The ten week federal civil lawsuit against the NYPD's practice of stop-and-frisk, Floyd v City of New York, ended last Monday. We learned much about the quotas, racism, and cynical operations of the NYPD -- but it all added up to what many people already knew. Stop-and-frisk is racist, unconstitutional and unjust.
The next day another trial of stop-and-frisk began in Queens, when four more freedom fighters were brought to stand trial for protesting at the capital of stop-and-frisk, the 103rd Precinct in Jamaica. On November 19, 2011, twenty people were arrested for standing outside the precinct doors, demanding an end to stop-and-frisk, and specifically in that precinct, which has the second highest number of illegal stops in the city. It's the precinct where NYPD killed Sean Bell in 2005, and where there's been intense harassment of trans people.
It's outrageous that Greg Allen, Noche Diaz, Ribka Getachew and Matt Swaye are even on trial. For 18 months, the District Attorney has refused to drop two counts of Obstruction of Government Administration against 13 people, even when the first group of four was found not guilty by a jury last November. Prosecutors are bringing the same evidence, but say they hope to get a different outcome with another jury.
It took two full days to get a six person jury and two alternates selected. So many people in the jury pool expressed opinions against stop-and-frisk that the prosecution was able to have some excluded for cause, because they said they wouldn't be able to listen to police officers and believe them. Others who spoke out against stop-and-frisk, or had negative experiences with the NYPD, but said they could still be fair and unbiased in this case, were excluded when the prosecutor used pre-emptive challenges to exclude them.
Of the last people in the jury pool to be questioned, four openly expressed opposition to stop-and-frisk. A young sister said she had been to protests against police brutality, and protested when Kimani Gray was murdered by the NYPD a couple months ago. She told one of those wrenching stories that breaks your heart about being abused as a child, going to court to testify against her abuser, and the prosecution not getting her abuser convicted. A young man had friends who had been arrested during Occupy Wall Street when the police led protesters into a place, then busted them. He didn't believe the police. A human resources manager quoted statistics on stop-and-frisk, and said "I believe it's biased, and there is not evidence it stops crimes. Over 90% of the people stopped were doing nothing wrong, and they are almost all Black and Latino. I think they should do stop-and-frisk on the Upper East Side (a wealthy area in Manhattan.)
The potential juror questioned the most was a 40 year old African American train conductor. He told of being stopped "many" times by the NYPD driving to work at night. Our lawyer asked, "how many times have you been stopped?" The court room -- except for the prosecutors -- erupted in laughter when he said, "you mean this year? I really couldn't even tell you." He went on to say that his brothers, cousins, son, son's friends are all stopped a lot. "And I do not know why. We are all working, going about our business. We have no records." He said that he lives in what is called a "high crime area," and it turned out to be the 103rd Precinct. He said that stop-and-frisk does not do any good, and he doesn't like it.
We ended up with a jury of people born in Queens, and all over the world, who say they don't have an opinion about stop-and-frisk, with one alternate believing that it's a good practice which she is sure lowers crime, although she cannot site how. These jurors say they have never been involved in protest. The prosecutor, who stipulated there was no violence from the protesters, is building his case on the fact that one could protest, even for a good cause, and still break the law.
Attorneys Mani Tafari, Martin Stolar, Thomas Hillgardner and Daria Aumond will argue that no laws were broken, and in fact the protesters were led, by NYPD officers, into a barricaded zone in front of the 103rd, and then arrested when they made a protest in front of the door. The defendants will testify about why they protested stop-and-frisk.
The trial begins Tuesday, May 28, and is expected to go three or four days. Trial support makes a big difference in front of a jury. Join us 9:30 am Room K-15 at Queens Criminal Court. 125-01 Queens Blvd. E/F train to Kew Gardens/Union Turnpike.
The next day another trial of stop-and-frisk began in Queens, when four more freedom fighters were brought to stand trial for protesting at the capital of stop-and-frisk, the 103rd Precinct in Jamaica. On November 19, 2011, twenty people were arrested for standing outside the precinct doors, demanding an end to stop-and-frisk, and specifically in that precinct, which has the second highest number of illegal stops in the city. It's the precinct where NYPD killed Sean Bell in 2005, and where there's been intense harassment of trans people.
It's outrageous that Greg Allen, Noche Diaz, Ribka Getachew and Matt Swaye are even on trial. For 18 months, the District Attorney has refused to drop two counts of Obstruction of Government Administration against 13 people, even when the first group of four was found not guilty by a jury last November. Prosecutors are bringing the same evidence, but say they hope to get a different outcome with another jury.
It took two full days to get a six person jury and two alternates selected. So many people in the jury pool expressed opinions against stop-and-frisk that the prosecution was able to have some excluded for cause, because they said they wouldn't be able to listen to police officers and believe them. Others who spoke out against stop-and-frisk, or had negative experiences with the NYPD, but said they could still be fair and unbiased in this case, were excluded when the prosecutor used pre-emptive challenges to exclude them.
Of the last people in the jury pool to be questioned, four openly expressed opposition to stop-and-frisk. A young sister said she had been to protests against police brutality, and protested when Kimani Gray was murdered by the NYPD a couple months ago. She told one of those wrenching stories that breaks your heart about being abused as a child, going to court to testify against her abuser, and the prosecution not getting her abuser convicted. A young man had friends who had been arrested during Occupy Wall Street when the police led protesters into a place, then busted them. He didn't believe the police. A human resources manager quoted statistics on stop-and-frisk, and said "I believe it's biased, and there is not evidence it stops crimes. Over 90% of the people stopped were doing nothing wrong, and they are almost all Black and Latino. I think they should do stop-and-frisk on the Upper East Side (a wealthy area in Manhattan.)
The potential juror questioned the most was a 40 year old African American train conductor. He told of being stopped "many" times by the NYPD driving to work at night. Our lawyer asked, "how many times have you been stopped?" The court room -- except for the prosecutors -- erupted in laughter when he said, "you mean this year? I really couldn't even tell you." He went on to say that his brothers, cousins, son, son's friends are all stopped a lot. "And I do not know why. We are all working, going about our business. We have no records." He said that he lives in what is called a "high crime area," and it turned out to be the 103rd Precinct. He said that stop-and-frisk does not do any good, and he doesn't like it.
We ended up with a jury of people born in Queens, and all over the world, who say they don't have an opinion about stop-and-frisk, with one alternate believing that it's a good practice which she is sure lowers crime, although she cannot site how. These jurors say they have never been involved in protest. The prosecutor, who stipulated there was no violence from the protesters, is building his case on the fact that one could protest, even for a good cause, and still break the law.
Attorneys Mani Tafari, Martin Stolar, Thomas Hillgardner and Daria Aumond will argue that no laws were broken, and in fact the protesters were led, by NYPD officers, into a barricaded zone in front of the 103rd, and then arrested when they made a protest in front of the door. The defendants will testify about why they protested stop-and-frisk.
The trial begins Tuesday, May 28, and is expected to go three or four days. Trial support makes a big difference in front of a jury. Join us 9:30 am Room K-15 at Queens Criminal Court. 125-01 Queens Blvd. E/F train to Kew Gardens/Union Turnpike.
RSS Feed