NYPD arrest human rights lawyer for waiting outside a restaurant while her kids used the bathroom

[Bobo]

Yeah, but motivated, genuinely interested in your well being, and empathetic customer service people who are still capable and interested in physically fighting a combative drunk during a domestic violence call etc…

The problem is that the kind of people who you want doing community policing are exactly the people who would be destroyed by doing it. Let’s be honest, doing police work means constant exposure to 1) fairly shitty people or 2) good people who are having a really shitty day. Not a recipe for really positive interactions.

[andy_hilmer]

Good points, but customer service is about not having a fulfilling life. How exactly is coppage different? Besides, fuck the psychos and their Maslow pyramid. Let them dive for crab.

[TrollsOpinion]

You read that there was a protest in the street?

You read that this woman, who admitted to being a participant in the protest, as was her right, took station on the sidewalk while her husband and children used the toilet at a local eatery?

And you are aware that street protests are not allowed to disrupt sidewalk traffic?

Therefore the police possibly interpreted the presence of this protestor, idle on the on the sidewalk, as disorderly conduct. And that includes the possibility that the arrest was not racially motivated?

Just like Ferguson( remember that? ) true judgement is being reserved until the facts of the case become known. And in the meantime the case disappears from the public imagination.

I welcome your opinion.

[ChuckV]

what protest?

[TrollsOpinion]

From the article:

NYC Public Advocate Tish James, attended a rally in Times Square with
her family, and afterwards, waited on the sidewalk outside of a Ruby
Tuesday restaurant while her husband took their children (10 and 6) to
the bathroom

[FoolishOwl]

And how can we object to police arresting people on the sidewalks following a political demonstration?

[daneel]

Your best defence of the police is that they’re waiting until people have finished exercising their first amendment right to free speech, then arresting them for standing on the sidewalk?

With friends like you…

[TrollsOpinion]

I simply offer the true observation that the demonstrator was standing idle on a sidewalk when approached by police.

What is certain is that the facts of this case are unknown to you and I.

Furthermore, as others have pointed out, the fact that the accused was a human rights lawyer is immaterial.

[TrollsOpinion]

Well, we can start with the notion that public protests are matters that fall strictly within strict police control.

I would love to debate such a thing with you. However, you probably don’t want this to happen for fear that you and I would agree.

So with that out of the way, you do understand the public permits for such demonstrations are very specific and specify whether or not such activities occur in the street or the park, or the neighborhood, etc…?

[daneel]

@TrollsOpinion

the demonstrator was standing idle on a sidewalk when approached by police.

A terrible crime, to be sure.

I see (as ever) you’re living up to your name, but - what is the trolley’s opinion of the Police’s actions, pray tell? You’re offering excuses for them, but do you agree with them?

What Would trolley Do?

@TrollsOpinion

So with that out of the way, you do understand the public permits for such demonstrations are very specific and specify whether or not such activities occur in the street or the park, or the neighborhood, etc…?

Doesn’t surprise me. I remember Mark Thomas dealing with such things quite amusingly a few years ago in the UK.

Mark Thomas: My Life In Serious Organised Crime pt 1

[Shuck]

First, she’s not some random “human rights lawyer” - she’s former general counsel for NYC Public Advocate Tish James, (who has been a vocal critic of the police and is an advocate for policies like the police body cams, something that isn’t exactly popular with the cops). What the cops did is a classic punitive move when they have no basis for arresting someone. So what’s more likely - that they pulled her in on this bullshit charge that served only to grossly inconvenience her because she was a random woman on a sidewalk, or because she was someone that had previously worked in what was essentially an adversarial position and had pissed them off? I’m not saying it’s definitely the latter, but…
If the argument is “the cops would be smarter than that,” then that requires the cops involved to actually be smart, which is, shall we say, not a given. The particular cop involved here has previous form for being an out-of-control abuser of citizens’ rights, something that he’s gotten away with so far. So he’s either very cocky, has no self-control and/or is particularly dumb.

[TrollsOpinion]

@daneel

A terrible crime, to be sure.

I see (as ever) you’re living up to your name, but - what is the trolley’s opinion of the Police’s actions, pray tell? You’re offering excuses for them, but do you agree with them?

What Would trolley Do?

Holy Shit! A trolley was asked what they think about something!

A red letter day on BoingBoing to be sure!

Thank you.

@daneel

What Would trolley Do?

TrollsOpinion would inquire as to the facts of the case. Was the initial police encounter in any way related to the protest, demonstration, etc occurring in the street?

I suspect so, but obviously dont know that it was. It just sounds like it was.

Why?

Because I refuse to believe that there is a conspiracy among hundreds of thousands of police officers( of all races ) to oppress dark-skinned people.
For that matter, what do we know about the race(s) of the arresting officer(s)? And why is this fact never brought up?

As to your video, its getting on in the day where I am. I promise to view it later.

P.S. I know that I come across as adversarial most of the time… let me momentarily put that aside.

I do appreciate your questions and I encourage more.

Peace.

[jsroberts]

@TrollsOpinion

TrollsOpinion would inquire as to the facts of the case.

An admirable sentiment, but you could start by reading the article.

@TrollsOpinion

For that matter, what do we know about the race(s) of the arresting officer(s)?

Check the first picture below the heading.

@TrollsOpinion

Because I refuse to believe that there is a conspiracy among hundreds of thousands of police officers( of all races ) to oppress dark-skinned people.

I don’t think people are claiming that it’s an organised conspiracy, just a definite bias.

[bwv812]

@Shuck

What the cops did is a classic punitive move when they have no basis for arresting someone. So what’s more likely - that they pulled her in on this bullshit charge that served only to grossly inconvenience her because she was a random woman on a sidewalk, or because she was someone that had previously worked in what was essentially an adversarial position and had pissed them off?

What’s more likely: that they deliberately targeted the lawyer of someone who they don’t like, or that they targeted a brown woman in ethnic dress who had just been attending a pro-Palestinian rally and had the temerity to question their authority? I will go with the latter. I mean, by your logic, we could argue that when minorities get profiled and it turns out they have outstanding warrants, they weren’t actually being profiled but had been deliberately targeted on the basis of their known criminality. I mean, she herself says she believes she was targeted because she is Muslim and South Asian.

@Shuck

The particular cop involved here has previous form for being an out-of-control abuser of citizens’ rights, something that he’s gotten away with so far. So he’s either very cocky, has no self-control and/or is particularly dumb.

You mean he is an out-of-control abuser of random people who he hasn’t deliberately targeted because of their expertise in the law?

@TrollsOpinion

I simply offer the true observation that the demonstrator was standing idle on a sidewalk when approached by police.

What is certain is that the facts of this case are unknown to you and I.

I see. So some facts are “true observation[s],” but somehow other “facts” are certainly “unknown to you and I.”

@TrollsOpinion

So with that out of the way, you do understand the public permits for such demonstrations are very specific and specify whether or not such activities occur in the street or the park, or the neighborhood, etc…?

Does this mean that if I see a person standing alone, I can claim they are actually part of a demonstration and then use the strict police control I am allegedly entitled to to criminalize them?

@TrollsOpinion

Because I refuse to believe that there is a conspiracy among hundreds of thousands of police officers( of all races ) to oppress dark-skinned people. For that matter, what do we know about the race(s) of the arresting officer(s)? And why is this fact never brought up?

We know at least on of the officers, Ryan Lathrop, is white.

If you refuse to believe in this “conspiracy” to target minorities, how do you explain the huge numerical and proportional disparities in the number of stops-and-frisks carried out against minorities as compared to white? That minorities engage in behavior that is, objectively speaking, more suspicious? That being a minority is suspicious in itself? How do you reconcile the data from Ferguson that blacks are much more likely to be stopped, but whites are much more likely to be found to be engaging in criminality when they’re stopped? Why are blacks being targeted when whites are the law breakers? Conspiracy suggests some sort of intentional and purposeful discrimination, but it’s possible to discriminate without conspiring to do so.

[AlexG55]

That’s not me you’re quoting…

[Dave_Baxter]

@miasm

Again… again… again, my point is that they are motivated to use excessive caution which, consequentially, creates negative interactions with the public from the get go.

But this isn’t much of a point. It’s like observing that fascists believe they have to oppress in order to stay in power, and therefore we can “understand” their behavior from there…

Yeah, thanks, but since that’s virtually the definition of “fascist” this isn’t a contribution to our “understanding” of them. Likewise, stating that law enforcement approaches the public from a potentially adversarial position in every interaction isn’t a contribution either, since this is inherent in all law enforcement.

What IS pertinent is what is allowed - and what isn’t - within countries with supposedly protected rights and freedoms which any and all law enforcement is 100% disallowed from violating said rights and freedoms. Anything else is simply apologist talk, since “understanding” the nature of law enforcement has no bearing on whether the violations of rights is illegal or not.

And, frankly, with the statistics of how many law enforcement officers die in the line of duty NATIONWIDE (105 in all of 2013) mixed with the number of civilians which are killed by law enforcement nationwide each year (thousands), even this “understanding” doesn’t hold up as terribly factual or a real imminent threat, certainly not on the level that should allow any flexibility on the violation of constitutional rights. That really is all there is to be said.

[miasm]

@Dave_Baxter, @jsroberts

Ah sleep and a new day! Same argument though.

I guess the point that I’m making is that America and increasingly other 1st world countries have chosen to militarise their police, they have been operantly conditioned to react as if they are under constant threat.

The reinforcement aspect of the equation remains woefully unbalanced by the only punishment authority, the courts.

The underlying motivation that is therefore amplified is the application of a culture of safety into the realm of regular interactions, which would otherwise seem to be safe.

This is where, I would imagine, the ‘good attitude test’ that all cops seem to apply to their victims/the public, comes from. An instant gauge of your likely compliance in a situation.

This would be the culture these people, the police on the street, are embedded in and therefore informs their actions. It also moves the envelope of expected discourse (interacting with the public verbally) to a dangerous place. It has evolved to set the bar so low that any natural differences in temperament can push the quality of the interaction below an acceptable boundary. Much like political discourse.

I like to think of myself as a realist and that is why, rather than trying to marshal the police to behave more politely, I suggested compliant malfeasance, in my original post.

It’s all there and if I’ve come across as tempestuous in my replies, apologies but I still feel my entire point and position is un-packable from that original comment.

The point of contention I appear to be being taken to task for, in my view, doesn’t exist except in those twisted misappropriations of my intent, necessary to find such a point.

If you want to take my observation of the conditioned responses of the police in their initial attitude in their interactions with all people in public negatively, you must first find a way to interpret my intention as being excusatory of their behaviour, which is what I’ve been so dogged to point out I am absolutely not doing.

I do wish the world was different and would contribute positively to any effort I thought would be in any was successful to changing those negative aspects but without such a plan of action I again state my original point.

Amplify complaint malfeasance as a method of dealing with the reality of the police.

Take from that what you will.

Miasm out.

[davide405]

@skaag

It’s difficult for me personally to comprehend, as I grew up in a highly mixed environment and color was never even a “thing”.

If you, or anyone who is white, think you are “colorblind” then I suggest you have a go at the Implicit Affiliation Test for Race (black - white) but take note:

[quote]Important disclaimer: In reporting to you results of any IAT test that you take, we will mention possible interpretations that have a basis in research done (at the University of Washington, University of Virginia, Harvard University, and Yale University) with these tests. However, these Universities, as well as the individual researchers who have contributed to this site, make no claim for the validity of these suggested interpretations. If you are unprepared to encounter interpretations that you might find objectionable, please do not proceed further. You may prefer to examine general information about the IAT before deciding whether or not to proceed.

I am aware of the possibility of encountering interpretations of my IAT test performance with which I may not agree. Knowing this, I wish to proceed[/quote]

You may not like what this test tells you, especially if you’re white and think you’re “colorblind.”

Link to disclaimer page.

Link to Race test.

ProTip: Take the test in private and give yourself a few days to process the results.

EDIT: My link-fu was very weak when I posted this. @anon29631895 has provided a much better link in the reply below.

[lafave]

@aikimo

It seems that, for you, this issue is about how to avoid getting arrested. But that’s easy and boring. You avoid getting arrested by obeying, no matter what.

And that isn’t always enough to avoid getting arrested.

[marc45]

Even if the arrest was completely random and had nothing to do with her status as a lawyer or her skin color or anything personal, why the fuck cannot someone stand on the sidewalk outside a restaurant for a few minutes simply waiting for someone inside?

Unless she was actively protesting, handing out leaflets, etc. this should just not have even entered the radar of the cops. In other words, this could have happened to you. Remember the words “when they came for me there was no one left to speak for me”.