Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
I'm -- comes -- -- welcome Vince Warren executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights.
And there is a trial about to begin in the your city having to do with a stop and frisk law.
The New York police department's stop and frisk policy.
It's welcome to show for those of us for those listening not a new York and we explained can you explain what the stop and -- policies.
Sure it's good to be additional.
This stop and frisk policy -- city police department is essentially a state practiced.
A systemically stopping black and Latino people without cause and stopping them.
Mostly because of their race in the scale in which it happens to hundreds of thousands of stops a year 500000.
Literally means that there are 15100 stops each day the vast majority of which number one.
People they're innocent and number 287%.
Are black and Latino so that the -- is -- challenge is not to stop the police.
From the -- of law enforcement but we're looking to do this to stop the practice of unconstitutional.
Stopping this which is stopping people without any.
Reasonable articulation that they have committed a crime that there about the committed a crime where they are committing a -- And you're involved in the lawsuit you've filed this lawsuit.
-- that police will say this is.
We're responsible and important factor in the drop in crime during -- Bloomberg administration.
Yet -- -- think that and and they have actually said that and frankly every major police department around the country and as with ever.
Tactic that they haven't places responsible for the -- the crime but here's what we know.
Nationally the crime rate has been dropping since the 1990.
And that there are there are.
Cities that don't employ the unconstitutional stuff the press that had been able to actually get guns and off the street and to reduce crime -- could further.
The problem with this policy is that even with the and stopping it which in which reflect about five million people.
And since Mayor Bloomberg here in New York to go over that they actually having -- -- -- low rate of recovering guns and weapons it's less than 1%.
Of all of these stops -- -- -- resulted in the recovery of a gun which is of course the purpose of the stopped.
I noted that this city for example Celeste Cole felt senior attorney for the city law department.
Says that they go with a crime is highest in the precinct by precinct the rates in which minorities -- -- -- consistent with the race in which they're stopped.
And then of credit identified as prime suspects.
It consistent with -- race in which minorities are identified as kind of -- -- that they are not.
A does that -- they're not decided disproportionate number of stops -- -- proportion of the number of crimes suspects.
Yeah and that's actually not true I mean one thing that we do know is that.
Number one that this city stops the vast majority of the two of the stops.
Our African American and Latino and that's true whether they -- -- a little crime area in immediately criteria criteria for a high crime area.
And in 55%.
Of all of this stuff they have these forms that they record that we -- -- the stops.
55% of all of them in each one of those areas they -- it's because it's -- high crime area.
So when they knew I could no crime areas the police is saying that was stopping people because this is the high crime area.
So would that this situation is is that.
That African Americans and Latinos do not commit most of the applicable African Latinos were stopped.
Actually having lower hit rate for contraband that -- people do and they would this city would actually get more guns and drugs off the street if they did random -- -- Check points.
And they do under this particular policy which is why we -- saying that the policy is unconstitutional because it stops people without cause.
It's racially discriminatory because it took part targets African American act against the Americans and Latinos without regard to the crime -- And it's.
As the ACLU brought a case and also -- you have a class action is what's between your case the ACLU case where -- the same case I'm just trying to get the logistics.
Usually you -- -- -- that are typically on our case which is sleepers this city New York is the largest one that deals with the stop at -- policy throughout the entire city.
Of the ACL UK and India -- -- -- indicate that targets.
Topics this outside of public as -- keep private residential areas in the Bronx.
And it's a third lawsuit with the NAACP legal the -- and education fund and the legal aid society and they are focusing on stopping this in public housing.
So when you think those three cases together.
It is -- sort of a full.
Litigation with respect to this stop this policy as -- pops up in different places in the city.
Sony people say well we're if we're safe for now the city safer and they don't pay much attention to what the policies are that could be so intrusive and fourth -- violations.
That maybe make the city -- I would even contend that even if things were safer.
I'm not sure I'd support -- I go I agree with that as well but I understand that most people don't look at it that way but here's how I would -- Is that what you -- policy that only pit stops.
87% of African Americans and Latinos but only recovers and all of those -- 1% of the -- that guns.
Leaving -- message from -- amounts of drugs and guns that are out there on the street or do you want to have a policy that is constitutionally based.
-- actually targets the people that are committing the crime instead of pulling people over because they're black and Latino.
And what of that sum of one of the arguments is you'll hear people say -- the blacks Latinos to the winds are committing the crime.
Yeah and that's been in the narrative for what now 400 years and it's I think it's basically -- for people tended to get over that it is actually not true.
And -- that even if it were true the city's policy is targeting innocent.
African Americans and Latino and the folks that we are trying to that the policies that we're trying to get into places look.
Stop and -- is -- legal activity as long as you have a reasonable particular ovals suspicion.
That crime has happened.
It is unconstitutional.
If you keep black people on the street if you decide to stop them to see what they're -- we had a point -- -- thirteen years old city I was a police officer.
He was dropping -- fed up at the bus stop.
He's walking back to his -- he got thrown into a police vehicle.
Handcuffed and into the precinct as parents had to come and get him out.
There was no.
Reason for him to have been stopped others in the fact that he was a young black man and that's something that doesn't make this paper.
This stopping him is not getting guns off the streets stopping him is not stopping crime and that's what we want the police to stop doing.
Focus on the criminals and -- the community march.
-- -- an image -- of the center for constitutional right I presume the goal is to stop the policy.
The goal is to stop the -- constitutional aspects of the politics.
Since the police officers have a perfect right to stop and his people when they have a reasonable suspicion that something is.
Go couldn't say -- whoever reasonable suspicion because this -- activists -- -- could the policemen.
Or woman say.
Or make up the case that this particular stop any particular stuff.
Was reasonable suspicion or take a little suspect.
Well and and that's in fact what they do because when you look at the number -- to the Q.
Biggest indicators that the police say why -- -- people the first one.
Is furtive movements that some sort of movement that the police officers and -- as.
Trying to hide something that is -- me that they are hiding something it doesn't mean that they have anything on the it's what they just sort of a post hoc rationale that's what the police.
Used to justify the stop -- we also have to remember but there's a policy of quotas that's going on in this city it's that this step in fiscal being driven.
From the top.
In terms of getting as many stops as possible and that is actually what's driving this policy and not crime fighting.
Numbers so when.
How do you see this going how Long Will -- this trial take how long before this resolution on this issue do you think.
Well this trial is scheduled to take over a month and we had our opening statements and we've.
Put on two witnesses today.
Included in the rest of the trial are going to be expert witnesses that.
We've engaged to talk about the numbers that the police department have put up.
And to show how the policy actually doesn't.
Accomplish what the -- says it's going to be we also expecting.
Some former police officers and current police officers to testify -- the the the policy is it working and how they're being pushed to push up the numbers.
It also but that this policy does not reduce crime there's literally no published study anywhere in the world that shows -- stop and frisk.
Reduces crime -- -- we need to teach -- that we need to come up with a better solution one in which the community.
The police the city the city -- all involved and we can come up with a better policy to get guns off our streets -- -- -- -- doing this.
There's an existing situation in Cincinnati they had a terrible terrible.
Police problem into two that -- years ago.
And they actually did something that we approach the city with which splits that they pull together all sorts of law enforcement folks even the police union.
The mayor's office City Council to come up with a solution and the solution that they have now.
It is one where they are actually looking at particular locations where the crimes are happening in their policing those.
Situations more heavily.
And so that they get what's called a higher hit rate which is that when they see somebody that they think is committing a crime to deal more likely to actually be committing -- -- Seven for -- kept adding any rooms right.
The opposite is happening in other places around around the country that we know -- in in the world and that there has been a a -- -- this.
Movement there with -- that -- department is now under consent.
Decree with the Department of Justice we -- know they're desperate to go in Oakland we're looking into this policy as well.
They felt very wisely decided not to do it mostly because it's been a failed experiment in the city.
But I would say that -- -- -- -- the largest police department in the country and very often the experiments that they do here and get picked up in other places -- -- -- this will definitely come to the community near you.
Unless the courts find as we think that this is unconstitutional and there's a better way to do it.
-- is that Vince Warren thank you very much for your time tonight appreciate very much what -- thank you Vince Warren executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights.
Bringing this case -- class action case before the courts --
Filter by section