Post by bistro on Jun 3, 2013 12:01:20 GMT -5
A Lot of Misjudgment of Suspicion-NYPD-Stop and Frisk trial
Without a doubt, Judge Shira Scheindlin has a way with understatement. During closing arguments in Floyd v. New York, the stop and frisk trial finishing up in the Southern District, the court said the obvious aloud.
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.
Yes. Yes it is. To the untrained eye, this might have been a foregone conclusion, Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner's adoration of the tactic notwithstanding. And yet, the City remains adamant that the massive failure of a 90% error rate in what they contend to be reasonable suspicion is protected under the ancient legal doctrine of stercus accidit.
The problem is that despite the fact that the individuals stopped were almost invariably black or Hispanic, there has been no evidence introduced of racial slurs during the course of the stops, which the City argues reflects the absence of profiling or racial animus. Judge Scheindlin wasn't entirely persuaded.
(more)
blog.simplejustice.us/2013/05/21/a-lot-of-misjudgment-of-suspicion.aspx?ref=rss
Though it apparently wasn't said, the foundation for the argument is Hanlon's Razor, never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity. In other words, New York's Finest are too clueless and incompetent to be expected to recognize when reasonable suspicion doesn't exist or that the law precludes their unconstitutional conduct, and they should therefore be forgiven their millions of trespasses.
While it's called "Hanlon's Razor," the concept is also attributed to Robert A. Heinlein, whose 1941 short story "Logic of Empire" includes the quote, "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity." This, of course, leads inexorably to another of Heinlein's quotes from his 1966 opus, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress: TANSTAAFL.
It's time for the New York City Police Department to pay the lunch bill. Check please.
Without a doubt, Judge Shira Scheindlin has a way with understatement. During closing arguments in Floyd v. New York, the stop and frisk trial finishing up in the Southern District, the court said the obvious aloud.
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.
Yes. Yes it is. To the untrained eye, this might have been a foregone conclusion, Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner's adoration of the tactic notwithstanding. And yet, the City remains adamant that the massive failure of a 90% error rate in what they contend to be reasonable suspicion is protected under the ancient legal doctrine of stercus accidit.
The problem is that despite the fact that the individuals stopped were almost invariably black or Hispanic, there has been no evidence introduced of racial slurs during the course of the stops, which the City argues reflects the absence of profiling or racial animus. Judge Scheindlin wasn't entirely persuaded.
(more)
blog.simplejustice.us/2013/05/21/a-lot-of-misjudgment-of-suspicion.aspx?ref=rss
Though it apparently wasn't said, the foundation for the argument is Hanlon's Razor, never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity. In other words, New York's Finest are too clueless and incompetent to be expected to recognize when reasonable suspicion doesn't exist or that the law precludes their unconstitutional conduct, and they should therefore be forgiven their millions of trespasses.
While it's called "Hanlon's Razor," the concept is also attributed to Robert A. Heinlein, whose 1941 short story "Logic of Empire" includes the quote, "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity." This, of course, leads inexorably to another of Heinlein's quotes from his 1966 opus, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress: TANSTAAFL.
It's time for the New York City Police Department to pay the lunch bill. Check please.