restoring the site back to what it was historically is not the preference of any individual, it’s an obligation of what we owe to the history of the site,” he said.
Andrew Siroka, executive director of the Honor Legion, said the group is replacing the plaques but is not sure if they will be installed for the ceremony on Saturday.
“If we don’t have the plaques installed, we’re hoping to have some kind of representation, said Siroka. “People will be able to see what’s going to be there.”
The site was established more than 100 years ago for members of the Metropolitan Police Force of New York.
Several police officers who lost their lives in the line of duty are buried there, including Patrolman Henry Haywood, one of Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders.
Police Commissioner Ray Kelly has attended the ceremonies and supports a revival of the site.
While supporters have received numerous offers from artisans who want to build a replacement statue, those decisions are solely in the hands of the Honor Legion.
The icy relations between the Honor Legion and the volunteers seems to be thawing a bit.
This year, the Honor Legion is co-sponsoring the memorial service with the Traffic Squad Benevolent Association.
Siroka pledged the group is working on a “respectful and decent restoration” within budget constraints.
“Right now, a flagpole is going on top of that pedestal,” he said. “You have to remember the tombstones are the actual history.”
Meanwhile, Carione encouraged active and retired law enforcement officers as well as interested members of the public to attend the Saturday ceremony to show respect for the fallen and support for a vital piece of NYPD history.
“It’s a brief and dignified service to the memories of our history and our deceased,” he said.
_______________________________________________________________________
Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Times’ Letters to the Editor:
Security at the Trade Center, as the Police Dept. Sees It
To the Editor:
Contrary to “With Security, Trade Center Faces New Isolation” (front page, May 17), illustrated with a photograph of construction barbed wire that will be long gone, the World Trade Center’s campus security plan doesn’t isolate the trade center from the Lower Manhattan community.
Pedestrians and bicyclists will be able to enter the site and travel its streets and sidewalks as never before. Taxis, cars and tour buses having business at the site will have access after screening to guard against the threat of a vehicle bomb.
Yes, delivery trucks will be diverted for separate screening, a reasonable precaution after the 1993 truck bombing of the World Trade Center claimed six lives and caused a thousand additional casualties. You make only passing reference to the trade center’s destruction on 9/11, none whatsoever to the 1993 bombing, and mention neither the memorial there for the nearly 3,000 dead on 9/11 nor its requisite security.
Nor do you mention that New York City has continued to be the target of multiple terrorist plots over the last decade. All these were important considerations in the balance of safety and access that we believe has been artfully achieved with the plan.
PAUL J. BROWNE
Deputy Commissioner
Public Information
New York Police Department
New York, May 18, 2013
_______________________________________________________________________
NAPO’s May 11 Rose Garden Ceremony
2 Colleagues Also Honored
Obama Deems Det. Who Took Bullet a ‘Top Cop’
By MARK TOOR — Monday, May 20th, 2013 ‘The Chief / Civil Service Leader’
Ivan Marcano usually hangs out in the grittier areas of The Bronx, but he and two NYPD colleagues May 11 found themselves in the White House Rose Garden being honored by President Obama as three of the nation’s Top Cops.
Mr. Marcano was promoted to Detective in his hospital bed last October after he was shot and wounded while intervening—off duty—in the robbery of a cab driver in Morris Heights. He spotted the action while riding in his girlfriend’s car, alighted from the vehicle and showed his shield. One of the robbers immediately shot him in the chest. He held one hand against the wound while firing with the other, killing one of the assailants.
The two other Detectives, Terrence Munnelly and Steven Smith, investigated the case, found the gun that shot Mr. Marcano and arrested one of the other robbers.
Praise From President
“The cab driver who Detective Marcano rescued put it simply,” Mr. Obama said. “He said, ‘I will be thankful to him for the rest of his life—for the rest of my life.’ So today, to all our Top Cops, let me say that our nation shares that sense of gratitude. You embody America at its best and at its bravest.
“And you set an example,” he continued, “because if Top Cops can risk their lives to do their jobs, the rest of us should just be able to summon some tiny fraction of courage and the same sense of responsibility.”
The Top Cops—43 officers and FBI agents from 10 states—were chosen by the National Association of Police Organizations, which has been giving the award for 20 years.
Kelly Lauds 3
New York City Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said, “I want to congratulate Det. Ivan Marcano, Det. Terence Munnelly and Det. Steven Smith for being named Top Cops by the National Association of Police Organizations. Through sheer bravery and exceptional police work, they stopped armed and dangerous criminals from posing a further threat to the public. Their actions reflect proudly on every member of the New York City Police Department.”
NAPO’s Top Cops awards pay tribute to outstanding law-enforcement officers across the country for actions above and beyond the call of duty. Awardees are nominated by their fellow officers.
_______________________________________________________________________
Dets., NYPD Captains And Fire Marshals All Backing Vallone
By MARK TOOR — Monday, May 20th, 2013 ‘The Chief / Civil Service Leader’
The Detectives Endowment Association, the Captains Endowment Association and the New York City Fire Marshals Benevolent Association endorsed City Councilman Peter F. Vallone Jr. last week in the race for Queens Borough President.
The Correction Officers Benevolent Association endorsed him in March.
Reasons He’s Their Guy
“We look forward to working closely with Peter to ensure the safety and security of the entire community, and to help implement critical quality-of-life improvements in Queens,” said DEA President Michael J. Palladino.
“Whether it’s fostering economic growth or a more-effective public-school system, Peter knows that a strong commitment to public safety positively impacts all aspects of New York City and Queens life,” said Roy T. Richter, president of the CEA.
“As other politicians groomed their egos in front of television cameras, Peter avoided press conferences to concentrate on the issues of his community,” said the FMBA’s president, William Kregler.
Mr. Vallone, who must leave the City Council next year because of term limits, wants to replace incumbent Helen M. Marshall, who is prevented by term limits from seeking re-election. Also in the race are former City Councilwoman Melinda Katz, City Councilman Leroy Comrie, former Deputy Borough President Barry Grodenchik, and State Sens. Tony Avella and Jose Peralta.
_______________________________________________________________________
NYPD to up Presence After Bias Killing of Gay Man
By JENNIFER PELTZ and TOM HAYS (The Associated Press) — Monday, May 20th, 2013; 4:44 p.m. EDT
A spate of hate-fueled attacks on gay men in New York, including a killing in the heart of one of its most gay-friendly neighborhoods, is stirring up anxiety, disbelief and outrage heading into what is usually a time of gay pride celebration.
In the wake of last weekend's deadly shooting on a street in Greenwich Village, officials said Monday that police would increase their presence in the Village and nearby neighborhoods through the end of June — gay pride month.
A group that combats anti-gay violence planned to fan out to various areas on Friday nights through June to talk to people about safety. And public schools are being asked to hold assemblies or other discussions of hate crimes and bullying, before summer break.
City officials, gay-rights advocates and others planned to march to the shooting scene Monday evening to denounce a rise in hate crime reports in a city that generally sees itself as a capital of diversity and tolerance.
"I don't know why it feels like we have taken a step backward, but that is the case, and what we're going to do with that is push forward," said City Council Speaker Christine Quinn — the first openly gay person to hold the post.
Officials and advocates can't pinpoint a reason for the recent rash of attacks, or even whether it reflects more violence or more reporting of it. Police called the killing of Mark Carson early Saturday a hate crime.
In announcing plans for additional police attention, Quinn said she thought anti-gay crime "got to a level of violence I thought was behind us."
The city and especially the Village have long been seen as beacons for gay people. The gay rights movement crystallized in the Village in June 1969, when a police raid at the Stonewall Inn touched off a riot and demonstrations that came to symbolize gays' resistance to being relegated to society's shadows.
Yet gay-bashing has continued to flare up in New York at times in recent years. In one particularly sinister case, three men connected with a 28-year-old man online in 2006, lured him to a rest stop off a Brooklyn highway with a promise of a date and mugged him, chasing him into traffic; he was hit and killed.
In 2010, authorities said Bronx gang members beat and tortured four people in an anti-gay rage, two men were accused of a gay-bashing beating at the Stonewall Inn itself and a man spewed homophobic insults while throwing a punch at another Village bar — all assaults that happened within little more than a week.
Police say there has been a rise in bias-related crimes overall so far this year, to 22 from 13 during the same period last year. The New York City Anti-Violence Project, a nonprofit group that tracks police and other reports of hate attacks against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people, says its numbers rose 13 percent in 2011 and 11 percent the previous year. The 2012 figures were not yet available.
Advocates see the incidents in the context of a culture that has grown more accepting of gays in some ways — 12 states have now legalized gay marriage — but doesn't universally ban discrimination based on sexual orientation; some jurisdictions do, but others don't.
"We have to ground this in the fact that, first, LGBT people still are without full equality in this country," said Sharon Stapel, the Anti-Violence Project's executive director.
Carson, 32, was followed and taunted before being shot in the face on a street blocks from the Stonewall Inn early Saturday, police said. Carson had been walking with a companion. Suspect Elliot Morales is being held without bail on charges in Carson's death. He hasn't yet entered a plea, and his lawyer didn't immediately return a call Monday.
The shooting came after other attacks fueled by anti-gay animus in recent weeks, authorities say. Those include a report last month of a man making anti-gay remarks and attacking a woman with a ketchup bottle at a Village diner; a man told police he and a friend were victims of a gay bashing outside a subway station in Midtown Manhattan this month; and two men walking arm-in-arm near Madison Square Garden report being jumped by a group of men on May 5, police said.
"This happened in Midtown, during the day, with a ton of people around," one of the victims, Nick Porto, wrote in a Facebook posting. "... When are we safe?"
It's a question the Anti-Violence Project hopes to help answer by sending staffers and volunteers out to various neighborhoods on Friday nights, starting this week, to engage gay people and others in conversation. The message: Stay safe, but also stay proud.
"We want to give people tools that can de-escalate situations but also say, 'You need to be yourself,'" Stapel said. "We're not telling people, 'Take your rainbow sticker off.'"
_______________________________________________________________________
NYPD beefs up its presence on the West Side of Manhattan following hate crime murder of gay man
The increased patrols in Greenwich Village, Chelsea and Hell’s Kitchen will aim to deter further anti-LGBT violence.
By Chelsia Rose Marcius AND Erin Durkin — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Daily News’
(Edited for brevity and NYPD pertinence)
The NYPD will increase its presence on Manhattan’s West Side following the hate-crime killing of a gay man in Greenwich Village, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn said Monday.
The increased patrols in Greenwich Village, Chelsea and Hell’s Kitchen will aim to deter further anti-LGBT violence.
They will last through June, which is Gay Pride Month and will include additional temporary headquarter vehicles.
Quinn, who is running to be the city’s first openly gay mayor, said she was shaken by the killing of Mark Carson last Friday.
His murder followed an anti-gay assault outside of Madison Square Garden and a bias attack against a gay man outside of Pieces bar in the Village.
The speaker called Carson’s death “a level of violence I thought was behind us.”
Quinn, who is running for mayor, and hundreds of others marched through the West Village Monday to honor Carson, 32, and speak out against hate crimes.
They held a rally at the scene of the shooting.
_______________________________________________________________________
Kelly Meets with Russian Interior Minister
Moscow safer than New York - minister
By RIA Novosti — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The Moscow News’ / Moscow, Russia
Russian police reforms have proved so successful that, in some areas, Moscow outperforms New York on safety, Russian Interior Minister Vladimir Kolokoltsev has boasted while on a visit to the United States.
Kolokoltsev made the claims during a meeting in New York late on Monday with New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly.
“We have compared the crime situation in Moscow and New York, factoring in the number of residents and police personnel responsible for ensuring security,” Kolokoltsev explained.
He claimed that, in some respects, parts of Moscow are even safer than New York, although he did not cite concrete statistics.
Official statistics suggest that crime has gone down in Moscow. In 2012, there were 447 murders and attempted murders registered in the Russian capital, according to official figures published by the Prosecutor General’s Office. This was down by 9 percent from the previous year.
But in terms of the murder rate, it was not immediately clear whether Moscow was indeed safer. By contrast, 417 murders were registered in New York, according to official figures published by the NYPD. But while the Russian figure included both murders and attempted murders, the New York figure was only for murder.
Kolokoltsev is in the United States for a series of meetings with law enforcement officials on a range of issues from day-to-day crime, to drug trafficking and terrorism, a press release posted on the Interior Ministry site on Tuesday says.
Kolokoltsev also praised the recent reforms of Russia’s police service, highlighting that they built on the New York police’s experience, particularly in “the direct responsibility of a commanding officer for his subordinates’ actions, including suspension or even dismissal.”
In 2011, Russia launched sweeping reforms of the 1.2-million-strong police force, which has long been notorious for corruption and abuse of authority.
Some 200,000 officers were dismissed, salaries were raised, and the force, which had continued to be known by the Soviet-era “militia” even after the Soviet Union collapsed, was renamed the “police.”
These high-profile reforms, however, have so far done little to build public trust in the institution within Russia. According to a survey by the independent pollster Levada, public confidence in the police stood at just 29 percent in October.
In February Russian President Vladimir Putin criticized the Interior Affairs Ministry, pointing out that 45 percent of crimes in Russia remain unsolved.
_______________________________________________________________________
Bloomberg's Butt Boys
Time to smoke out NY’s butt-leggers
By RAYMOND W. KELLY and THOMAS FARLEY — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Post’
(Op-Ed / Commentary)
NOTE: See next article - Mike
Last week’s indictment by Attorney General Eric Schneiderman of 16 members of a multimillion-dollar cigarette-smuggling ring underscores the serious nature of cigarette trafficking in New York City. Recent arrests linking the ring members to organized crime and terrorist organizations make it clear that New York needs stronger enforcement of tobacco laws.
While it hasn’t been established yet where the illicit proceeds in last week’s case ended up, we are concerned because similar schemes have been used in the past to help fund terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah. While our federal partners continue to investigate the money trail, the NYPD has arrested the principals in this massive scheme.
Make no mistake: We have a responsibility both to protect the taxpayer and to make certain we are neither targeted nor exploited by terrorists.
The indicted ring members bought cigarettes wholesale in Virginia and resold them to bodegas in New York City, avoiding the state tax. The Virginia-New York tobacco corridor is well known to law-enforcement agencies. Last week’s arrest represented just the tip of the iceberg. Currently, 46 percent of cigarette retailers in New York City inspected by the Department of Finance have untaxed cigarettes.
The lost tax revenue and possible links to organized crimes are not the only concerns. Smuggled cigarettes often are sold at a discount, making these deadly products more accessible to young people and smokers who are trying to quit. Contraband cigarettes also place law-abiding retailers at a competitive disadvantage to retailers selling illegal, untaxed cigarettes at artificially low prices.
Even as the smoking rate has decreased in New York City over the past decade, it remains the leading cause of preventable death, killing thousands of New Yorkers each year. Many New Yorkers are aware of the city’s public-education efforts to help smokers quit and discourage young people from taking up the habit. However, most do not realize that it’s not just the habit that is dangerous — the cigarette trade itself can be treacherous.
New York City and state are therefore cracking down on the proliferation of illegal cigarettes. Two bills — one introduced in the City Council and the other in the Legislature — directly address the problem of smuggled tobacco products.
The Sensible Tobacco Enforcement bill in the council will curtail the sale of illegal and discounted tobacco goods. Under this bill, the sale, possession or concealment of untaxed cigarettes or counterfeit stamps will result in a fine of up to $2,000 for a first violation, $5,000 for a second violation and the revocation of one’s license to sell cigarettes and the sealing of one’s premises for multiple violations.
The second bill, under consideration by the Legislature, will increase civil and criminal penalties for the possession of counterfeit and untaxed cigarettes and make it easier for officials to seize contraband. If a store can’t sell cigarettes without New York City stamps, it makes smuggling far less profitable.
In a related move, the city also filed a Citizen’s Petition with the US Food and Drug Administration to implement a track-and-trace system that would monitor the manufacturing and flow of tobacco products from production through distribution to retail outlets.
Such a system can help law-enforcement officers identify the last point in the chain of distribution where the cigarettes were possessed legally when they turn up without the required city tax stamps, as they did last week. That, in turn, would enable law enforcement to investigate how they were diverted to the illegal market and who was responsible.
Cigarette smuggling might appear to be a victimless crime, but last week’s arrests illustrate how it is not. Cracking down on cigarette-tax evasion is vital not only for public health but also for businesses and public safety as well.
Raymond W. Kelly is New York City police commissioner. Thomas Farley is health commissioner.
_______________________________________________________________________
Zero Cooperation Extended to Bloomberg's Butt Boys by State on Untaxed Cigarettes
Edited from:
Craigslist still in the business of selling sleaze
By John Crudele — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Post’
There was some political intrigue that went unnoticed when New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly held a press conference last week to announce the indictment of 16 members of a criminal ring that made $55 million selling untaxed cigarettes.
Sure, it was interesting that these people may have been using some of the proceeds to fund terrorist organizations. But you already knew that from reading my columns over the past few years.
The thing that caught the attention of my sources was the fact that no New York state tax enforcers were present on the podium or involved in the bust.
As I’ve told you in previous columns, Albany has taken a pass when it comes to enforcing cigarette-tax laws, and it’s costing the city and state a lot of tax revenue. My sources are telling me that the amount of untaxed cigarettes being sold in New York City and towns along the state’s borders is still enormous and that our retailers are having a hard time staying in business.
Next time, maybe the AG and the police commissioner can scrunch over a bit to make room for Gov. Cuomo and his tax enforcers, who seem clueless.
The state did do something yesterday. It issued a report criticizing Tom Stanton, the former head of tax enforcement, for running a “rogue” operation. Stanton and I know each other. I also know this: Albany had better get more rogue itself, or the crooks are going to own the state.
_______________________________________________________________________
Long Island
Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘New York Newsday’ Editorial:
Questions shroud fatal shootings at Hofstra
There should be no misunderstanding about why Hofstra student Andrea Rebello is dead: The life of this 21-year-old Tarrytown resident ended tragically because Dalton Smith, a career criminal who had spent the vast majority of his adulthood incarcerated for serious, often violent crimes, invaded her home and menaced Rebello and others (including her twin sister) with a loaded gun.
Smith was a vicious man. Even though he did not fire his gun, he is directly responsible for the death. Armed, he invaded a home and terrorized several college students, forcing one to go to an ATM for money. When police arrived, he used Rebello as a physical shield. In doing so, he endangered a life brimming with promise.
But even while there is no question where to hang the blame, there are questions that need to be answered, some of which stem from the fact that this felon was in a position to commit the crime:
Should Smith have been paroled after he served nine years for attempted armed robbery and criminal possession of a weapon?
Was it appropriate to let Smith out once again, in February, after he had been jailed for violating that parole? Will we learn that the local parole office is understaffed?
Was Smith pursued as actively as he should have been once a warrant was issued for his arrest in April, again for violating parole?
These are the questions it's easiest to be angry about. Smith, 30, seems to have proved with his every adult act that he was a dangerous man who would not follow society's rules and would endanger others. Why, then, didn't we take him at his word, and acts?
The other issues involve the review of the police response in the tense and chaotic minutes after they arrived at the crime scene.
Was the lone officer's entering of the home under these circumstances standard operating procedure for the Nassau County Police Department?
If other law enforcement agencies follow different protocols in situations with an armed gunman and hostages, should Nassau change its procedures?
How will the county police and the district attorney investigate the case? Do these probes have different goals? Will the findings be released to the Rebello family and public?
Second-guessing the officer who fired seven bullets into Smith and one into Rebello, killing both, is not the point. That officer was faced with numerous split-second decisions, starting with whether to enter the house and ending with whether to fire. If Andrea Rebello had lived, the officer would be hailed a hero.
He may yet be, once all the facts are known. The officer who fired the shots had served eight years with the New York City Police Department and then 12 more with the Nassau force. If evidence makes it clear that the officer could not wait for backup or hostage negotiators because the students faced imminent danger, then so be it.
But that may not be the case, or not entirely the case, and this is not the last such incident that will occur in Nassau County. There could be ways to keep men like Smith behind bars. There may be steps to take at active crime scenes to increase the odds of a better outcome. If so, we must find out, and explain the answers to the public, then pursue these tactics.
_______________________________________________________________________
Tragic Hofstra family: Where was the negotiator?
Family of Andrea Rebello, the student accidentally killed by a police bullet, ask why the cop didn't negotiate with armed robber who held her hostage instead of firing eight time.
By Ginger Adams Otis , Vera Chinese AND Richard Harbus — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Daily News’
The godfather of the Hofstra University student accidentally killed by a police bullet says the cop should have negotiated with the armed robber who held her hostage instead of firing eight times.
“We felt that the Nassau County Police were very unprofessional and could have prevented this tragedy,” Henrique Santos said Monday as the family of Andrea Rebello, 21, remained in mourning.
Nassau police continue to investigate the tense, close-quarters standoff early Friday that ended in the shooting deaths of Rebello and Dalton Smith, the armed robber who was using her as a human shield inside an off-campus home in Uniondale, L.I.
Rebello, a junior at Hofstra, had just returned home from partying with her twin sister and two friends when Smith burst in through an open door.
The cop who fired the fateful shots, Nikolas Budimlic, had responded to a 911 call and confronted Smith inside the home. Police have said the officer — a veteran cop who had previously served on the NYPD — fired when the robber, who held Rebello close to him, pointed his gun at the officer.
Seven of the rounds Budimlic fired hit Smith, killing him. One hit Rebello in the head, killing her.
Santos spoke outside her family’s home in Tarrytown. He said Rebello’s twin sister, Jessica, who was in the home when her sister was shot, is inconsolable. “Jessica is sleeping too much. We try to get her up and make her eat something. When she does, she says, ‘Oh my God, it’s all my fault, what did I do (wrong) to get this?’” he said.
_______________________________________________________________________
New Jersey
First gun bills land on Christie's desk
By Matt Friedman — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The Newark Star-Ledger’ / Newark, NJ
TRENTON — Three bills aimed at controlling gun violence gained final legislative approval in the state Assembly today, making them the first of what is expected to be a big batch of gun control legislation to land on Gov. Chris Christie’s desk.
But the bills — part of a larger package introduced in the aftermath of the December Newtown, Ct. school shooting — were far from the most controversial ones the Legislature has put forward, and face an uncertain fate with the governor, who has 45 days to decide what to do.
The bills would give owners of illegal guns 180 days to dispose of them (A3796); create a task force to study ways to improve schools security (A3583) and establish uniform standards to report lost, stolen and discarded guns (A3797)
"Our work is far from done," Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver said in a statement. "And I look forward to giving final legislative approval to more common sense gun violence prevention bills in the weeks ahead, all while continuing our effort to get a bill limiting ammunition magazine capacity into law."
Oliver was referring to a bill her house passed in March that would limit the capacity of ammunition magazines from 15 to 10. The measure has stalled in the upper house, where Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) — who sits in a partly rural and conservative legislative district — has refused to advance it.
A spokesman for Gov. Chris Christie did not return a phone call and email seeking comment.
The Assembly session was free of the theatrics that took place at the committee hearings on the Senate and Assembly’s larger gun packages. The bills were quickly passed with no debate, and gun control advocates and opponents did not show up to cheer the Assembly on or to protest.
But Scott Bach — president of the New Jersey Association of Rifle and Pistol Clubs — said there are problems with the bills.
Bach said the bill on tracking lost and stolen firearms violates federal law because it would require state authorities to publicly release confidential information.
"Due to an idiosyncrasy of the federal trace system, guns recovered from house fires, floods, voluntary surrender, and other innocuous circumstances are all labeled ‘crime guns,’ even though they have nothing to do with crime," Bach said. "Gun banners want this confidential law enforcement data to manipulate statistics and falsely claim that sales to law abiding citizens are a source of ‘crime guns.’"
Bryan Miller, executive director of Heeding God’s Call, which supports more gun control measures, said the said is already can publicize information gathered by the federal government. "The interest in this data is to discover where the illegal guns are coming from," he said.
The Senate Law and Public Safety Committee will meet today to consider four proposals to toughen the law on those caught with illegal guns. They would require bail for weapons offenses be paid in cash (S1133); increase the penalty for giving a gun to a minor (S1279); remove the statute of limitations for prosecuting gun thieves (S2801); and increase penalties for possession of guns by convicts (S2804).
_______________________________________________________________________
F.B.I.
FBI turns away many applicants who fail lie-detector tests
By Marisa Taylor — Monday, May 20th, 2013 ‘The McClatchy Newspapers’
WASHINGTON — Thousands of job applicants come to FBI offices all across the country every year, eager to work for the top law enforcement agency in the U.S.
But many of them have their hopes dashed, and it’s not because of their work experience or education or criminal records. They’re turned down because they’ve failed their polygraph tests.
The FBI’s policy of barring job candidates who fail their polygraph tests clashes with the view of many scientists that government agencies shouldn’t be relying on polygraph testing to decide whether to hire or fire someone. Experts say polygraph testing isn’t a reliable indicator of whether someone is lying – especially in employment screening.
Further, a little-known technical glitch in one of the leading polygraphs that the bureau and many other government agencies have used could give applicants who fail polygraphs even more reason to assert that they were inaccurately and unfairly labeled liars.
“I was called a lazy, lying, drug dealing junkie by a man who doesn’t know me , my stellar background or my societal contributions,” wrote one black applicant in Baltimore, who said he was told he qualified for a job except for his polygraph test failure. “Just because I am young and black does not automatically denote that I have ever used any illegal drugs.”
Government agencies use polygraph testing not only to weed out job applicants but also to question criminal suspects and to determine whether sex offenders are complying with psychological treatment or probation.
Although all polygraph testing is controversial, many scientists are highly critical of its use in job screening, saying it’s especially prone to inaccuracies because the questions are often more vague than they are in criminal investigations and therefore they’re more likely to provoke reactions from the innocent that might seem like deception.
Adding to the skepticism, polygraphers have documented problems with the measurement of sweat by the LX4000, a polygraph that the FBI and many other federal agencies and police departments across the country have used, McClatchy found. Polygraphers also interpret measurements of respiration and blood pressure for their decisions on whether someone is lying, but many see the sweat measurement as especially indicative of deception. The manufacturer of the LX4000, Lafayette Instrument Co. Inc., describes the problem as rare but it isn’t able to specify what that means. The company also points out that other polygraphs that use the same technology might have the problem as well.
“The potential for occasional differences to be observed was already clearly described in the published literature, not limited to the Lafayette polygraph system, and anecdotal experience confirms it is an occasional occurrence,” the company said in a statement to McClatchy.
But Gene Iredale, a San Diego lawyer, said the problem could mean that agencies such as the FBI are “making decisions in criminal cases and are taking away security clearances on the basis of completely inaccurate information. The polygraph is speculative to begin with; that’s why it’s not admissible in court.”
A spokeswoman said the bureau, which has polygraphed applicants since 1994, “continues to find it a relevant and necessary tool in both employment and operational related matters.”
The spokeswoman, Kathleen Wright, said the bureau wouldn’t respond to questions about the LX4000 nor reveal the number of people who failed each year, although she acknowledged that if an applicant doesn’t pass a polygraph “then the applicant is normally not hired.”
Records obtained by McClatchy show the FBI polygraphs about13,000 people a year for job screening, criminal investigations and national security inquiries. According to records, the bureau has at least a 30 percent failure rate in its job screening. As many as 40 percent of special agent applicants don’t get the job because of their polygraph test results.
The bureau isn’t alone in its reliance on polygraph testing. A contractor fired 10 Drug Enforcement Administration court interpreters in San Diego after the DEA said they’d failed their polygraphs or refused to take them , according to a federal lawsuit Iredale filed against the U.S. government over the decision. The Philadelphia Police Department says on its website that it won’t hire someone who doesn’t pass its polygraph.
Other police departments, such as Kansas City, Mo., Sacramento, Calif., and Raleigh, N.C., say they don’t rely entirely on a polygraph test to determine whether they should hire someone.
“If someone shows deception and we’re not able to clarify it, then the investigator puts that in their report and that’s something we look into,” said Kathy Lester, who oversees the Sacramento Police Department’s hiring. “It’s not just based on the polygraph, but we’ll have other corroborating information.”
However, even those who say they don’t have a strict policy of barring failing applicants were hard-pressed to say what they’d do if they were faced with a failure without a confession of wrongdoing.
“We have to feel comfortable hiring someone,” said Lester, who estimated that her department would polygraph about 200 people this year for positions ranging from police officers to firefighters to clerks. “If we feel somebody is deceptive based on the totality of the circumstances, then we can’t hire them.”
Despite its strict policy, the FBI gives some applicants the opportunity to take another test, but it doesn’t disclose the number.
James Wedick, a retired FBI agent of 34 years who’s now a private investigator in Sacramento, called the bureau one of the “worst culprits” in its reliance on polygraph testing. He said he’d repeatedly seen highly qualified people turned away who’d be excellent law enforcement officers. The stigma follows them even if they try to apply elsewhere, because police departments and federal agencies often weigh whether someone previously failed a polygraph, even if they haven’t tested the person themselves.
“Many of these people work their entire adult lives to get a job with the bureau,” he said. “These are people who haven’t done anything wrong and they’ve got stellar resumes and they’re told, ‘Sorry. You can’t get a job because of the polygraph.’ It’s ludicrous.”
Documents obtained by McClatchy demonstrate that the bureau is rejecting people even as the applicants insist they’ve never done anything wrong. The documents, which were given to McClatchy by polygraph researcher Katelyn Sack, also show that some applicants view the rejection as illegal discrimination. In fact, half of a dozen applicants who filed the complaints McClatchy obtained thought they were discriminated against because they’re African-American.
"I believe I was discriminated against as a black female,” wrote one woman who applied to the Memphis, Tenn., FBI office and was told she’d failed two polygraphs.
The first polygrapher said the woman seemed to be lying about drug use. After she was granted another test, the second polygrapher said she passed. A supervisor overturned that conclusion.
In all the cases reviewed, the bureau countered that the polygraph tests revealed the applicants were hiding some sort of wrongdoing that wasn’t discovered during the usual background investigation.
In Dallas, for instance, one applicant accused a polygrapher of asking whether he was an Israeli spy because he’s Jewish and of Iranian descent. The polygrapher, however, said the polygraph results showed him to be deceptive in response to questions about spying. “Other FBI officials confirmed the accuracy of the polygraph reading,” the records say.
The FBI acknowledged that the polygrapher did mention an Israeli spy agency, “as he typically discusses foreign intelligence services with applicants.”
In response to another complaint filed by a U.S. citizen of Iranian descent, the bureau said “the outcome of the polygraph examination was based solely on (complainant’s) reaction to the questions posed him.”
The polygrapher who first tested the man concluded that he passed. Her supervisor, however, said the bureau couldn’t determine whether he was lying, calling him “inconclusive.”
When he was tested again, said the applicant, who applied in Albany, N.Y., he was accused of trying to beat the polygraph test and told he was lying about links to terrorists.
The FBI denied discriminating against the applicants, who filed the complaints from 2006 to 2010. The bureau said supervisors who reviewed the polygraphers’ determinations didn’t know the characteristics of job applicants and therefore couldn’t be biased.
Government agencies often successfully assert that national security and law enforcement interests trump an applicant’s right to sue over a polygraph test. They persuade courts of polygraph testing’s usefulness by pointing to confessions of wrongdoing they elicit during the tests.
However, Sacramento attorney David P. Mastagni called the technical glitch of the LX4000 a “real, significant legal issue” that could give people who have been denied jobs because of polygraph tests a legitimate reason to sue. Mastagni, who represents law enforcement officers in employment disputes and criminal cases, said manufacturers could be accused of not disclosing a product defect if they were aware of such a flaw and didn’t do enough to fix it.
“If someone inaccurately got labeled a liar, that’s a big deal. This is not a crybaby issue,” he said. “It could be lots of people lost out on a job.”
Tish Wells contributed to this article.
_______________________________________________________________________
2 F.B.I. Hostage Rescue Agents Die in Training Exercise at Sea (The Details)
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Times’
It was a counterterrorism training exercise that the two agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s elite hostage rescue unit had completed dozens of times before: rappelling from a helicopter onto the deck of a ship at sea.
But as Special Agents Christopher Lorek and Stephen Shaw began their descent on Friday onto a ship roughly a dozen miles off the coast of Virginia, the helicopter suddenly tilted because of a strong gust of wind. As the pilot tried to steady the aircraft, the two men, holding onto the ropes and loaded down with gear, lost their grips and fell.
By the time they were rescued from the water, one of them was dead. The other died soon after.
The episode, announced Sunday by the F.B.I., was the first time that an agent has died in the line of duty since December 2011. In the past 12 years, six others have been killed. The F.B.I. has about 14,000 agents.
Special Agents Lorek and Shaw are believed to have died from blunt trauma, according to a senior law enforcement official who provided details based on an initial investigation by the bureau. “Everything is still being looked at, but so far this is where the investigators think we are,” the official said. “Every part of this is under review.”
Special Agent Lorek, 41, had been a member of the hostage rescue unit, based in Quantico, Va., for six years. He was deployed to Alabama in February as part of a team that helped rescue a 5-year-old boy who was being held in an underground bunker. Special Agent Lorek provided support to the team that entered the bunker and killed the man holding the child hostage. Special Agent Shaw, 40, joined the unit two and half years ago.
The men, both married and fathers of two, lived near Quantico with their families. The bureau’s hostage rescue unit was created before the 1984 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles. It was formed to provide the federal government with the ability to respond to an episode similar to the one that had occurred at the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, in which 11 Israeli athletes were killed after being taken hostage.
Over the years, the unit, which has a little fewer than 100 agents, has responded to roughly 850 episodes, including the bombings at the Boston Marathon last month. In that instance, agents from the unit were sent from Quantico after the attacks to deal with finding other explosives in the city. They have also responded to episodes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The hostage rescue team is part of the bureau’s Critical Incident Response Group, a military like unit that is “ready to deploy anytime, anywhere” to crises like hostage rescues and terrorist attacks. Its agents often wear uniforms similar to soldiers and carry high-powered assault rifles. The most prominent photo on the F.B.I.’s Web site for the group shows two armed agents hanging off the side of a flying helicopter.
“We mourn the loss of two brave and courageous men,” the F.B.I. director, Robert S. Mueller III, said Sunday. “Like all who serve on the Hostage Rescue Team, they accept the highest risk each and every day, when training and on operational missions, to keep our nation safe.”
_______________________________________________________________________
A.T.F.
‘Furious’ slam at Justice
By GERRY SHIELDS — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Post’
WASHINGTON — A US attorney violated Justice Department policy by leaking information to the media to retaliate against a federal agent who helped expose the department’s botched federal “Fast and Furious” gun-running operation, an inspector general said yesterday.
Justice Department IG Michael Horowitz called former US Attorney for Arizona Dennis Burke’s actions “wholly unbefitting.”
Burke resigned after acknowledging that he leaked information to Fox News about Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives whistleblower John Dodson.
Dodson had gone to Congress with complaints about the program, which allowed roughly 2,000 guns to be sent to Mexico in hopes of tracking them to drug cartel leaders. But the ATF lost track of most of the guns.
Burke leaked information showing that Dodson himself had proposed a similar action in which he sold six weapons which were lost.
_______________________________________________________________________
Texas
Dallas Police Association furious over bill restricting cell-phone tracking
By Karen Brooks Harper — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The Dallas Morning News’ / Dallas, TX
A bill that would ban police from tracking cell phones without probable cause won preliminary approval by a cheering Texas House on Monday, angering police across the state who were fighting the provision they say will strip them of a valuable life-saving and crime-fighting tool.
“It’s going to kill people,” said Frederick Frazier, political action committee chairman and first vice president of the Dallas Police Association.
The bill had 108 House sponsors but died when it ran up against a deadline for passing House bills, and was tacked on instead to a technology privacy bill by Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas.
It’s part of a broader effort by the House to rein in technology in favor of the 4th Amendment.
Word is that amendment will send the bill into a conference committee, where it could get stripped.
The House cheered when they approved the bill, which sponsor Bryan Hughes, a Mineola Republican, said would protect Texans’ privacy in the face of police who want to monitor them for no particular reason.
Current law lets police track cell phones with the burden of reasonable suspicion, which Frazier said allows them to – say – get the cell phone records of the last 10 people who called the dead guy in the ditch and figure out where they were last night.
Or, he said, a girl goes missing, police find out there are 10 sex offenders living next to where she was when she disappeared, so they get their records and find out who was there when she disappeared.
Or using cell phones to track the Kaufman DA killer, or the Boston bomber – all, he said, would be hampered by a bill like this.
Raising the burden to the level of search warrant not only costs time and paperwork, Frazier said, but restricts them from even being able to obtain the records because probable cause doesn’t cover the wide net police have to cast sometimes in order to find a suspect.
Hughes points out that the bill makes exceptions for felony fugitives, life-threatening situations or immediate dangers – some of which would cover the scenarios above.
His argument to police: That if you have no probable cause to be tracking a cell phone, you shouldn’t be doing it. If you do, then what’s the big deal?
Frazier scoffed at the notion that the exceptions would help. Instead, he said, it would be devastating to police work. The lawmakers who supported the amendment don’t get the amount of pressure police are under, particularly in big cities, to solve violent crimes every day. Most of them, Frazier said, couldn’t care less about people who aren’t breaking the law.
“They all think that people are spying on them,” he said.
_______________________________________________________________________
California / Felonious Mopery in Police Parking Lot
Man who smashed police car windows shot dead by police in Inglewood, Calif.
By Barry Leibowitz — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘CBS News’
(CBS) INGLEWOOD, Calif. - Police in the Southern California city of Inglewood say they shot and killed a man who was smashing the windows of patrol cars in a police parking lot, CBS Los Angeles reported.
Authorities said around 6 p.m. Saturday the man started breaking the windows of squad cars - eight in all - with a long, sword-like weapon.
The blade was "18 inches or more," said Lt. Mark Fried.
Police called it an "officer-involved shooting," CBS Los Angeles reported. It was unclear how many officers opened fire.
Police said the suspect was treated at the scene and taken to a hospital where he was declared dead.
His name and age were being withheld until his next of kin could be notified.
No motive was given for the rampage. No officers were injured.
_______________________________________________________________________
Immigration Enforcement / Illegal Aliens
Immigration Officials Say Safeguards Were Added
By JULIA PRESTON — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Times’
Department of Homeland Security officials, responding to sharp criticism on Monday from a union representing 12,000 of its employees, said they had added many safeguards in recent years to protect against fraud and security violations by foreigners seeking to live in the United States.
The officials reacted swiftly to a statement by Kenneth Palinkas, president of the National Citizenship and Immigration Services Council, in which he called on lawmakers to reject an immigration bill before the Senate, saying security procedures were weak for checking the backgrounds of millions of immigrants who would apply for immigration documents under the legislation.
Mr. Palinkas said he was adding his signature to a letter to Congress from a separate union that represents 7,700 federal deportation agents, which charged that the Senate bill would be a “significant barrier to the creation of a safe and lawful system of immigration.”
If the legislation passes, the immigration officers in Mr. Palinkas’s union will be central to carrying it out. They would review applications for provisional legal status from an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants, as well as for millions of green cards and other immigration documents.
Administration officials rallied on Monday to dispute any contention that they had been lax on immigration security, and also to fend off any new opposition arising to the Senate bill, which President Obama strongly supports.
In his statement, Mr. Palinkas said immigration officers had been rushed into approving applications, with officials discouraging them from “proper investigation into red flags.”
The citizenship agency “has been turned into an approval machine,” Mr. Palinkas said.
He said a program started last year by Mr. Obama to give deportation reprieves to young undocumented immigrants had an approval rate of 99.5 percent. “Practices were put in place to stop proper screening and enforcement,” he said.
In a telephone interview, Mr. Palinkas said many agency employees felt they had been slighted by top officials, who paid more attention to the demands of immigrant advocate organizations.
“There is a sense of entitlement among the interest groups,” Mr. Palinkas said. “They expect to get what they seek.”
Homeland Security officials said that accusations of a “rush to yes” by the employees of the citizenship agency long predated the Obama administration. The agency created an antifraud unit in 2010 to increase the number and scope of reviews of immigrants applying for documents, the officials said, with the number of antifraud officers increasing by 20 percent since then. The agency greatly expanded requirements for screenings based on fingerprints and other biometric information, the officials said.
Rather than press for more approvals, the agency has scrutinized employees’ decisions to make sure they were consistent with the law, officials said, and set priorities allowing officers to focus on detecting immigrants who might be security threats.
Approval rates were high in the youth program, officials argued, because many young undocumented immigrants who were not likely to qualify either did not come forward to apply or withdrew when their applications were questioned by the agency.
“Reverting back to a system that treats violent criminals the same as children brought to this country through no fault of their own would only undermine the integrity of the immigration system and force law enforcement agencies to divert limited resources from focusing on those who pose real threats to their communities,” said Peter Boogaard, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security.
The bill by a bipartisan group of eight senators is moving through the Senate Judiciary Committee, where lawmakers on Monday continued voting on some 300 amendments. So far, opponents have gained little traction, although the committee has adopted several amendments, mainly by Republicans, to strengthen security provisions.
The letters from the immigration officers’ unions was quickly circulated by Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, a Republican who staunchly opposes the bill.
_______________________________________________________________________
Pols: Fingerprint traveling illegals
Senators: Take prints of traveling aliens
By GERRY SHIELDS — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The New York Post’
WASHINGTON — A key Senate panel yesterday passed an amendment to the immigration-reform bill that would require foreigners leaving the country to submit to fingerprinting in order to catch those overstaying their visas.
“We fingerprint people before they come into the country, that’s in the entry system, but we don’t read it when they exit, and that’s the hole in the system,” said Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.).
An estimated 40 percent of the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants have overstayed their visas.
The measure approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee calls for a fingerprinting system to be in place at 10 international airports, including Kennedy and Newark, within two years.
Another 20 airports, including La Guardia, would be brought in within six years. Sessions voted against the amendment, saying that the plan should be implemented immediately at 150 airports and ports of entry.
A 2009 report by the Department of Homeland Security showed that border patrol and airport screeners using portable machines caught 175 people on a terrorist watch list and 60 overstays.
Sen. Charles Schumer supported the proposal.
“It’s a good start, and once we see how the program works, we can scale it out further,” Schumer said.
Meanwhile, opponents slammed the overall immigration bill yesterday, contending it would grant legal status to illegal immigrants with criminal convictions.
New York ranks sixth in the states most affected by the measure. Federal officials removed 911 illegal immigrants convicted of crimes in the past six months from New York, but 520 of those would qualify to stay under the new bill, the group said.
_______________________________________________________________________
Senate panel approves immigration changes requiring fingerprint system at 30 U.S. airports
By Ed O’Keefe — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The Washington Post’ / Washington, DC
Every immigrant leaving the United States through one of the 30 biggest airports would have to be fingerprinted by federal authorities under an immigration reform measure that won early committee approval in the Senate on Monday.
The plan approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee is a concession to Republicans and some Democrats who support establishing a nationwide biometric tracking system at all U.S. air, sea and land ports of entry, a key recommendation made by the bipartisan 9/11 Commission after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to track potential terrorists entering or leaving the country.
The committee rejected a similar GOP proposal last week that would have forced the Department of Homeland Security to establish a biometric immigration tracking system at every U.S. air, sea and land port of entry. The committee’s Democrats and the four members of the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” who wrote the immigration bill and sit on the panel said such a plan would be too expensive.
But bipartisan negotiators sought a compromise after Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) — a key GOP member of the “Gang of Eight” — said he supports the concept of a nationwide biometric system and would fight for the proposal once the immigration bill reaches the full Senate.
Under the new agreement sponsored by Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), DHS would need to establish a fingerprint tracking system at the nation’s 10 largest international airports within two years of the bill’s approval. The program would expand to the next 20 largest international airports within six years.
Rubio deemed the proposal “a good start,” but said he would keep pushing for a nationwide system. “If we have an exit system that utilizes biometric information, it will help make sure that future visitors to the United States leave when they are supposed to,” he said in a statement.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), a key Democratic negotiator, said in a statement that establishing the system at 30 airports “will not be easy” but will be “doable in the next five years.”
The Judiciary Committee met in a marathon session Monday seeking to complete debate on the immigration bill by week’s end. The panel by Tuesday should be on to the most controversial aspects of the bill regarding how to handle the legal status of the roughly 11 million illegal immigrants living in the United States, according to committee aides.
The panel also agreed Monday to changes that would essentially bar immigrants who were granted asylum from returning to their home country, a proposal drafted in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings.
Senators unanimously approved an amendment by Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) that would terminate the asylum or refugee status of anyone who returns to his or her home country. Graham introduced the amendment after investigators discovered that Boston bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev had traveled last year to Russia and Dagestan after his family sought and was granted asylum from Dagestan in 2002.
In the months prior to his trip, the FBI had opened and closed an investigation of Tsarnaev based on tips from Russian authorities. A U.S. counterterrorism task force later received a warning about Tsarnaev’s overseas trip and the warning was delivered to a single U.S. Customs and Border Protection official based in Boston. The warning went unnoticed until after the April 15 bombing that killed three people and injured more than 250 others near the finish line of the Boston Marathon.
The committee last week approved another GOP amendment inspired by the Boston attack that would prevent lapses in information-sharing about foreign students when their immigration status changes while they are in the United States.
_______________________________________________________________________
Homeland Security
Boston bomber spent 6 months in Russia’s most violent Republic
By Unnamed Author(s) — Tuesday, May 21st, 2013 ‘The Journal of Turkish Weekly’ / Ankara, Turkey
MAKHACHKALA, RUSSIAN REPUBLIC OF DAGESTAN — The news of the Boston Marathon bombings circled the globe, and resonated here in Dagestan, a majority Muslim republic in Russia, on the shores of the Caspian Sea.
Last year, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the older of two brothers suspected of the bombings and a longtime Boston resident, returned to Dagestan, where he had lived for a year during his youth.
Dagestan was the land of his maternal ancestors. But in the last two years, this republic of 3 million people has gained notoriety as the region with the highest level of political and religious violence in all of Russia.
Seeking sharia law
Tsarnaev mainly stayed in the capital, Makhachkala, where he lived with his father. He prayed nearby at the al-Nadiria mosque, a conservative place named after its founder who was fatally shot 10 years ago.
The current imam, Hassan Mahomedovich, does not remember Tsarnaev. He says members want sharia law, but oppose violence.
"Here in the mosque there are no extremists there is no one person with an extremist position. We are orderly only, smart, literate, well-educated Muslims," said Mahomedovich, 73.
Across the street, graffiti reads: "Victory or Heaven."
One mosque member who did not want to be identified said he thought that Tsarnaev was framed by American security services.
This view was pushed here by Tsarnaev’s mother, Zubeidat, who gave an angry press conference after her oldest son was killed in a shootout with Boston police. She said that her son was innocent, and that he was set up, and then killed by American security services.
Cousin's influence
Boston coroners say that Tamerlan Tsarnaev's bullet wounds were compounded by his younger brother Dzhokar running him over in a getaway car.
Later, the mother told reporters that Tamerlan’s greatest influence in Dagestan was a third cousin -- Magomed Kartashov, head of the Union of the Just, a pro-sharia group in the town of Kizlyar.
VOA drove two hours north, and talked to Rasim Ibadanov, a Union of the Just leader. He remembers Tsarnaev as a happy, humorous person.
“When we found out from the first time that it was Tamerlan Tsarnaev, that was a huge shock for us,” said Ibadanov, in a barbecue restaurant where other members had gathered.
Ibadanov said his group walks a fine line: advocating sharia law, but promoting non-violence.
“Yes, we say that we want to live in a sharia society, but we aren’t calling for some kind of destabilization or overthrow of the government, or any other kind of radical or extreme actions," said Ibadanov, a 30-year-old computer specialist. "We are just saying our opinions."
Kartashov, the third cousin, could not be interviewed. His lawyer said he was in a prison hospital, recovering from a police beating after being arrested with a wedding motorcade that flew black flags with Arabic writing.
Extremist attacks
Ibadanov said police are jailing a nonviolent man and claiming he was a radical mentor to Tsarnaev.
“We think that they are trying to discredit him and claim that he is some kind of illogical extremist, and that he had some effect on radicalizing Tamerlan Tsarnaev," he said.
But extremist attacks - and counter-terrorist operations - are weekly events in Dagestan.
Returning to Makhachkala, a reporter passed through Chirkey. Last August, a suicide bomber killed six people here, including one of Dagestan’s most revered moderate Muslim leaders.
Official repression
Further down the road, we arrived in Buinaksk, just hours after a policeman and a civilian were killed in a police car. Before that, security officials had blown up a house of suspected extremists.
Zarema Bagavotdinova runs a human rights group for conservative Muslims in the city. She shows us the remains of the house.
“They called me and said that there was a house search," she recalled of the "counter-terrorist operation." "Then, around 8:30, they called and said they supposedly found explosive materials that they couldn’t defuse, and that they blew them together with the house.”
Analysts believe that Tsarnaev came to Dagestan from Boston with radical world views formed from readings he found on the Internet. Here in Dagestan, he saw that some people try to score religious and political points with bombs.
_______________________________________________________________________
Mike Bosak
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment