Breaking: Stop-and-Frisk Practice Violated Rights, Judge Rules

[Hissyspit]

Source: New York Times

@BreakingNews: Judge rules stop-and-frisk policy in New York City violated rights - @nytimes

@AP: BREAKING: Federal judge appoints outside monitor to oversee changes to NYPD stop-and-frisk policy. -MM

Stop-and-Frisk Practice Violated Rights, Judge Rules

By JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN
Published: August 12, 2013

In a repudiation of a major element in the Bloomberg administration’s crime-fighting legacy, a federal judge has found that the stop-and-frisk tactics of the New York Police Department violated the constitutional rights of tens of thousands of New Yorkers, and called for a federal monitor to oversee broad reforms.

In a decision issued on Monday, the judge, Shira A. Scheindlin, ruled that police officers have for years been systematically stopping innocent people in the street without any objective reason to suspect them of wrongdoing. Officers often frisked these people, usually young minority men, for weapons or searched their pockets for contraband, like drugs, before letting them go, according to the 195-page decision.

These stop-and-frisk episodes, which soared in number over the last decade as crime continued to decline, demonstrated a widespread disregard for the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, according to the ruling. It also found violations with the 14th Amendment.

To fix the constitutional violations, Judge Scheindlin of Federal District Court in Manhattan said she intended to designate an outside lawyer, Peter L. Zimroth, to monitor the Police Department’s compliance with the Constitution.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/nyregion/stop-and-frisk-practice-violated-rights-judge-rules.html

[Dustlawyer]

1. K&R! This is racists and needed to be stopped!

[MADem]

2. FINALLY!

I mean, come on...they do this shit without even a teeny bit of "probable cause."

It's past time it stopped. Bullying random people is no substitute for community policing.

[Baitball Blogger]

5. What was the breaking point?

Really, it was so obvious. What took them so long?

[MADem]

6. Getting to court, maybe?

The mills of the gods grind slowly, and all that...!

[thelordofhell]

27. They finally stopped and frisked a white guy

Yeah, I said it........and you know it's true

[Baitball Blogger]

28. No argument from me.

[tumtum]

3. Hmmm, M. Bloomberg isn't having a very good year so far.

His large soda ban was struck down, his gun control ads are backfiring right and left, now this.

Glad this racist policy was seen by the judge for what it is.

[BumRushDaShow]

4. Article here

Stop-and-Frisk Practice Violated Rights, Judge Rules
By JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN
Published: August 12, 2013

In a repudiation of a major element in the Bloomberg administration’s crime-fighting legacy, a federal judge has found that the stop-and-frisk tactics of the New York Police Department violated the constitutional rights of tens of thousands of New Yorkers, and called for a federal monitor to oversee broad reforms.

In a decision issued on Monday, the judge, Shira A. Scheindlin, ruled that police officers have for years been systematically stopping innocent people in the street without any objective reason to suspect them of wrongdoing. Officers often frisked these people, usually young minority men, for weapons or searched their pockets for contraband, like drugs, before letting them go, according to the 195-page decision.

These stop-and-frisk episodes, which soared in number over the last decade as crime continued to decline, demonstrated a widespread disregard for the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, according to the ruling. It also found violations with the 14th Amendment.

To fix the constitutional violations, Judge Scheindlin of Federal District Court in Manhattan said she intended to designate an outside lawyer, Peter L. Zimroth, to monitor the Police Department’s compliance with the Constitution.

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/nyregion/stop-and-frisk-practice-violated-rights-judge-rules.html

[MADem]

8. About the judge....

Shira A. Scheindlin (pronounced shend-lin;[needs IPA] born 1946 in Washington, D.C.) is a United States District Court judge on senior status for the Southern District of New York. She was nominated by President Bill Clinton on July 28, 1994, to a seat vacated by Louis J. Freeh (who went on to be the director of the FBI), confirmed by the United States Senate on September 28, 1994, and commissioned on September 29, 1994. On December 12, 2012 her vacated seat was filled by Lorna G. Schofield.

Scheindlin is known for her intellectual acumen, demanding courtroom demeanor, aggressive interpretations of the law, expertise in mass torts, electronic discovery, and complex litigation.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shira_Scheindlin

For anyone else who was curious, I wondered if she was Judge Judy's sister-in-law, and the answer is no!

http://abovethelaw.com/2006/08/happy-birthday-judge-scheindlin/

... Although she’s not related to “Judge Judy” (a.k.a. Judge Judith Sheindlin — different spelling), one couldn’t be blamed for thinking so. The Honorable Shira has a reputation has a holy terror. She works her clerks like dogs, berates them frequently, and sometimes even makes them cry. Don’t pee on her robe and tell her it’s raining!

[leftyladyfrommo]

7. Well, of course it did.

You can't just stop and frisk people on the street.

Geesus!

[Old Codger]

9. For sure

The saddest part of this is that it had to have a court say it was wrong when anyone with half a brain already knew that.

[Igel]

13. Yeah, that's the point of the ruling.

But the counter-"argument" is that it was necessary for the common good.

Those who like control and think that they should get to make the rules tend to think that you have to find a way to do what's "necessary" even if the clear intent of the law says it's illegal. Their supporters argue that it's unconscionable for the leader to be somehow restricted from doing what's "necessary".

There was a high crime rate, largely confined to certain areas of the city. NYC had a broken windows policy. Moreover, the assumption was that much of the crime was rooted in an indifference or even contempt for "somebody else's" laws--and since the laws weren't internalized as something to be followed, external constraints were needed, and so you wanted the police to have not only a high profile but do so in a way that they can't be ignored. Stop-and-frisk was concentrated in the high crime area.

The correlation that crime went down during the period is either ardently touted as to the properness and need for the policy, or assiduously explained away by any means necessary.

[Rain Mcloud]

16. Indeed,it seems to have lowered the national crime rate.

We need a stop and audit corporate crime task force and all for the sake of the Greater Good.
We'll see how long this lasts.

[leftyladyfrommo]

23. When people are scared to death of the police

it's going to lower the crime rate.

You just have to decide what's more important - a lower crime rate or your consitutional rights.

Personally, I am way more afraid of the jack boots and the pounding on the door in the dead of night than I would ever be of thugs on the street. If there are thugs I just stay off that street.

[dickthegrouch]

10. The Idiot cop who started this

has been propagating it to Oakland, CA and LA too (for huge sums in consulting fees, of course).
Glad to see the concerns have finally been heard and addressed by a Judge, even if she doesn't have jurisdiction in CA.

Oakland is going to have to come up with a better plan.

[Dawson Leery]

11. Congratulations Blomberg, you put NYC under federal supervision, just like a southern state!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014563084

[DeSwiss]

26. K&R

[center]
Off with the judge's head! Emp-Bloomie has spoken!!![/center]

[blackspade]

12. Awesome!

[backscatter712]

14. Noting the judge's name: any relation to Judge Judy? n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

19. Haha I thought that too. :D

[backscatter712]

24. I hope Her Honor gave the NYPD a righteous Judy-style chew-out! n/t

[christx30]

15. It's unconstitutional...

but she's not ordering it to end:

Noting that the Supreme Court had long ago ruled that stop-and-frisks were constitutionally permissible under certain conditions, the judge stressed that she was “not ordering an end to the practice of stop-and-frisk. The purpose of the remedies addressed in this opinion is to ensure that the practice is carried out in a manner that protects the rights and liberties of all New Yorkers, while still providing much needed police protection.”

So she's going to appoint someone to monitor the unconstitutional practice to ensure that it's not more unconstitutional-er than it has to be?
Why do we even listen to these legal idiots?

[bigdarryl]

17. Good point Christx30 nothing to get excited about the dumb ass judge still didn't order it to stop

I didn't realize the Supreme Court had already looked at Stop And Frisk I wonder how uncle Thomas ruled in that case.The reason I'm curious is because didn't he have a relative like a nephew who was stopped by police and was ruffed up and he(uncle Thomas) was surprised at how he was treated.

[X_Digger]

31. Umm.. the case was in 1968, Terry v Ohio

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio

So it was a little before Thomas' time.

The majority was Warren, joined by Black, Brennan, Stewart, Fortas, Marshall; concurrence by Harlan and White; Douglas was the lone dissenter.

[uhnope]

18. Yes! Finally! & Way worse than the NSA fake scandal. nt

[branford]

20. This is only the beginning of the legal battle.

I'm sure the City will appeal the matter to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, and I would not be surprised if it went up to the Supreme Court.

Also, as others have mentioned, the Court's ruling does not end the practice, only appoints someone to monitor it to prevent abuse. The devil will surely be in the details and the monitor's opinions and actions will be most interesting.

[Ash_F]

21. Check out this video

In case you call yourself a Democrat and support the policy

[HereSince1628]

22. My gratitude to those who endured and fought againt this mistreatment.

Tens of thousands of New Yorkers, mostly minority men, deserve recognition as veterans of the front-line of the conflict for defending freedom for ALL Americans.

The vast majority of you will go unnamed. The suffering you endured, your sacrifice for freedom, has served the rest of us.

Thanks.

[X_Digger]

32. Hundreds of thousands, every *year*

In 2010, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 601,285 times.
518,849 were totally innocent (86 percent).
315,083 were black (54 percent).
189,326 were Latino (33 percent).
54,810 were white (9 percent).
295,902 were aged 14-24 (49 percent).

In 2011, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 685,724 times.
605,328 were totally innocent (88 percent).
350,743 were black (53 percent).
223,740 were Latino (34 percent).
61,805 were white (9 percent).
341,581 were aged 14-24 (51 percent).

In 2012, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 532,911 times
473,644 were totally innocent (89 percent).
284,229 were black (55 percent).
165,140 were Latino (32 percent).
50,366 were white (10 percent).

[kirby]

25. Did you hear Bloomberg?

At his news conference he claimed that 'nowhere in the 195-page decision did the judge acknowledge that it worked'.

Isn't this like saying that if we installed CCTV cameras in everyones homes we would reduce domestic violence? And when that is ruled unconstitutional, complaining that the judge did not mention how effective it was?

[X_Digger]

34. That is a disturbing 'ends justify the means' bit of bullshit, isn't it?

Another quote from the dailynews..

http://www.nydailynews.com/stop-frisk-violated-rights-judge-article-1.1424287

"She ignored the real-world realities of crime," and showed "a disturbing disregard for the good intentions of our police officers," he said, adding noting that stop-and-frisk has taken 8,000 guns off the street in the past 10 years.

What was that saying about "good intentions"?

eta: And what a load of tripe:

"If this decision were to stand, it would," he said, "make the city, in fact the whole country, a more dangerous place."

No Bloomie, NYC isn't the whole country.

[DainBramaged]

29. 85% stopped accused of NO crime but stoped for 'suspicious' behaviour

Walking while Black and Brown is cause for suspect of criminal activity.


What a country.

[Tx4obama]

30. Probably won't be a class action suit cause it looks like the list of names will be deleted

August 7, 2013

NYPD to stop archiving names, addresses of stop-and-frisk targets

In a settlement with the New York Civil Liberties Union, the NYPD has agreed to remove all names and addresses from its stop and frisk database within the next 90 days.

-snip-

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nypd-stop-keeping-names-addresses-stop-and-frisk-targets-article-1.1420603

August 7, 2013

City Agrees to Expunge Names Collected in Stop-and-Frisk Program

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/08/nyregion/city-to-trim-a-database-on-police-stops.html?_r=0

July 16, 2010

Gov. Paterson signs law forcing NYPD to delete stop and frisk database

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/gov-paterson-signs-law-forcing-nypd-delete-stop-frisk-database-article-1.467911

[Kingofalldems]

33. K and R