The Benefits of Fewer NYPD Arrests

[xchrom]

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/12/the-benefits-of-fewer-nypd-arrests/384126/

?nhgak3

A funny thing happened in New York City last week: Cops stopped arresting people. Not altogether, of course—that would be anarchy. But since last Monday, the number of arrests in America's largest city plummeted by two-thirds compared to the previous year. The decline is a conscious slowdown by New York's police force to protest City Hall's perceived lack of support for law enforcement.

NYPD officers and union leaders have been at odds with Mayor Bill de Blasio in the wake of the Eric Garner case and the killings of Officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos this month. In their latest move, officers have begun a "virtual work stoppage" throughout the city by making fewer low-level arrests and issuing fewer citations. The Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, New York's largest police union, urged its members not to make arrests "unless absolutely necessary," according to the New York Post's report.

[The slowdown] has helped contribute to a nose dive in low-level policing, with overall arrests down 66 percent for the week starting Dec. 22 compared with the same period in 2013, stats show.

Citations for traffic violations fell by 94 percent, from 10,069 to 587, during that time frame.

Summonses for low-level offenses like public drinking and urination also plunged 94 percent—from 4,831 to 300.

Even parking violations are way down, dropping by 92 percent, from 14,699 to 1,241.

Drug arrests by cops assigned to the NYPD’s Organized Crime Control Bureau—which are part of the overall number—dropped by 84 percent, from 382 to 63.
Although safety is cited as the reason for the police union's move, political considerations are central. "This is not a slowdown for slowdown’s sake," a police source told the Post. "Cops are concerned, after the reaction from City Hall on the Garner case, about de Blasio not backing them." The NYPD slowdown also comes amid protracted contract negotiations between police unions and the mayor's office.

[hobbit709]

1. So they are proving the majority of their arrests are for harassment and revenue purposes.

[KG]

2. ^^^this

[MADem]

4. Well, can't have them sitting around on their hands, can we? Let a bunch of them go!

Laid off--no longer needed! They're not bringing in the dough, so it's time for them to go!

Start with the idiots who think dissing the Mayor for being the father of black chidren is a smart idea!

[GreatGazoo]

3. NYPD did something similar to Dinkins

and they had two major fallouts with Giuliani including one in 1996/97 where they tried to ban him from police funerals.

" Driving the clash between the mayor and the PBA is a behind-the-scenes stalemate on talks over a new contract. The police contract expired last April, and so far the two sides have yet to talk....

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/irate-pba-give-rudy-blues-article-1.727198

[Savannahmann]

5. Mr. Mayor, may I make some suggestions on what we can do to improve the Police?

Since you are in negotiations for the contract now, let's get started now. ]

1) Drug and Alcohol testing. Starting with pre-employment, post incident, reasonable suspicion, and random. We'll start with common illegal drugs that they regularly arrest others for. Obviously there would be a question of probable cause, so these tests would not result in jail as they do for most of their victims, but would mean an end to their employment.

2) A civilian board formed and empowered along the lines of the NTSB to investigate uses of force, both against the police, and against the citizenry. The board would not be empowered to even recommend prosecution. The board would be empowered to answer the basic questions. Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How. These reports would be made public at the conclusion of the investigation. The board would have one goal, truth. Then it's up to the DA to take any action regarding prosecutions that are deemed appropriate. But mostly, this board would examine police training and behavior. What training are they getting that is inappropriate? What training can be improved? What policies are inappropriate placing either the police, or the public at greater risk?

Failure to co-operate with the incident investigation board, or providing the board with incorrect or adjusted information shall result in an immediate reduction of the City's responsibility to the Police Pension fund by five percent for a period of five years. Each incident of false/misleading information will result in an additional five percent reduction.

The board members shall be nominated by civil rights organizations, churches, and community groups. I'll leave it up to you Mr. Mayor if you think it should be confirmed by electoral process or by executive action. I'm sure we can find a few NTSB investigators to help set it up and get it going in the right direction.

3) Polygraph testing. Police officers shall submit to polygraph testing every six months. The questions shall be limited to basic integrity checks. Have you lied, have you seen another officer lie on official reports or on the witness stand. Have you planted evidence or have you been aware of someone else doing so. Have you seen or participated in cases of excessive force?

Again, due to the legal protections, such a test shall not be used for the purposes of prosecution, but they can be used to open an investigation into an incident. These tests are integrity checks to make sure the people we are entrusting with the extraordinary power over our citizenry are worthy of that trust. This is nothing more than is done regularly to CIA analysts who are entrusted with similar levels of access and power. If they fail the test, they are ineligible to continue serving as police until the failure is adequately dealt with. Subsequent failures will make the individual ineligible to serve as a police officer in the City of New York.

Finally, body cameras. If the officer has his camera off during an incident in which force is used, it should shift the burden of proof from the victim, to the officer to demonstrate that it actually happened the way he said. These cases would get priority attention from the incident investigation board.

I hope that these and other common sense reforms that are long overdue, and desperately needed by our society are strongly considered by you and your staff.