The owner of an Atlanta gym wants the world to know that police aren’t welcome at his business.

Recently, Jim Chambers posted a sign on the front door of the EAV Barbell Club explaining the gym’s rules. The sign is clearly visible from the street and reads, “Do whatever the hell you want, correctly, except crossfit cultism. No f—–g cops.”

According to Chambers, although the sign went up a couple weeks ago, he has enforced this policy since the gym opened. He also does not give memberships to active members of the military.

Former law enforcement and military members, however, are welcome to join.

In an interview with Reuters, Chambers explained that most of his clients are minorities and/or members of the LGBT community. Many of them would be uncomfortable working out alongside law enforcement because police officers had harassed them in the past.

“We know statistically that those people are at risk around police in America,” Chambers said. “I had members who joined because of the policy: they saw it on the door and thought, ‘Oh, that’s cool,’ and joined.”

He has since removed the vulgar sign but plans to put up another without the expletives.

The Atlanta Police Department has not released an official statement about the policy. However, a representative told local news station WXIA, “Were we to respond to an emergency there, this sign would not stop us from lawfully doing our job.”

Chambers doesn’t mind. “If they have a warrant, they can go anywhere they want, but we’re not breaking the law,” he said.

He also noted that, as someone who describes himself as “somewhere between an eco-anarchist and a Marxist-Leninist,” he would not be likely to call the police in the first place.

WXIA reached out to a team of lawyers about the legality of the policy. They agreed that federal anti-discrimination laws do not protect law enforcement as a separate group. The courts could decide if the policy is discriminatory, but for now, it remains legal.

Since the story broke on Tuesday, mixed reactions have been pouring in on social media. The gym’s Facebook page currently has a 1.4 rating and over 2,000 one-star reviews.

Atlanta Gym Owner Puts Up Sign, ‘No F—ing Cops’ – Tells Reporters: No Veterans Either https://t.co/KUGJQNMsCt
Wow
Why would anyone go there?

— Truckster1 (@truckster1) August 9, 2017

Atlanta gym owner you're doing amazing sweetie https://t.co/sLUzClmBkc

— reggie (@1942bs) August 9, 2017

Atlanta gym bans Cops from joining.

It’s their right. And it’s our right not to join & to protest outside the gym. https://t.co/l7BmVeYzV8

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) August 9, 2017

Delaney Cruickshank

Delaney Cruickshank is a Staff Writer at Law Street Media and a Maryland native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in History with minors in Creative Writing and British Studies from the College of Charleston. Contact Delaney at DCruickshank@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Atlanta Gym Bans Police and Active Military Members appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Michelle Carter Has Been Sentenced

Michelle Carter, the 20-year-old woman who was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter after her boyfriend killed himself in 2014, has been sentenced to 15 months in prison. Carter encouraged her boyfriend, Conrad Roy, to kill himself via text messages. Many legal experts did not expect Carter to be convicted, and opinions on the case differ. A lot of people said she deserves more time behind bars and speculated that she received such a lenient sentence because she is a white woman. Others opposed the concept of convicting someone for their role in a second individual’s suicide.

#michellecarter judge orders she cannot profit from the crime.. no movies, no magazines, books or tv interviews for payment #WBZ

— Cheryl Fiandaca (@CherylFiandaca) August 3, 2017

However, the judge in the case granted Carter a stay of incarceration, so she will not go to prison until after her appeals have been wrapped up. Roy’s family delivered emotional statements about their son and accused Carter of pushing Roy to commit suicide so that she could take on the role of the grieving girlfriend. The case remains highly emotional and ultimately could shed light on how to deal with similar cases.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: August 4, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Have you ever been driving on the highway just a tiny bit over the speed limit, and then a sneaky robotic cop pulls you over? No? Well you may have an encounter just like that someday in the not-so-distant future.

Last month, Dubai introduced its first autonomous police robot, known as REEM. REEM stands at 5’7″, weighs approximately 220 pounds, and looks loosely based off the robots introduced in the 2004 Will Smith film “I, Robot” (but definitely not as cool). While it has complete autonomous navigational control, its actions are severely limited. It can provide information on directions, the weather, and the locations of nearby restaurants. REEM can carry small packages and has a computer touchscreen that allows for a person to communicate via videoconference with a human police officer.

This is just one of the major developments that makes up the Smart Dubai 2021 Strategy, which aims to utilize smart technology to make Dubai one of the most technologically innovative police forces in the world. Other services that are part of this plan include the Dubai Police App that helps users connect with the police force without having to go to a police station, the introduction of autonomous mini-robotic cars that will be used for patrols, and providing officers with Aston Martins and Bentleys as squad cars.

Dubai’s goal is that by 2030 robots will make up 25 percent of the police force. But Ramon López de Mántaras, a research professor at the Spanish National Research Council, believes that plan is a bit over-ambitious. He contends that it is feasible, but constructing a machine that is capable of making complex human-like decisions is very difficult. He stated:

For a human, the principle of proportionality or how to apply a just answer to each situation is already complex. For a machine it’s almost impossible right now.

There are also questions about the legal ramifications that are inherent in introducing a robot that has authority. Some experts have started to delve into those questions–for example, the UCLA law review published a report on how we could handle the likely introduction of police robots in the coming years.

The report also suggested that there are many hypothetical scenarios that lawmakers and regulators can address now instead of waiting until the technology catches up in the near future. Such scenarios include whether a robot should be allowed to possess a weapon and if it’s allowed to fight back when threatened. Researchers also need to determine whether introducing robotic police will increase social inequality and distrust that currently exists between the police and large subsets of the population.

These questions obviously don’t need to be answered right now, as the police robots currently in place in Dubai are simple observant machines. But the technology is catching up fast and sooner or later robotic police officers may just become the new norm.

James Levinson

James Levinson is an Editorial intern at Law Street Media and a native of the greater New York City Region. He is currently a rising junior at George Washington University where he is pursuing a B.A in Political Communications and Economics. Contact James at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Dubai Brings Real Robocops to its Streets appeared first on Law Street.

After the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) organized a rally over the weekend to protest the removal of a confederate monument in Charlottesville, Virginia, thousands of counter protesters gathered to voice their disgust.

The Charlottesville City Council recently voted to remove a monument of Confederate General Robert E. Lee, but the KKK claims it is part of a sweeping effort to erase white history. The protest was held a block away from Emancipation Park, formerly Lee Park, which was recently renamed. But the statue of Lee riding a horse has yet to be removed.

LIVE from #CharlottesvilleKKK rally—#KKK still protesting. HUNDREDS of Counter protestors –very loud @ACLU #Charlottesville pic.twitter.com/QuShCGeehW

— Bo Erickson (@BoKnowsNews) July 8, 2017

City Councilwoman Kristin Szakos wrote in an editorial that the council’s decision was made to join a “growing group of cities around the nation that have decided that they no longer want to give pride of place to tributes to the Confederate Lost Cause erected in the early part of the 20th century.”

A court order has delayed the removal of the statue until a hearing next month that may just be a precursor to an elongated legal battle, according to NPR.

Not only is the town home to the University of Virginia, but it was also the home of American founding father Thomas Jefferson, and is near his Monticello estate.

Sunday’s protests featured about 30 Klansmen, many of whom arrived armed with handguns, and approximately 1,000 counter protesters, according to the Washington Post. The KKK was escorted by police clad in riot gear as they entered and exited.

The fact that the police force, comprised of local, county, state, and university police, protected the Klansmen, left a bad taste in plenty of people’s mouths after seeing police disproportionately use violence to subdue African-American protests.

The KKK is a hate group. Police are keeping them safe. When Black folks protest for our right to life, police harass and harm us. https://t.co/eVv9Vf4e7m

— Negrita (@HustleAndFro_) July 8, 2017

Charlottesville Mayor Mike Signer previously urged the town’s residents not to “take the bait — to deny the KKK the confrontation and celebrity they desire,” but thousands still felt compelled to voice their disgust with the group’s resurgence.

While the Klansmen attempted to speak publicly to the crowd at multiple points, they were inaudible and drowned out by the noise made by the counter-protesters. Jalane Schmidt, a professor at the university and a vocal supporter of the removal for Lee’s statue, was among the group gathered at the park. She told the Washington Post:

It is important for me to be here because the Klan was ignored in the 1920s, and they metastasized. They need to know that their ideology is not acceptable…I teach about slavery and African American history, and it’s important to face the Klan and to face the demons of our collective history and our original sin of slavery. We do it on behalf of our ancestors who were terrorized by them.

By the end of the day 22 people had been arrested while three others were hospitalized. Two of the medical issues were due to the heat while the other was alcohol-related, according to the Washington Post.

The Klansmen were members of the Loyal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, based in Pelham, North Carolina, about 140 miles across the Virginia border. The group was compelled to fight, in their view, the eradication of white history. While most protesting the statue’s removal were part of the KKK, others, like Brandi Fisher, drove hours from neighboring states to join and voice their concerns.

“I don’t agree with everything the Klan believes, but I do believe our history should not be taken away,” said the West Virginia native. “Are we going to remove the Washington and Jefferson memorials because they were slave owners?”

The KKK also staged a protest last month alongside white nationalist leader Richard Spencer in which the group ominously marched with torches to protest the council’s decision. That earlier protest also drew condemnation from citizens and even Virginia Congressman Tom Perriello.

Get your white supremacist hate out of my hometown. https://t.co/KfkxHImvze

— Tom Perriello (@tomperriello) May 13, 2017

Once the protests ended on Sunday afternoon, police escorted the Klansmen out and asked the counter protesters to disperse. After the police decided the remaining crowd was “an unlawful assembly,” the police force donned masks and released gas canisters to disperse the crowd, according to the Washington Post.

Last month the Anti-Defamation League released a comprehensive report on the current presence of the KKK in the United States. According to the research, there are about 3,000 people who strongly identify with Klan ideology and there are 42 active groups across 33 states. The report also states that many of the chapters have joined forces with each other or with neo-Nazi groups in order to show strength and unity. As a result, groups have beliefs ranging from “traditional” white supremacist beliefs to Christian Identity, “a longstanding racist and anti-Semitic religious sect,” according to the ADL Report.

Several white nationalist groups have obtained permits for yet another rally on August 12, so there will likely be more conflicts like these in the future. With racial tensions heightened since the 2016 election, these feuds over confederate monuments are just one example of the conflicts that continue to arise between white nationalists and more progressive communities.

Josh Schmidt

Josh Schmidt is an editorial intern and is a native of the Washington D.C Metropolitan area. He is working towards a degree in multi-platform journalism with a minor in history at nearby University of Maryland. Contact Josh at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Protesters Clash with KKK in Charlottesville Over Robert E. Lee Monument appeared first on Law Street.

South Carolina recently passed a law that requires police officers in the state to undergo training to better recognize when a mental illness, not malicious intent, is behind a person’s actions. The legislation, passed unanimously by both chambers and signed by the governor in May, applies to all 16,000 officers, including corrections officers, in South Carolina.

Training in “mental health or addictive disorders,” as the law terms the newly required subjects, is already standard practice for 59 accredited police agencies in South Carolina. But for the remaining 240 or so agencies, the course will be added to the 40 hours of re-training officers complete every three years for recertification.

Supporters of the new training requirements say officers need to be equipped to deal with people whose actions can be ascribed to illness, not ill intent.

“Someone may be acting in a strange way,” said State Law Enforcement Division Chief Mark Keel, “and officers need to understand it’s not just out of meanness but someone has an issue going on and they need help — not necessarily jail, but a hospital.”

The legislation does not define the exact number of training hours officers are required to commit to mental health, nor does it outline what the course would include. Instead, the law says the course must be approved by the Criminal Justice Academy, which is working with the National Alliance on Mental Health to hammer out the details.

In its most recent training catalogue, the academy offers a course titled, “Law Enforcement Awareness for the Mentally Ill.” According to the course description, it will “help the first responder as well as the seasoned officer better understand what someone with a mental illness is dealing with.” The course will include “group discussions with mentally ill clients.” 

According to a recent survey conducted by the Council of State Governments Justice Center, 41 of 42 states (eight states did not respond to the study) “have standards for mental health training.” State standards for mental health training, the survey found, are often instituted by a state’s officer training entity. Some states, like South Carolina, use the state legislature to pass legislation that addresses training. 

South Carolina is no stranger to the problems that can arise when officers are not properly trained to spot mental illness.

In August 2010, Andrew Torres’ family asked three officers to come to his Greenville home, and enforce a court order that would commit him to a mental hospital. Torres did not willingly comply, and the officers tasered him (the exact series of events are in dispute). Torres, who had been diagnosed as schizophrenic, went into cardiac arrest, and died at a hospital. Torres’ family sued the officers, and in 2014 were awarded $500,000 for the death of their son.

The recently-passed bill, sponsored by Senator Vincent Sheheen (D-Camden), is meant to prevent such episodes from happening again. Sheheen recently said that if officers are not properly trained, a confrontation with a mentally ill subject “escalates to criminality or violence or trouble.” He added: “It’s not fair to law enforcement to put them on the street and not equip them.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post New South Carolina Law Requires Officers to Undergo Mental Health Training appeared first on Law Street.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) released a video on Thursday imploring its followers to stock up on firearms and “fight back” against liberals. But many Americans were horrified by the inflammatory message, fearing that it could spark violence.

The lobbying group’s video claims that liberal Americans are indoctrinating children, “assassinating [the] real news,” and using Hollywood celebrities to further their narrative. Titled “The Violence of Lies,” the video claims that when police stop the demonstrators from protesting they will be accused of police brutality.

The spot, which runs a bit over a minute, is narrated by conservative talk show host Dana Loesch, a NRA spokeswoman. Her chilling commentary is paired with haunting black and white stock footage of scenes across America, including various demonstrations.

“The only way we stop this, the only way we save our country, and our freedom, is to fight this violence of lies with the clenched fist of truth,” Loesch says in the video.

The NRA video also claims there has been a surge in left-wing violence, which is false, according to Vox.

The NRA hasn’t released any statement regarding the video, instead simply retweeting Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s claims regarding his interview with Loesch. Loesch defended the ad by telling the New York Times:

I hardly think that condemning violence is inciting violence. I think the ad is very clear — there are excerpts from actual riots that are included in the ad, and that’s exactly what I’m addressing.

The video is another example of the NRA’s habit of using “apocalyptic, paranoid rhetoric” to advance the idea that people must defend their gun rights. One example cited by Vox is a 2013 op-ed by NRA vice president Wayne LaPierre claiming that if liberals succeed in passing gun control then a lawless America would follow.

Soon after the video went public a petition was organized asking Facebook to removed the video from its site.

“The video tries to create an ‘us-vs-them’ narrative and pit Americans against one another,” the petition, which has over 25,000 signatures, said. “It paints liberals as liars and as violent, unruly protesters who law-abiding gun owners need protection from.”

Liberals weren’t alone in criticizing the NRA video–many gun owners were horrified at the provocative advertisement. Multiple Facebook users commented on the post with comments claiming they were cancelling their membership or condemning the veiled encouragement of violence against liberal demonstrators.

Another comment compared the video to George Orwell’s “1984” and Ivan Pavlov’s experiments with salivating dogs, according to Huffington Post.

But still other Facebook comments were grateful for the video “describing 100 percent exactly what happened,” according to Time.

Multiple politicians denounced the NRA video on social media. Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy said he believes the NRA is telling followers to shoot people and that he recommends people cancel their membership. Virginia Lieutenant Governor Ralph Northam said he found the video “dangerous and wholly inappropriate.”

Former television personality Montel Williams also chimed in on Twitter. Williams added his own comment to a tweet from Black Lives Matter activist Deray McKesson who noted that the response would surely be different if a minority made the video.

This ad doesn’t speak for me as a proud, responsible gun owner. I find it disgusting. @Everytown @sandyhook https://t.co/1BDKXLHTym

— Montel Williams (@Montel_Williams) June 29, 2017

There was also criticism from terrorism experts. Ex-CIA intelligence analyst Cynthia Storer, now an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University, spent 20 years in the agency focusing on counterterrorism and al-Qaeda specifically, according to Newsweek. “The NRA is feeding an us vs them narrative of the kind that fuels all extremist movements,” Storer tweeted. “Extremism sparks extremism in return. It’s a vicious cycle and the world burns.”

If the NRA was seeking publicity, then the group hit a home run. But if the organization wanted to start a dialogue or help fix a fractured America, this is a failure. It isn’t the first politically hyperbolic video, and it won’t be the last, but in this case the impact could be conflict and a widening of the gap in an already polarized American public.

Josh Schmidt

Josh Schmidt is an editorial intern and is a native of the Washington D.C Metropolitan area. He is working towards a degree in multi-platform journalism with a minor in history at nearby University of Maryland. Contact Josh at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post NRA Video Sparks Reactions from Both Supporters and Opponents appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

NSA Contractor Charged with Leaking Classified Info on Russian Hacking

Yesterday, more information came to light about a top-secret NSA report regarding the Russian involvement in the presidential election last year. The document stated that Russian hackers did attack at least one company providing voting software, just days before the election. It also states that Russian military intelligence was responsible for the cyber attack.

.@theintercept blew its source’s cover by giving the NSA a copy of the leaked document, according to @nytimes https://t.co/PG73Pqe4ZX

— Josh Rogin (@joshrogin) June 6, 2017

Barely an hour after the article was published online by the Intercept, the Justice Department charged the suspected leaker with sharing classified material with a news organization. The suspect is Reality Winner, a 25-year-old federal contractor at the NSA. According to the government, there is evidence that Winner printed the documents and was in touch with the Intercept. She is the first alleged leaker arrested under President Donald Trump, who has said he wants to crack down on leaks. Now a lot of people are applauding Winner for sharing the information, and for having a pretty cool name.

Daily Recap: Woman named Reality Winner leaked info showing Russia tried to hack elections that gave us a POTUS many think is Surreal Loser.

— Ana Navarro (@ananavarro) June 6, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: June 6, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Protests in Portland, Oregon, erupted Sunday after two men were murdered in the city last week while trying to defend young girls from anti-Muslim taunts on a train.

On one side of the Portland protests was a free speech rally for supporters of President Donald Trump. It was organized by conservative group Patriot Prayer, led by Joey Gibson, a self-described “Libertarian and a Christian.” The rally of Trump supporters, located near city hall, led to two counterprotests–a rally originating from an anti-fascist group and a “Portland Stands United Against Hate” rally.

A heavily protected police force, along with Homeland Security officers, stood between the two sides. After violence broke out, police said that officers had been assaulted.

A small group of Buddhists silently joined the Portland protests, according to the Washington Post. 

Portland police face off with counter protesters as Alt-Right activists are seen in background #trump #PDXprotests @wweek pic.twitter.com/ucqnyub87m

— William Gagan (@WillyFoReal) June 4, 2017

The groups were given protest permits despite Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler’s plea to the federal government to revoke the permission.

“Our city is in mourning, our community’s anger is real, and the timing and subject of these events can only exacerbate an already difficult situation,” Wheeler posted on Facebook.

During an interview with HLN Network, Wheeler clarified that he supports free speech no matter the topic, but believed that the timing was a threat to public safety.

While the Trump supporters argued that their rally was simply to promote the First Amendment, the other side viewed it as an endorsement of the aforementioned train stabbing.

Jeremy Christian, the suspect in the murder case, brought free speech to the forefront of his trial as he entered the courtroom on May 30.

“Get out if you don’t like free speech!” he shouted.“You call it terrorism; I call it patriotism. Die.”

Christian had been seen at previous alt-right rallies in Portland, performing Nazi salutes and screaming racial slurs, according to the Washington Post.

Despite a large police presence separating the protesters, violence erupted throughout the day. The Portland Police Department made 14 arrests at a “variety of locations” and confiscated various weapons, including bricks, hammers, and hunting knives.

Another collection of weapons seized today. pic.twitter.com/tdMmMSM2Wp

— Portland Police (@PortlandPolice) June 5, 2017

The 14 suspects, whose ages ranged from 19-to 64-years-old, were all caucasian. Three got off with citations. The charges include disorderly conduct, carrying a concealed weapon, and interfering with a peace officer. The remaining 11 suspects will be arraigned in court this Friday at Multnomah County Court, according to CNN.

Police say that the situation began with each side hurling insults and names before things escalated. At some point in the day demonstrators began throwing bottles, bricks, and balloons filled with “foul-smelling liquid,” according to USA Today.

Gibson, who claims he disapproves of Christian’s actions both on the train and at previous protests, spoke against violence at the rally.

“I want everybody here . . . to find it in yourself to make this day positive, with no hate and no violence,” he told the crowd. “We have to understand Portland is legitimately shaken up right now.”

Josh Schmidt

Josh Schmidt is an editorial intern and is a native of the Washington D.C Metropolitan area. He is working towards a degree in multi-platform journalism with a minor in history at nearby University of Maryland. Contact Josh at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Portland Protests Result in 14 Arrests, Confiscated Weapons appeared first on Law Street.

After becoming the first police force to develop its own crime tracking system back in the 1990’s, the New York Police Department has decided to pioneer a new way to measure public safety: asking New Yorkers how they think the police are doing in real-time. While seeking feedback from the public is hardly a new idea, the new system developed by the NYPD employs new technology to get up-to-the-minute insights.

The NYPD’s new sentiment meter works much the same way that traditional polling does, except it will provide live data at a hyper-local level. With the same technology used by online advertisers, the NYPD will ask people to rate their trust, sense of safety, and approval of the local police. Working with a consulting company, the department will identify individuals by their location and ask them a short series of questions with online surveys targeted like commercial ads. The way it’s administered will allow the NYPD to constantly bring in new information about its performance in each neighborhood.

Since the implementation of CompStat–the department’s management and crime tracking system–in 1994, the NYPD has relied on crime statistics as one of its primary measures of success, contributing to a dramatic reduction in crime over several decades. Here’s a look at how the city’s violent crime rate per 100,000 residents has changed since the mid-1980’s and how that compares to cities with populations over 250,000 and the U.S. as a whole:

To see more of New York’s crime data or to see how other large cities compare, check out Law Street’s interactive dashboard.

While the NYPD has undoubtedly played a role in lowering the city’s violent crime rate, the department’s relationship with the community has frequently been strained. In many minority communities across the country, trust in the police has plummeted following high-profile deaths at the hands of law enforcement. And in New York, the death of Eric Gardner–who died from being placed in a chokehold by a police officer after he was confronted for selling cigarettes on the street–sparked protests across the city after a video of the incident went viral.

With the new system, which Police Commissioner James O’Neill has started calling the “sentiment meter,” the NYPD seeks to understand how people view the local police force and how those perceptions vary throughout the city’s 77 precincts. New technology will allow the department to monitor how New York residents rate its performance by surveying a larger sample, with more frequency than ever before. Much like how the CompStat system allowed the NYPD to identify hot spots–areas where crime was particularly prevalent–data from the sentiment meter will allow local commanders find neighborhoods with low trust in the police. This will allow them to create and evaluate new strategies to both reduce crime and improve public relations.

John Linder, who worked as a consultant to help the NYPD develop the system, outlined the department’s goals in an interview with the Marshall Project in January:

If we can find a way to give the commanders of the NYPD real time data on what people feel, then police brass can tailor strategies and tactics in response. It can give them more than just crime statistics, police activity (arrests, summonses, stop-question-frisks, case closures by detectives) to guide what they do and don’t do. That’s what O’Neill has told us to deliver.

While the department is hopeful that the new data will help resolve longstanding issues with the community, some still question whether the new data will be as useful as the NYPD suggests. Johnetta Elzie, founder of Campaign Zero–an advocacy group devoted to ending police violence–asked, “Who feels safe to even reply back? And who, in the marginalized community, is going to trust the police and send an honest answer back?” in an interview with the New York Times.

As crime rates in cities across the country have fallen over the past several decades, the key to reducing crime even further may be improving police-public relations. While it may take some time before the new system yields results for the NYPD, placing this level of emphasis on how the actions of police officers affect the many communities they serve is certainly a step in the right direction.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The NYPD’s New Plan to Measure Community Safety: Will it Work? appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Trump is Getting Rid of Michelle Obama’s “Let Girls Learn”

Michelle Obama’s signature initiative for girls’ education, “Let Girls Learn,” will exist no longer. The program started in 2015 and focuses on education for girls in developing countries. White House officials have leaked that the program’s operations will end right away. Some aspects of the program will continue, but the name will no longer be used and it will cease to be a standalone program.

Tina Chen, Michelle Obama’s chief of staff, said that it was a disappointment considering the global recognition the initiative had. It also had bipartisan support and several years of funding already in place. Also yesterday, the new agriculture secretary, Sonny Perdue, announced changes to another one of Michelle’s initiatives–healthy school lunches. Perdue claimed that kids don’t like the healthier food with less sodium. “If kids aren’t eating the food, and it’s ending up in the trash, they aren’t getting any nutrition, thus undermining the intent of the program,” he said.

How is this moving the country forward and “Making America Great Again”? #trump100days https://t.co/0ijsKBj1LZ

— Delal Pektas (@delalpektas) May 1, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 2, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Seriously, Sean Spicer?

Sean Spicer has done it again. At the daily press briefing yesterday, while criticizing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for using chemical weapons on his own people, he referenced World War II. “You know, you had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn’t even sink to using chemical weapons,” he said, implying that Assad is worse than Hitler while somehow forgetting that Hitler killed millions of Jews via gas chambers.

I hope @PressSec takes time to visit @HolocaustMuseum. It’s a few blocks away. https://t.co/24fNoMUyS8

— Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) April 11, 2017

When trying to clarify his comments, Spicer continued to flub, saying, “He was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing.” But between 160,000 and 180,000 Jews that the Nazis killed were from Germany, according to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. The comparison drew immediate backlash on social media and elsewhere, and Spicer later apologized on CNN.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: April 12, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

New “Extreme Vetting” Could Force Tourists to Hand Over Cellphones and Passwords

According to Trump Administration officials, the government is considering adding “extreme vetting” to the security check process at airports. Tourists and visitors could be forced to reveal their phone passwords to allow border agents to look through their contacts, social media profiles, and whatever other information they keep on their phones. Visitors could also face inquiries about their “ideology,” including questions about honor killings and the “sanctity of human life.” They could even be forced to hand over financial records. Officials said that the rules could also apply to the countries currently enrolled in the Visa Waiver Program, which allows citizens from 38 countries to travel to the U.S. without applying for a formal visa.

If the goal is to deter/eliminate foreign travel to the US, this would definitely do it: https://t.co/n8QG7jlCj3

— brianweeden (@brianweeden) April 4, 2017

A lot of people were pretty upset by this news and called the move intrusive and crazy. Dozens of human right groups came together and issued a joint statement saying that the new rules would enable unjustified scrutiny and invasion of privacy. It would also deter travelers from coming to the U.S., which could harm the American tourism industry.

If as reported, “extreme vetting” would be extremely destructive to our long term competiveness and global standing. https://t.co/gPSQ24xyY4

— David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) April 4, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: April 5, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Protests After Off-Duty Cop Fires Gun During Altercation with Teens

On Tuesday, an off-duty LAPD officer seems to have lost it in an altercation with some kids who walked on his lawn in Anaheim, California. A video that went viral on social media yesterday shows a group of young teenagers outside a house and the cop pulling the limbs of a 13-year-old boy. When the boy’s friends start pulling him in the other direction, the cop fired his gun. No one was injured, but photos surfaced of the boy with bruises on his neck.

JUST IN: Hundreds protest in Anaheim after an off-duty LAPD cop grabbed a teenager and fired his weapon during a scuffle on his lawn. pic.twitter.com/ry6W56fkh1

— Fusion (@Fusion) February 23, 2017

The boy, Christian Dorscht, allegedly stood up for a 13-year-old girl after the officer started shouting profanities at her for walking on the lawn. According to Dorscht’s father, the boy said he was going to “sue” the cop, which the cop allegedly misheard as “shoot,” and decided to arrest him. The incident ended with Dorscht being charged with criminal threats and battery while the cop walked free. Hundreds took to the streets of Anaheim to protest and the ACLU of Southern California said it is deeply disturbed by the video and demanded a full explanation. The LAPD will conduct an internal investigation of the unnamed officer.

Keep in mind this all started cuz an off-duty cop was ready to shoot children over walking in his yard. https://t.co/Efm3d4bssc

— X (@XLNB) February 23, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: February 23, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Earlier in February, a French police officer was charged with raping a 22-year-old man with no criminal record during a violent arrest at the Aulnay-sous-Bois housing estate, located in the Parisian suburbs. Three other officers were charged with assault during the same arrest and all four officers, who denied the charges, have been suspended. However, the suspension has not satisfied the desire for justice in the banlieues, the suburbs of Paris that are often compared to the ghettos of American cities, areas of primarily low income housing that the far-right National Front have condemned as hotbeds of crime. The rape of the young man arrested in Aulnay-sous-Bois month has sparked mass protests across multiple suburbs.

Protesters clashed with police, and French academics are concerned that these protests may just be the precursor to riots on a greater scale, especially with the presidential elections just two months away. The victim, identified only as Theo, has asked the public to obey the law and not turn to violence, in a statement reminiscent of Rodney King’s “can’t we all get along” comments in 1992.

Conflict between the police and residents of the banlieues is always colored by the legacy of the 2005 riots, which began with the death of two teenagers who were electrocuted while hiding from the police in a power station. Young people took to the streets across multiple cities, burning buildings and cars, fighting police officers and even in ransacking the police station of Aulnay-sous-Bois. An estimated 3,000 people were arrested and a state of emergency was declared for several weeks. Thousands of extra police officers were called to duty and the images of burning neighborhoods were broadcast worldwide, painting the banlieues as almost apocalyptic.

The suburbs contain a diverse mix of incomes and ethnicities but in the past several decades they have become symbols of violence, unrest, and inequality. The Muslim and immigrant populations of the suburbs have frequently been vilified by politicians from across the country, who associate them with both acts of terrorism and petty crime. The revelation that Samy Amimour, one of the shooters in the November 2015 Paris attacks, came from the banlieues, added fuel to the fire.

This culture of fear combined with soaring unemployment rates has increased the isolation of the suburban population. Although the 2005 riots may have made the world sit up and take notice of the banlieues, they did not garner the community respect or sympathy from politicians or the greater French public. The riots only served to increase fear of the suburban population, to the point that any protest, even a justified one, is automatically considered to be a potential riot. The potential for a riot is by no means nonexistent but the fear of the banlieues has reached the point where even peaceful protest is feared. In an era where the far right is steaming ahead as a seemingly unstoppable force, the voices of the banlieues are getting pushed out of the traditional political sphere. When excluded from normal channels, populations have always relied on civil disobedience–but no one seems willing to frame the protests in the banlieues as such because of the pervasive legacy of 2005.

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Will Riots Engulf the Parisian Suburbs Once Again? appeared first on Law Street.

The robbery of Kim Kardashian in Paris in October is one step closer to being resolved after police arrested 17 suspects in the beginning of the week following a close review of security footage. On Thursday, four of them were charged. Investigators believe the robbery to be an inside job. Most of the suspects, three of whom are women, are professional criminals who have previously committed armed robbery or drug and counterfeit trafficking. A 40-year-old limousine driver from a company the Kardashians frequently use when visiting Paris was arrested, but he was subsequently released. However, his younger brother remains in custody, and police believe he is the one who told the experienced robbers about Kardashian’s whereabouts.

One of the four people charged on Thursday was a 63-year-old man referred to by the name “Yunice A.,” who was charged with armed robbery in an organized gang, kidnapping, and criminal association. He will stay in custody for the time being. Available information about the other suspects include that one 62-year-old and one 27-year-old are facing the same charges as Yunice A. A 44-year-old is charged with concealment/fencing by an organized gang and association with criminals. Six more suspects are still being questioned.

Reportedly, police were able to identify some DNA from the tape used to tie Kardashian, and also from a piece of jewelry that one of the thieves dropped in the street as they fled on rented bicycles. The DNA combined with the surveillance footage led to the arrest of the thieves.

Charges have been filed against 4 suspects involved in the Kim Kardashian Paris robbery. https://t.co/JxKuN9QUou pic.twitter.com/a228pTmPiR

— Complex (@Complex) January 13, 2017

According to the Daily Mail, French authorities won’t let an eyewitness who could testify against the robbers into France. An Algerian concierge at the place where Kardashian was staying, known as Abdulrahman, saw the robbers’ faces. After the robbery, he left France to go home and recover from the stress of being held at gunpoint. Now, the French government won’t issue a visa to let him back in and testify, even though he previously was a legal resident in France. His lawyer Henri de Beauregard said:

I don’t know if this is incompetence or just a bad decision. He is the best witness, he saw the criminals much longer than Miss Kardashian. I hope the police have a lot of solid proof and evidence, because if they don’t, it will be seen as a crazy decision.

The robbery happened when Kardashian was in Paris to attend Fashion Week in the beginning of October. Five men disguised as police officers entered the mansion she was staying in, had the concierge take them to Kardashian’s room and stole jewelry worth $10 million after holding her at gunpoint and tying her up in the bathroom. Among the stolen items was her 20-carat engagement ring, worth $4 million.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Four Charged in Kim Kardashian Paris Robbery Case appeared first on Law Street.

Like most Americans, a majority of police officers think that marijuana laws should be relaxed, according to a new survey published Wednesday.

A Pew Research Center survey of nearly 8,000 policemen and women shows that 68 percent of cops favored relaxing marijuana laws in some form, with 32 percent saying that it should be legalized for both recreational and medical use. Only 30 percent said that weed should not be legal at all.

Participating law enforcement were less enthusiastic about marijuana legalization than the general public–84 percent said that marijuana laws should be relaxed. Only 15 percent of the public think that weed should remain illegal.

“Survey: Two-thirds of cops say marijuana laws should be relaxed” – @wonkblog on our survey https://t.co/BPdIwMSPMz pic.twitter.com/yfCAh4C9M2

— Pew Research Center (@pewresearch) January 12, 2017

This data comes after eight states voted to legalize recreational marijuana in 2016. However, marijuana is still listed as a Schedule I drug under federal law–the same classification used for hard drugs like heroin, crack cocaine, LSD, and MDMA. Marijuana has not been linked to any overdose deaths, and its properties have been found to help alleviate the symptoms of terminal illnesses and diseases such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, Alzheimer’s, and epilepsy.

Under the Trump administration, the future of marijuana policy is unclear. The momentum propelling legalization efforts could suddenly halt if Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Trump’s pick for Attorney General, chooses to enforce federal marijuana laws.

During his confirmation hearing on Tuesday, Sessions said he wouldn’t commit to never enforcing federal law for medical marijuana use. He was asked if he would use federal resources to investigate and prosecute sick people who are using marijuana in accordance with their state laws.

“Using good judgment about how to handle these cases will be a responsibility of mine. I know it won’t be an easy decision, but I will try to do my duty in a fair and just way,” said Sessions.

Even though marijuana’s immediate future remains unclear, the clear consensus emerging from the American public, and now cops, favors the relaxation of marijuana laws.

These findings come from an online poll of a nationally representative sample of 7,917 officers working in 54 police and sheriff’s departments administered between May 19-August 14, 2016.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Two-Thirds of Cops Support Legalizing Marijuana in Some Form appeared first on Law Street.

At a pool party in 2015, white police officer David Eric Casebolt slammed black teenager Dajerria Becton to the ground and pinned her down with his knee. Now she has sued him, as well as the city and police department, for the psychological damage the incident caused her, citing excessive force and seeking $5 million in damages. Becton was only 15 at the time and was an invited guest to the party, which took place in a predominantly white neighborhood in McKinney, Texas. Another black teenager, Tatiana Rhodes, and her mother were organizing a cookout at a community pool as an end of the school year get-together for classmates. They live in the area.

A cellphone video that went viral shows Becton starting to walk away from the situation after police officers show up, but Casebolt runs over to her and pins her to the ground with a knee in her back. He also pulls her hair and shoves her face down in the ground while she pleads to see her mother. When some boys come up and tell the officer to let her go, he draws his gun at the unarmed teenagers. Many who saw the video thought it was clear that Casebolt overreacted, and he resigned from his position within a few days.

Rhodes, the girl who organized the party, said that it all started when a couple of white women at the pool started aiming racial slurs at the teenagers, calling them names, and saying that they should go back to their Section 8 homes. One woman even reportedly slapped Rhodes in the face. In a Youtube video interview with Rhodes, her mother criticized the grown women for harassing children rather than talking to the parents. At some point during the party, someone called the police and claimed that a group of teenagers from out of town had showed up and started a fight. But the Rhodes family said that only classmates who were invited attended the party.

Becton’s lawyer Kim T. Cole said Thursday that the incident affected Becton psychologically and that she is struggling in school. She said, “I would hope that at a certain point she gets some counseling and kind of regains her life and confidence. Emotionally, she is a wreck.” Cole said that the physical injuries–abrasions, head and neck injuries—have healed, but that the emotional scars will remain. Becton has since received repeated threats, been the victim of cyberbullying, and become a target at her school. Cole also said that Becton is afraid to call the police if anything happens to her, as she doesn’t trust law enforcement officers now.

#Texan teenager unlawfully tackled by #police, sues the city for $5 million: https://t.co/QmlzwopSUB pic.twitter.com/7DrY2wI5cB

— The Voice Newspaper (@TheVoiceNews) January 5, 2017

The lawsuit cites excessive force, assault, and unlawful detention. But a spokeswoman from the city of McKinney denied all the allegations and wrote in a statement that the McKinney Police Department will defend itself vigorously. Casebolt’s lawyer, Jane Bishkin, said that he “let his emotions get the best of him.” He was allegedly stressed after responding to two suicide calls right before arriving at the pool party, one where a man had shot himself in front of his family and one where Casebolt managed to talk a teenage girl out of jumping from a roof. After resigning, he and his family received death threats and had to move to an undisclosed location.

Casebolt was also sued back in 2008 for allegedly abusing a black driver, Albert Earl Brown Jr., who claimed that the officer had yanked his pants down to his ankles during a roadside search. Brown said he was being racially profiled, and that Casebolt told a white woman who was in his car that she had made a mistake by hanging out with him. The case was dismissed as Brown had marijuana in his car and was jailed. But the fact that Casebolt has been at the center of two separate racial incidents has many believing this runs more deeply than misunderstandings or stress.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Teenage Girl Sues Police Officer Who Pushed Her Down at Pool Party appeared first on Law Street.

Happy Friday everyone! Last night, Trevor Noah came up with a pretty good summary of the year, saying: “2016 started with Zika and then turned bad.” But satire is the best medicine, so watching Noah’s clip could help. Hope you have a great weekend and see you on Monday! Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Is This America? NC Republicans Attempt a Legislative Coup

You might have thought that American politics couldn’t get any messier right now. But in North Carolina, the GOP has basically staged a coup. When it became clear on November 9 that Pat McCrory was losing the governor’s seat, he claimed the results were too close to call, with Democrat Roy Cooper only 4,300 votes ahead. He then demanded a statewide recount and claimed that there was voter fraud, before admitting defeat on December 5. But now the GOP is trying to undermine the results by introducing two bills, HB 17 and SB 4, which would essentially strip Cooper of a lot of power.

North Carolina Republicans Make Brazen Bid for Permanent Power After Losing Governor’s Race https://t.co/VFFwNLaSpx pic.twitter.com/iNXPiSmRVQ

— Patrick (@cahulaan) December 15, 2016

The bills would prevent the new governor from making some cabinet appointments, restrict how many Democratic lawmakers could be hired, and basically ensure Republican rule continued. And last night, the NC House passed HB 17, so it’s now up to the NC Senate to decide what to do.

Denying the results of a democratic election is alarming. As Slate writes, “What’s happening in North Carolina is not politics as usual. It is an extraordinarily disturbing legislative coup, a flagrant effort to maintain one-party rule by rejecting democratic norms and revoking the will of the voters.”

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: December 16, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

A tiny town in Indiana is officially without a police force, after the town marshal and four other officers resigned on Monday. “The Town is currently without the Police Department,” read a reassuring sign posted outside of the Bunker Hill police department. “In the case of an emergency please call 911.” The marshal, Michael Thomison, blamed the Bunker Hill Town Council for the big exodus.

“[The council] would not communicate with us or the officers and they kept scaling back,” Thomison told a local TV station. He said that some members of the council asked the officers to do “illegal, unethical, and immoral things,” such as running background checks on other town councilors. They were threatened when they declined the councilors’ requests, Thomison said.

So who will protect Bunker Hill, a town with an estimated 2015 population of 858, in the meantime? The sheriff of Miami County, which includes Bunker Hill, said county deputies will patrol the town and respond to calls until a new marshal is hired. The town’s website has a job listing for a part-time marshal.

Bunker Hill issues statement after entire police force resigns https://t.co/QMeFTJmNOp via @cbs4indy

— Ms Marvel (@jeana_guzman) December 15, 2016

Thomison also claims that he and the other officers were forced to share one set of body armor. “I did not want to send someone out there with bad body armor so I would take mine off and provide it to the other officers,” he said. In a statement, the Bunker Hill Town Council denied all of Thomison’s allegations, and blamed disagreements over a “lack of funding available to the town to invest in the police department.”

Thomison also had a more personal beef with the council. He was diagnosed with cancer last year, and in May, he told the council he was ready to get back to work full time. The council however, would only take him in a part-time role. “They came at me and said it is costing the town way too much money because of my insurance and they said we are taking you down to part time,” he said.

The Bunker Hill Town Council, in its statement, said the “resignation of the entire police force has come as a shock,” and it was never the goal “to dismantle or otherwise endanger the town police department or officers.” The council thanked the officers for their service, and “asks for patience from the town residents in this process.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bunker Hill, Indiana Had its Entire Police Department Quit in One Day appeared first on Law Street.

During the campaign, President-elect Donald Trump gave a speech in the wake of two bombings in New York and New Jersey. In response, Trump said that the police force should have the ability to profile suspects in order to be able to target individuals and subsequently catch criminals faster. While people quickly debated what exactly Trump was calling for, whether it was racial profiling versus criminal profiling, his comments immediately stirred debate over the questionable practice.

Read on to find out more about the history of racial profiling, how it is still used, its effectiveness, and the impact it has on individual freedom.

History of Racial Profiling

According to the ACLU, racial profiling is “the discriminatory practice by law enforcement officials of targeting individuals for suspicion of crime based on the individual’s race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin.” Racial profiling is closely associated with and only narrowly differentiated from criminal profiling which “is the reliance on a group of characteristics they believe to be associated with crime.”

In criminal profiling, the cumulative characteristics of people who have committed a crime are used to identify those who may be likely to commit the same crime. However, racial profiling assumes any member of a racial or ethnic group of people may commit a crime because of who they are.

In addition, part of racial profiling is willfully overlooking members of the majority when they commit crimes. The ACLU cites the following example:

An African American man in Maryland, who after moving into a white community, was attacked and subjected to property damage. Local police failed to respond to his repeated complaints until they arrested him for shooting his gun into the air, trying to disperse a hostile mob outside his home.

The accompanying video looks at the practice of racial profiling and what it means:

Racial profiling in the United States traces its roots all the way back to colonial times. One of the earliest examples was a registry in which free blacks were required to enlist. The registry kept track of a number of physical characteristics as well as how that person came to be free. The idea behind it was to limit the movement of free black people around the South. If they were unable to prove their status they could even be forced into slavery. This kind of targeting particularly reemerged during the Jim Crow era and continued on throughout the Civil Rights Movement and into the present. Often when it comes to racial profiling, the discriminatory practices are not written down in a record but implied.

The closely associated criminal profiling also has a long history, dating back to the 1880s in England when experts tried to track down the elusive Jack the Ripper. Profiling in the United States began gaining momentum in the late 1950s with profiles contributing to the arrest of suspects in high-profile crimes. In 1974 the FBI launched its Behavioral Science Unit utilizing profiling techniques to locate serial rapists and murders. Over the years psychology has taken a major role in these profiles as certain, common traits are identified in many of the cases and used to pinpoint other offenders. While this approach is used more to identify specific individuals guilty of specific crimes, it also creates a template for future investigations to use as well, which is similar to how the ACLU describes criminal profiling. Nevertheless, these same profiles cannot be overly broad generalizations, or they risk being another form of racial profiling.

The Use of Profiling

In his speech, one of the points Donald Trump alluded to was Israel’s use of racial profiling and the success it has had with it. While many other Western nations have shunned the practice, Israel has readily adopted it as a means of protection. This is especially true in airports where people with Jewish last names or links to Israel are able to quickly move through security while those from other regions, particularly from predominantly Muslim regions, are often held up for hours for intense inspections.

While the United States does not have similar programs, for the most part, there is one glaring exception that generated a lot of high profile coverage just a few years ago. That is the infamous stop-and-frisk program that was a major component of the New York Police Department’s effort to fight crime. While the city claimed this program was an effective way to reduce crime, a federal judge disagreed, claiming instead that it provided cover for officers to target non-white citizens in unnecessary and illegal ways.

While police officers are well within their right to stop someone they suspect of committing a crime or are likely to commit a crime, they must be able to demonstrate some cause. However, in the case of stop-and-frisk, people of color were being stopped at a disproportionately high rate, which led a federal judge to deem the policy unconstitutional. In fact, 83 percent of the stops conducted by the NYPD between 2004 and 2012 were of black or Hispanic people, while those groups made up slightly more than half of the city’s population. The following video gives the details behind the stop-and-frisk ruling in New York:

Although stop-and-frisk was really the only major program that led to clear racial profiling in an attempt to fight crime, as mentioned earlier, racial profiling is often done without a directive or anything on the books. The ACLU, for example, has a long list of what it claims are incidents of racial profiling against a variety of minority groups. Over the last couple of years, there have been a number of high-profile incidents involving white police officers and non-white victims, which certainly seem to indicate racial profiling does still occur even without an explicit policy.

When it comes to criminal profiling, the practice has gotten a lot of attention in popular culture but its effectiveness has also been called into question. Part of the problem is that criminal profiling is not much more reliable than racial profiling. According to a small study done in Britain, only 2.7 percent of 184 cases showed that the practice helped lead to an arrest. The main issue was there were so many different characteristics that it was hard to create a single profile that would be used to capture criminals. This sentiment was echoed by a Secret Service report on school shooters that suggested that potential shooters would have to be identified on an individual basis because they were all so different. The most common results, unfortunately, were confirmation bias at best, and at worst simply another form of prejudicial profiling.

Evaluating the Use of Profiling

Since racial profiling only targets a select group of people it is unsurprisingly not very effective. For the clearest evidence, one need only to look at New York’s stop-and-frisk program once more. Of all the people stopped, nearly 90 percent were released with no further action and were free to go. In other words, only 6 percent of stops ended with an arrest and another 6 percent resulted in court summonses. In fact, the data indicates that stop-and-frisk likely had little relation to the number of murders and other violent crimes in New York.

Other instances, such as the ones listed by the ACLU, also show how racial profiling is typically not effective. In fact, these instances of racial profiling only seem to make matters of crime worse as they encourage disaffected people to lash out in anger.

Impact

Not only is racial profiling ineffective it can also be harmful in the long run. The reason for this is because people who are unfairly targeted by police tend to feel a reduced trust in the police force as an effective means of fighting crime. When people do not trust the police, then the police are less able to do their jobs because they lack both authority and the necessary assistance from communities to help them with their work.

This feeling of being excessively targeted also seems to be supported by the numbers. The clearest example, and by now one that is well-worn, is the existence of clear racial discrepancies in prisons. Black male children born in 2001 are approximately 5.5 times more likely than white children to be incarcerated at some point in their life.

From a dollars and cents perspective, racial profiling is also costly. Retraining officers following a racial profiling incident or paying a settlement for racial profiling can cost a city or police department millions, if not tens of millions of dollars. There are countless examples of this, one of the most egregious is in Arizona–where the actions of notoriously prejudiced Sheriff Joe Arpaio just cost his county $22 million in settlements with Latino community members.

Conclusion

Like other controversial techniques for preventing crime, racial profiling does have its defenders. They argue that it has been successful in reducing crime and point to examples like stop-and-frisk in New York and to other countries that embrace the measure such as Israel. It even has a closely related cousin, criminal profiling, which relies on somewhat related methods to help in the hunt for criminals.

However, like many of those very same controversial techniques, the numbers suggest racial profiling actually does not really reduce crime at all. In fact, it may actually increase crime by lowering trust in police and diminishing officers’ effectiveness in minority communities. It also seems to fill prisons in the United States disproportionately by race while also costing police department millions in settlements and training.

Racial profiling then seems to be a practice that is more harmful than good. However, the reality of that may not outweigh some people’s perception that it is effective. In either case, the practice is unlikely to be done away with entirely, in the meantime it is likely to make the tenuous relationship between the police and many communities even worse.

Resources

CNN: Donald Trump Defends Racial Profiling in Wake of Bombings

ACLU: Racial Profiling: Definition

History News Network: The Roots of Racial Profiling

Haaretz: in Israel, Racial Profiling Doesn’t Warrant Debate or Apologies

The New York Times: Racial Discrimination in Stop-and-Frisk

American Psychological Association: Criminal Profiling: The Reality Behind the Myth

Center for Science and Law: Criminal Profiling, Present, and Future

National Institute of Justice: Race, Trust, and Police Legitimacy

Economic Policy Institute: Where Do We Go from Here? Mass Incarceration and the Struggle for Civil Rights

CNN: Racial profiling Costs Arizona County $22 million

Brennan Center for Justice: Ending New York’s Stop-and-Frisk Did Not Increase Crime

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Judging a Book by its Cover: The History of Racial Profiling in the United States appeared first on Law Street.

The LAPD will not assist President-elect Donald Trump in any way if he decides to follow through with his deportation plans, said police chief Charlie Beck on Monday. Trump has pledged to deport millions of illegal immigrants, a promise that has caused anxiety for many of the undocumented, as well as fully legal, immigrants in the country. Los Angeles County is home to roughly one million out of the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. But Beck said his police force will not do anything differently just because there is a new president:

We are not going to engage in law enforcement activities solely based on somebody’s immigration status. We are not going to work in conjunction with Homeland Security on deportation efforts. That is not our job, nor will I make it our job.

LAPD will not help deport immigrants under Trump, chief says https://t.co/zVnPuPLgXX pic.twitter.com/TWhejyi0j9

— Los Angeles Times (@latimes) November 14, 2016

The LAPD has a long tradition of not complying with  federal guidelines on the issue of undocumented immigrants. Officers are not allowed to stop someone simply because of their immigration status, or to ask about it. Officers have additionally stopped handing over people arrested for small crimes to federal agents for deportation and also no longer hold inmates who might be deportable after they served their time.

California is a liberal state and is so unhappy about Trump’s election that many people there have recently been campaigning for Calexit—to make California independent from the rest of the U.S. Now that many worry about what will happen under Trump, officials in the Golden State have tried to comfort people. The LA Archbishop Jose H. Gomez held a special prayer service last Thursday, saying, “In the past couple days since the election… we have children in our schools who are scared. They think the government is going to come and deport their parents.” He said that the church will keep supporting immigrants that are here illegally.

pic.twitter.com/wAPa6ied6y
100,000 people rally against US Fascism and for #CalExit
We are an undeniable force

(yes, it is LA ~1500 Wilshire)

— #CalExit NaphiSoc (@NaphiSoc) November 15, 2016

LA Mayor Eric Garcetti called for a meeting at Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles and promised that he would stand up for his people. “If the first day, as president, we see something that is hostile to our people, hostile to our city, bad for our economy, bad for our security, we will speak up, speak out, act up and act out,” he said.

On Friday, California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill–Senate Bill 10–that would let undocumented immigrants buy health insurance through the state exchange. It passed the state senate on Monday but requires approval by the federal government. If that happens, it would make California the first state to let illegal immigrants who make too much money to qualify for low-income plans buy insurance from the state exchanges.

In times like these, it is reassuring that some people are determined to stay empathetic and show solidarity with others.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The LAPD Says it Will Not Assist Trump with Any Deportation Plans appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

The World’s Scariest GOTV Strategy?

A historically black church in Greenville, Mississippi was set on fire late Tuesday night and vandalized with the words “Vote Trump” spray-painted on the façade. Most of the damage was to the main building and no people were hurt. But the community is in shock over what reminds many of hateful attacks in the 1950’s and 60’s.

Black Church in Mississippi Burned Down, ‘Vote Trump’ Painted on It https://t.co/vTcPtZs72F pic.twitter.com/HUBpCy8PFB

— CitizenSlant (@CitizenSlant) November 2, 2016

Many fear that this is only the beginning of what could happen if Trump is elected president. But at the same time some crazy people think it was staged by Democrats to place blame on the Republicans.

Just like the 1960’s, #Democrats are burning churches to scare and intimidate Black Voters who are voting for Trump https://t.co/SSm317UFfL

— P. J. (@Portosj81J) November 2, 2016

The Trump campaign made sure to dissociate itself from that message.

Trump campaign statement on Mississippi church arson pic.twitter.com/d6PnyVuHBR

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) November 2, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: November 3, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

What is Duffgate 2016?

Misappropriation or mistake? Hilary Duff and her new boyfriend Jason Walsh wandered around town this weekend to take part in Halloween festivities. But when this picture hit the stands…it kind of sucked out all the fun.

Hillary Duff made her first public appearance with boyfriend Jason Walsh, but many questioned their costume choices. https://t.co/p2HpdDGt2Z pic.twitter.com/l0msDyRKIm

— EntertainmentTonight (@etnow) October 30, 2016

What could have been an innocent costume choice is not so innocent anymore because of these implications…

why did hillary duff and her boyfriend think it was a okay to dress up as a pilgrim and a Native American

— yesica (@yfjgtr) October 30, 2016

But are people really being too harsh?

Hillary Duff joins the ranks of T Swift and Amy Schumer in the “most tone deaf to privilege and racism” competition.

— Nat 8 Days Purser (@NatPurser) October 30, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: October 31, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Women For Trump?

After Trump’s horrible comments about sexual assault, women supporting Trump are in the limelight and it’s confusing a lot of people.

Take a look:

A lot of us are like: why, just why? Hillary becoming president is one of the best things that can happen for the majority of American women, historically speaking, and they just want to vote for Trump?

It’s their vote, I guess, but WTF.

WE ALL STAND BY TRUMP. WOMEN FOR TRUMP. HE’S OUR ONLY SAVIOR. #maga #MakeAmericaGreatAgain #Trump2016 #Trump @Cher pic.twitter.com/vOcgXMr0FB

— Ingrid Mueller1 (@_Women4Trump) October 9, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: October 14, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Bryan White

Bryan is an editorial intern at Law Street Media from Stratford, NJ. He is a sophomore at American University, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Broadcast Journalism. When he is not reading up on the news, you can find him curled up with an iced chai and a good book. Contact Bryan at BWhite@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Conclude Denver Broncos Player Aqib Talib Shot Himself in the Leg appeared first on Law Street.

Wikileaks Is Probably Publishing Your Private Data Right Now

Wikileaks is often applauded for dumping mass data files exposing the secrets of the Democratic Party and the NSA. But now its contributors may have gone too far. Wikileaks has recently been accused of disclosing identifying information on the health and other topics of private citizens. The Huffington Post wrote a scathing article condemning Wikileaks for exposing the lives of sexual assault victims and the sexual orientation of people who otherwise would like that to be kept a secret.  Woah, woah, woah. Now that’s going too far right? Could there be something wrong with a world that knows (or doesn’t know) everything?

Wikileaks has been quick to defend itself:

Reports that WikiLeaks published data on “Turkish women” are entirely false. US election sees media standards decay. https://t.co/odmpxNB0Jp

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) August 23, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: August 24, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

This morning, I opened up social media to discover news about yet another Black man dead after an officer-involved shooting. Although details are still incredibly fuzzy, according to a few different accounts, last night a man named Leek Moss was shot and killed by Harrisburg, Pennsylvania police.

This was #LeekMoss yesterday morning w/ his newborn baby.

Police shot & killed him last night. pic.twitter.com/IwsZ5gREgH

— Shaun King (@ShaunKing) August 8, 2016

Local news reports say that the shooting was at roughly 9 PM last night, August 7, and did involve a police officer, but “details surrounding the incident are unclear at this time.” Reports also discuss unrest and high emotions in the aftermath of the shooting.

As far as I could tell, there haven’t been any news articles that have disclosed Moss’s identity yet, but Twitter and Facebook have been mourning the 17-year-old father of a newborn infant, and a Facebook page that appears to be Moss’s shows expressions of condolence from his family members and friends.

Additionally, a press conference was held this morning that went over some of the details of the shooting. According to coverage of that press conference, the officer involved had been active for under two years, and there may have been a knife involved. The circumstances are still under investigation.

#AltonSterling#PhilandoCastile#KorrynGaines#PaulONeal#LeekMoss

In one month…

— ugh (@thetrapgoth) August 8, 2016

#LeekMoss is a teenager and a new father. A beloved son and brother. Killed by police last night in Harrisburg, PA. pic.twitter.com/A4PknSbcSk

— Shaun King (@ShaunKing) August 8, 2016

#Harrisburg let Dauphin County DA @edmarsico know we want independent investigation into the shooting of #LeekMoss 717-780-6767

— Walter S Thomas Jr (@revthomasjr) August 8, 2016

#LeekMoss i hope this isn’t true. Again #blacklivesmatter

— on purpose amy (@ToxicSabrinaAF) August 8, 2016

While details of what happened to Moss are still unclear, police have mentioned several times to “not believe everything on social media” and to “remain calm.” While that’s expected after a death, it’s also worth noting that most probably wouldn’t even know about shooting without social media’s ability to disseminate information quickly.

More details are to come on Moss’s death, but as more and more Black Americans lose their lives in officer-involved incidents, the need for the #BlackLivesMatter movement and the palpability of America’s mistrust of police continues to ring true.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Leek Moss: Social Media Reports Black Teen Killed by Officer in PA appeared first on Law Street.

You are peacefully lying on your back with both of your arms in the air, pleading with police not to shoot you. Instead of letting you walk away unharmed, a police officer shoots you in the leg. What would be your next plan of action? File a lawsuit against the officer?

Well, that’s the latest in the incident with Charles Kinsey, a 47-year-old behavioral therapist from North Miami, Florida,  who was shot in the leg by police while trying to help his autistic patient. In case you missed it, check out Law Street’s coverage of the incident here.

Kinsey filed a federal lawsuit against North Miami police Officer Jonathan Aledda, arguing that Aledda and other officers wrongfully arrested him and used excessive force. In the lawsuit, it also says that Aledda did not help stop the bleeding after he shot Kinsey, even after officers figured out there was no weapon at the scene. Because of the physical, emotional, and mental trauma the incident caused, Kinsey and his lawyer are demanding a jury trial and unstated monetary damages. 

After he was shot, Kinsey was handcuffed and lay bleeding in the middle of the street, according to the lawsuit. It also alleges that when North Miami officers arrived at the scene, they immediately grabbed assault rifles from their cars and approached in a “military-style formation.”

Kinsey’s attorney, Hilton Napoleon, filed the lawsuit and in it, said,“by failing to render aid, Officer Aledda allowed Mr. Kinsey to unnecessarily bleed out on the ground for a significant period of time, which further exasperated Mr. Kinsey’s recovery time for his injuries.” 

Aledda has been placed on paid administrative leave.

The autistic man Kinsey was looking after, Arnaldo Eliud Rios, 23, has been at the psychiatric ward of a Miami hospital and was traumatized by the event, said his mother, Gladys Soto. Rios and Kinsey met at the hospital last week for the first time since the shooting.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Behavioral Therapist Shot by North Miami Police Officer Files Federal Lawsuit appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Let The Sexist Commentary Begin!

Last night at the DNC, Hillary Clinton officially accepted the Democratic Party’s nomination for president. Many viewers, including myself, were in awe of such a historic moment. I’m sure the opposition seized in disbelief. We all have a lot to say about what went on last night, from Katy Perry’s performance to Hillary Clinton’s killer white pantsuit (loved it!). But for some reason, the hot topic this morning is not what Hillary said during her acceptance speech, but how she sounded.

James Naughtie, a BBC commentator on the “Today Programme,” responded to a question about whether Clinton had a “woman problem” saying:

 She does. There’s something about her which puts some people off. It’s partly the history. It’s partly the slightly shrill tone which she tends to adopt sometimes in speeches.

And during her speech on Thursday night, many on Twitter couldn’t resist telling Clinton to smile and commenting about her voice. I guess we’ve got a lot of sexist coverage to look forward to.

via GIPHY

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: July 29, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

By now you’ve seen the video of a black man lying in the street with both hands firmly in the air pleading with police, “don’t shoot me!” The man is Charles Kinsey, a 47-year-old behavioral therapist from North Miami, Florida,  and he was shot in the leg by police while trying to help his autistic patient.

Police were responding to reports that a man was suicidal and had a gun. Cellphone footage captured Kinsey lying on the ground trying to explain to police that the man sitting next to him was autistic and was holding a toy car–not a gun. But it didn’t matter that his hands were in the air, or that he was lying on his back, or that he wasn’t even the individual suspected of having a gun–he was still shot.

Watch the Video Below

“As long as I’ve got my hands up, they’re not gonna shoot me, that’s what I’m thinking,” Kinsey told reporters. “Wow, was I wrong.”

Kinsey was shot Monday, but his attorney released the video filmed by witnesses to the public Wednesday afternoon. While the video does not show Kinsey being shot, it clearly shows him on the ground complying with police. Versions of the footage have been viewed collectively over a million times already on YouTube.

Kinsey has been released from the hospital and is expected to fully recover. Before leaving the hospital he told WSVN, a CNN affiliate, that he asked the officer for an explanation after the shooting. “I’m like, ‘Sir, why did you shoot me?'” Kinsey recalled. “He said to me, ‘I don’t know.'”

It appeared to the officers that the white male was trying to do harm to Mr. Kinsey. In fearing for Mr. Kinsey’s life, the officer discharged his firearm trying to save Mr. Kinsey’s life and he missed.

The shooting comes after the recent police shootings of Alton Sterling and Phillando Castile rocked the nation. After the video went viral Thursday, Twitter quickly exploded with people condemning the shooting.

“Sir, why did you shoot me?”
“I don’t know…”
is 400 years of American history wrapped into one conversation #CharlesKinsey

— AHill (@al3x_hill) July 21, 2016

Officer says he “thought” #CharlesKinsey was in danger. Doesn’t explain why he handcuffed him after he shot him.

— Goldie Taylor (@goldietaylor) July 21, 2016

Until police officers are routinely held accountable for shooting unarmed civilians, especially of color, it won’t end. #CharlesKinsey

— Dr. Jill Stein (@DrJillStein) July 21, 2016

I’ve been thinking about this all morning.
“Sir, why did you shoot me?”
“I don’t know.”

This is insanity. #CharlesKinsey

— Johnetta Elzie (@Nettaaaaaaaa) July 21, 2016

Plot twist: Even if you surrender completely with both hands in the air lying down, you will still get shot by a cop. #CharlesKinsey

— NUFF$AID (@nuffsaidNY) July 21, 2016

So is this #CharlesKinsey silence the “he’s no angel” portion of the game? Where y’all check his 8th school reports & his driving records?

— Questlove Gomez (@questlove) July 21, 2016

Don’t swim. Don’t listen to loud music. Don’t walk home. Don’t ask for help. Don’t sell CDs. Don’t breathe. Don’t be black. #CharlesKinsey

— Black Magic Woman (@jananamirah) July 21, 2016

The unidentified officer, who is described as being a 30-year-old Hispanic, was placed on administrative leave pending an investigation. Kinsey’s attorney Hilton Napoleon II told CNN,

The reality is that he believed … that if you comply with the police and you lay on the ground with your hands up, and if you speak to them like my client was speaking to them, as Americans, we try to believe that that will not result in you getting shot.

[…]

Physically, he will recover, but mentally, he felt like he did everything he could possibly do and that wasn’t good enough.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Charles Kinsey’s Hands Were Up and He Was Still Shot By Police appeared first on Law Street.

This year, Law Street Media is attending both the RNC and DNC conventions, and bringing Law Street readers the inside scoop. We’ll be doing day-by-day rundowns and exclusive features. Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, and Snapchat for even more content.

Here’s a look at the third day of the festivities, courtesy of Law Street reporters Kevin Rizzo and Alec Siegel:

The big story of the evening, of course, was Ted Cruz’s speech…

Maybe His Nickname Should Be ‘Stubborn Ted’?

Wednesday evening’s theme was “Make American First Again.” Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, in one of the more anticipated speeches of the convention, struck that chord, but mainly just ruffled delegates’ feathers as he glazed over Donald Trump, his eyes dead set on a 2020 run. Cruz spent most of his speech expounding on freedom and American values, and the role of limited government:

America is more than just a land mass between two oceans, America is an ideal. A simple, yet powerful ideal. Freedom matters. For much of human history government power has been the unavoidable constant in life. Government decrees and the people obey, but not here. We have no king or queen, we have no dictator, we the people constrain government. Our nation is exceptional because it was built on the five most beautiful and powerful words in the English language, ‘I want to be free.’

And while he did congratulate the man who christened him ‘Lyin’ Ted’ during the bruising spring campaign season, Cruz did not explicitly endorse Trump. According to media outlets who received advanced transcripts of Cruz’s speech, Trump knew about the non-endorsement as early as Monday. The NYT reported that Trump called Cruz Monday evening in an attempt to secure his support.

Now that we’ve seen Trump’s negotiating skills with Cruz’s convention speech I can’t wait to see our new trade deals #TheArtOfTheDeal

— Kevin Rizzo (@kevinrizzo10) July 21, 2016

Delegates on the floor showered Cruz with boos and chants of “Say it!” and “Trump!” as it became clear he would not endorse the man who–after an emphatic roll call on Tuesday–will be the official Republican torchbearer come November. As Cruz spoke, the interior of Quicken Loans Arena seemingly shook with the near unanimous discontent from delegates. “I appreciate the enthusiasm of the New York delegation,” Cruz cracked. But it seemed like all 50 states and U.S. territories jeered in unison.

WATCH: Ted Cruz doubles down on not explicitly endorsing Donald Trump at #RNCinCLEhttps://t.co/HrVIVjljlkhttps://t.co/qF83Q6ASEK

— The Boston Globe (@BostonGlobe) July 21, 2016

And of course, this quote garnered quite a few boos for Cruz: 

.@tedcruz met with boos after saying “vote your conscience” instead of saying Trump’s name https://t.co/yTgdsGVcSx

— BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews) July 21, 2016

The Crowd Seemed to Enjoy the Music Selections

We Met Some Festively-Dressed Delegates

The conventions have long been known as spots for delegates to show off their patriotic fashion choices.

Here are delegates from the American Virgin Islands (left) and Hawaii (right).

Image courtesy of Alec Siegel for Law Street Media

Image courtesy of Alec Siegel for Law Street Media

Police Officers Everywhere you Turn

Police officers from all over the country have a large presence in downtown Cleveland this week. I’ve spotted officers from bordering states like West Virginia and Pennsylvania as well as from states as far as Montana and California. While it’s hard to tell if this event is different from other conventions, the number of officers is particularly striking. There are officers everywhere you look, and so far, they have taken an active approach to maintaining law and order.

Image courtesy of Alec Siegel for Law Street Media

As is the case when a city hosts any major event, outside law enforcement officers are called in to help maintain order and respond to potential disruptions. But in the wake of high-profile and highly polarizing shootings, both of and by police officers, the tone is decidedly different. I’ve seen many people stop to thank police officers and when groups of officers walk down the street or around the convention area many have even been met with applause. That message is prominent in many of this week’s speeches, with frequent references to Blue Lives matter and some offering a full-throated defense of police officers.

A Few Protests But Nothing Big Yet

Image courtesy of Kevin Rizzo via Law Street Media

There were two incidents in particular when I noticed the overwhelming number of police officers. On Tuesday afternoon, competing protests drew large crowds in Cleveland’s Public Square. Before things escalated further police officers blocked off the square’s perimeter and filled the interior. They allowed protesters to leave but didn’t let anyone pass the barrier. Over time the situation diffused and police officers outnumbered protesters in the square.

Image courtesy of Kevin Rizzo for Law Street Media

On Wednesday, news broke that protesters were planning a flag burning on East 4th Street, right outside of the entrance to Quicken Loans Arena, drawing large crowds. Officers again flooded the area and blocked more people from entering while police riding horses helped disperse the crowd. Ultimately 17 people were arrested, but the situation never escalated.

Police officers have repeatedly stood in between different competing protests this week. The problem may be that not only are people protesting, but that both sides of a protest are represented and often engaging with each other. There are a number of people protesting at each other, which is what police appear to be most concerned with.  For example, there were anti-LGBT and pro-LGBT protests looking right at each other with a line of officers right in between.

Yet, People Seem Happy?

You could tell during roll call vote yesterday. Even states that didn’t vote Trump proudly announced their delegates for him

— Kevin Rizzo (@kevinrizzo10) July 21, 2016

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What’s up at the RNC?: Law Street’s Day 3 Coverage appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

#OhioAgainstHate Trends Ahead of the Republican Convention

In response to the RNC and the seemingly imminent nomination of Donald Trump, Ohioan volunteers canvassed their neighborhoods to spread a simple message: #OhioAgainstHate. 

Former Ohio State Sen. @ninaturner explains why #OhioAgainstHate is important to Ohioans. #UnitedAgainstHatepic.twitter.com/FazhRjHBxp

— MoveOn.org (@MoveOn) July 16, 2016

The movement also comes in anticipation of violence and protests at the convention, and the hope that Ohioans and RNC visitors will remain peaceful.

Cleveland welcomes all guests to the #ClevelandRNC but please…respect our city, our people, our officers, our HOME. #OhioAgainstHate

— Kate Mervine (@gil8282) July 16, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: July 18, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

If you are currently living in or visiting Phoenix, Arizona, stay vigilant: there may be a serial killer on the loose. Local authorities announced this week that they believe that seven recent killings in the city are all connected–the work of a man who many are calling “the serial street shooter.”

The series of shootings in the Phoenix area began in mid-March when a 16-year-old boy who was shot, but not killed, while walking on the street late at night. The very next night, March 18, a 21-year-old man was also shot and wounded. The crimes escalated into killings from there, with two people shot and killed in April, then two in early June. The final three killings happened on June 12 in front of the victims’ home. The victims were all pictured in an NBC tweet this morning.

After 7 murders, apparent nighttime serial killer has Phoenix on edge. https://t.co/9rDvi8lkHX pic.twitter.com/I4hRWfM5uC

— NBC Nightly News (@NBCNightlyNews) July 14, 2016

The shootings have taken place in the Maryvale area of Phoenix, known for being a low-income neighborhood. A map was released depicting the locations of the eight shootings.

Though there is a locational connection, the police have not released any other links between victims or the shooter.

Police have only recently deemed these slayings part of a larger plan. Up until this week, there was no publicized connection between the eight shootings. This week, the police labeled the shooter a serial killer, killing these people for no apparent reason. Now, a sketch artist’s depiction of the man based off of eye witness testimony has been released to the public.

Possible serial killer behind 7 murders in Phoenix, police say. @Miguelnbc reports now #NBCNightlyNews pic.twitter.com/U07iNLOizD

— NBC Nightly News (@NBCNightlyNews) July 13, 2016

Additional information about the suspect indicates that he is most likely a light skinned Latino or white male in his 20s.

This shocking update to the recent shootings has people all over Phoenix on edge. Members of the community are scared to go out at night. The families of the victims are afraid to reveal their identities. One of the victims’ sister was quoted in an interview with a  Phoenix news station, saying:

It’s unbelievable that there is this monster that has done so much harm, that nobody is coming forward. All of these people were so good. Good people with good families. And now they are gone in the blink of an eye because of a monster.

Not just asking for the public to report any suspicious vehicle or persons. But [it] want[s] them to report any unfamiliar vehicle or person that comes into their neighborhood.

Alexandra Simone

Alex Simone is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street and a student at The George Washington University, studying Political Science. She is passionate about law and government, but also enjoys the finer things in life like watching crime dramas and enjoying a nice DC brunch. Contact Alex at ASimone@LawStreetmedia.com

The post Is There a Serial Killer on the Loose in Phoenix? appeared first on Law Street.

As high-profile police shootings continue to hold the nation’s attention, a new study on the extent of racial bias in police officers’ use of force is making some big waves. In fact, this research comes to a particularly surprising conclusion: the police are actually less likely to shoot black civilians. But there are some important details to work through before we jump to any conclusions.

The study, conducted by renowned Harvard economist Roland Fryer, did identify some significant bias in the way police officers use force. This is a bias that exists at nearly all levels–like putting hands on a civilian, pushing a person up against a wall, using handcuffs on someone without arresting them, and even using pepper spray or a baton–but when it comes to lethal force, the most severe of all, police may actually be slightly less likely to kill black civilians.

But before we jump to conclusions or even accept that conclusion on its face, it’s important to sort through a large number of methodological nuance to understand what we can take away from this research. Fair warning, if you came here looking for a clear-cut conclusion, you’ll have to read the rest of this article to get the full picture.

Some Background

First, it’s important to point out that Roland Fryer’s study involved a significant undertaking by a team of researchers. And Fryer himself certainly wasn’t expecting the final conclusion. “It is the most surprising result of my career,” Fryer told the New York Times. The research is also still a working paper, which means that it hasn’t yet been peer-reviewed and published in a formal journal. It was put out by the National Bureau of Economic Research for experts in the field to look at and discuss its findings prior to a more formal release.

The debate about police shootings is one that has notoriously had a lack of hard data to discuss. We simply don’t have good statistics on the number and characteristics of incidents when police officers used lethal force. Independent counts have started to fill this gap–of note are the Washington Post’s database of police shootings and the Guardian’s “The Counted” project–but there is little national data with the depth necessary to identify bias. With this research, Fryer and his team provide some important analysis to a discussion that has few statistics to draw from.

A look at the methods

So let’s take a closer look at the data and how it was used. To measure racial bias when it comes to all levels of force the researchers looked at statistics provided by several police departments, notably New York City’s “stop, question and frisk” program, as well as nationally representative survey data that measures interactions with the police. To look at the use of lethal force–officer-involved shootings–the researchers had to assemble their own dataset from 10 police departments in three states. The researchers managed to get a particularly interesting dataset from the Houston police department, which provided a large number of reports on interactions between police and civilians.

Of that Houston dataset, the researchers took a random sample of files with “arrests codes in which lethal force is more likely to be justified: attempted capital murder of a public safety officer, aggravated assault on a public safety officer, resisting arrest, evading arrest, and interfering in arrest.” However, this data was unique to the Houston police department. The other police departments could only give details for instances when lethal force was used, but we would need data about when officers decided not to use force in order to properly identify the effects of bias.

The conclusions and what they mean

First, it’s important to note that the researchers only look at actual interactions between officers and civilians. This means that the study does not engage with one important racial bias in policing–that officers are more likely to stop and interact with black civilians than white civilians.

That caveat aside, when it comes to the lethal use of force, here’s how Fryer summarizes his findings:

Using data from Houston, Texas–where we have both officer-involved shootings and a randomly chosen set of potential interactions with police where lethal force may have been justified–we find, in the raw data, that blacks are 23.8 percent less likely to be shot at by police relative to whites.

The researchers used the raw data referenced in the quote and then controlled for a range of factors–civilian behavior, possession of a weapon, the situational context, and much more–but still found no presence of bias in the use of lethal force by the Houston police department.

Importantly, this is only based on the Houston data, so while we may be able to conclude that officer-involved shootings in Houston are not subject to racial bias, we cannot really take that to mean that the same holds true nationally or for any other police department. Even then, this conclusion rests on the researchers’ ability to control for several important variables like behavior and context.

It is also important to note that this data came from police officer summaries of their interactions with civilians. While we cannot cast doubt on an entire police department, there have been several cases where the story provided by police officers has been refuted with video evidence.

Police officers’ bias in nonlethal force

Looking beyond lethal force, Fryer and his team found persistent racial bias at all other levels of force. Using the New York City Police Department’s data on its stop and frisk program between 2003 and 2013, the researchers found a notable relationship between race and the use of force. After controlling for as many variables as possible, the researchers note that black civilians are 17 percent more likely to be subject to the use of force than white civilians. For Hispanics, the rate was 12 percent higher than for white people.

Interestingly, this pattern largely remained consistent at a range of different levels. The lowest level of force measured–officers laying their hands on a subject–occurred much more frequently than the highest–using pepper spray or a baton. But the rate at which minority civilians incur the use of force largely remained consistent at all levels short of lethal force. As Fryer puts it, “The use of high levels of force in these data are rare. Yet, it is consistently rarer for whites relative to blacks.” What’s particularly interesting about this is that the researchers managed to find bias in data collected and provided by the NYPD itself.

The researchers also looked at a nationally representative survey to identify the extent to which racial bias exists in these interactions. Using data from the Police-Public Contact Survey conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, they found even larger differences in the use of force by race. While the researchers note that the rate at which officers used force was considerably lower in the survey data–about 15 percent of white civilians experienced the use of force in the stop and frisk data while only 1 percent reported experiencing force in the survey data–a pattern of bias remains for different racial groups. They conclude:

Differences in quantitative magnitudes aside, the PPCS paints a similar portrait–large racial differences in police use of force that cannot be explained using a large and varied set of controls.

After looking over his research, Fryer argues that police may act according to perceived costs. He suggests that there may not be racial bias in the use of lethal force because doing so is particularly costly–there is often internal reviews and the decision to shoot someone can have profound life consequences for the police officer as well as the victim. However, the same costs may not exist when using nonlethal force. Fryer argues that if we wish to reduce racial bias for lower levels of force, we should increase the costs associated with using them. Put simply, if we want to reduce this bias, police need to feel that they will be held accountable for unnecessarily using force.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post When Does Racial Bias Affect Police Officers’ Use of Force? appeared first on Law Street.

Last night, the country was shocked as yet another shooting occurred–this time injuring both police officers and civilians in Dallas, Texas. The Dallas shooting was the latest in a string of violence involving white police officers and black men. However, this time it was civilians who turned the trigger on those in uniform, leaving five of them dead. 

In the slideshow below, a collection of individuals across the nation–including anyone from politicians and celebrities to everyday people–used Twitter to express their grief, fury, and condolences over last night’s events. Read their messages and reflect on their collective outrage over how a protest of emotional and peaceful observance transformed into a crime scene full of chaos and carnage. 

Inez Nicholson also contributed to this story.

President Obama Delivers A Statement

Watch @POTUS‘s statement on last night’s attack on law enforcement in Dallas, Texas. https://t.co/lqd4OaofxM

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) July 8, 2016

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Aftermath: The Nation Reacts to the Dallas Shooting appeared first on Law Street.

Ahmed al-Menhali came to the U.S. from the United Arab Emirates for a medical procedure. What he didn’t expect was police officers approaching him, guns in the lobby of his hotel, forcing him to the ground. Now officials in Avon, Ohio, where the incident took place, have apologized.

A hotel clerk saw Menhali and thought he was a terrorist because he was wearing traditional clothing and talking on the phone in Arabic. She texted her sister and father that she was panicking, and both of them called 911. In a phone call that is posted on YouTube, the sister says the man was “pledging his allegiance or something to ISIS.”

The officers were wearing body cameras, and in one of the videos they are heard yelling aggressively to Menhali to lie down, before approaching and handcuffing him. However, when they searched Menhali and found nothing, it was brushed off as a misunderstanding. But the shock of being held at gunpoint and accused of being a terrorist caused the man to suffer a light stroke. A paramedic was at the scene to treat the hotel clerk for a “panic attack,” and made sure Menhali got to the hospital.

Xenophobia and racism have reached new levels if a tourist can’t even wear his own clothes and speak in his own language without being forced to the ground at gunpoint. The event caught the attention of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

“This near hysteria [against Muslims] has been created by political candidates. It’s irresponsible and dangerous,” said Julia Shearson, director of the Cleveland chapter of CAIR to Al-Jazeera.

The incident caused many reactions on social media.

The ignorant worker and her sister should have apologized to Ahmed Al Menhali and the desk clerk should be terminated. @MarriottIntl

— Shea (@Sheaa_) July 5, 2016

Can the world advise Americans not to wear white socks in black sandals? Asking for a friend https://t.co/DP80LXOQOG

— Lexi Alexander (@Lexialex) July 4, 2016

The United Arab Emirates demanded an apology and even warned their citizens to not wear traditional clothing if they visit the United States. The police chief and Avon Mayor Bryan K. Jensen met with Menhali to apologize on Saturday and said in a statement that there might be criminal charges against the clerk that notified 911.

Menhali told Arabic newspaper Al Arabiya that the police hurt his back and threw his phone on the ground. He also pointed out: “The policemen who humiliated and insulted me arrived at [the hotel] without explosives experts or counter-terrorism forces because they knew I’m not a terrorist.”

Menhali said that he appreciated the apology, but also wants the people who called 911 to be held responsible, and that the authorities should use this experience for cross-cultural education purposes. That is a high-minded response from someone who was treated wrongly, and is educational itself.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Ohio Police Apologize to Muslim Tourist After Mistaking Him as Terrorist appeared first on Law Street.

It happened again–a cellphone video circulating on social media shows police shooting a black man at close range, only hours after Independence Day celebrations ebbed. Early Tuesday morning Alton Sterling, 37, was shot and killed when pinned to the ground by two police officers in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

According to reports from Louisiana police an anonymous person called 911 and said that a man selling CDs outside the grocery store had threatened him with a gun. Police arrived at the scene, tasered Sterling and wrestled him to the ground.

The cellphone video shows how seconds later someone says, “He’s got a gun.” This led the officers to shoot Sterling even though he was already lying on the ground. It was later confirmed he was shot multiple times in the chest and the back, sparking outrage on social media and protests in Baton Rouge.

This is the video.

Executed in cold blood https://t.co/BWJVRQr1qU #AltonSterling

— Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) July 6, 2016

A Man, a Father, a Husband, a Black Man, an American, shot while laying on his back. Tell me why Again? Heaven Help us All #AltonSterling

— LeVelle Moton (@LeVelleMoton) July 6, 2016

According to local media, residents who took to the streets accepted the fact that the same civil unrest and race-focused protests that have grown in other cities have now arrived in Baton Rouge. In Baton Rouge the African-American population is divided from the white, in many cases living in separate neighborhoods and under the poverty line.

Even though protesters stopped traffic and no police officers were in sight, the protests were largely non-violent and controlled.

The #AltonSterling aftermath pic.twitter.com/PPvSuiEtaz

— Avi (@RecklessAvi_) July 6, 2016

Alton Sterling was a father of three and sold his CDs in front of the convenience store. The owner Abdullah Muflahi told CNN that they had known each other for six years and that he never saw any argument between Sterling and someone else. He also never saw the gun-waving incident that allegedly was called in to 911.

“Pretty much everybody who knows him knows he’s a sweet person,” Sterling’s sister, Mignon Chambers, said to WVLA-TV.

Sterling’s family spoke at a press conference about the shooting:

This must stop. Enough!RT @CNN: "I want my daddy": #AltonSterling’s 15-year-old son in tears https://t.co/6PcxaxmfXC https://t.co/pP1CgsU3Mq

— Kristin Diable (@kristindiable) July 6, 2016

The shooting comes a little more than a week after the actor Jesse Williams gave a speech at the BET Awards on racism, and urged listeners to not accept police brutality. According to CNN, the police officers involved in Sterling’s death are now on administrative leave.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Shooting of Alton Sterling Sparks Protests in Baton Rouge appeared first on Law Street.

Police officers in Idaho are hereby banned from talking to the media on weekends. The new policy from the Police Department in Lewiston, Idaho became official earlier this week in order redistribute resources during understaffed weekends. Journalists seeking weekend updates must now be present at an actual crime scene, even if it’s only to get a quick brief.

Lewiston’s City Councilman Jesse Maldonado disapproves of the new rule and called it “disquieting.” He told the Idaho Statesman, “City residents reading the newspaper, their interest doesn’t stop on Friday. That’s just not how it works.”

Newspaper readers aren’t the only ones affected by Idaho police suspending communications during weekends. The decision also hinders transparency between the police and the public, preventing them from interacting openly with the community. In the midst of recent discussions about police misconduct and violence, it would probably be in the police department’s own interest to show openness towards the media.

As Law Street reported previously, the number of prosecutions of police officers involved in civilian shootings is higher than it’s been in a decade. It’s possible that these numbers have grown in part due to growing media attention on the issue. Therefore, the media could play an important role in bringing cases of misconduct into the limelight.

According to the Idaho Statesman, surrounding towns have very open and transparent relationship with the media. One sheriff claimed that he bas given his cell phone number to reporters and another officer claimed he allows reporters to have access to call logs and personnel during regular business hours.

“As an agency we have a good, efficient, working relationship with the media and we keep those channels of communication open,” said Joel Hasting, Police Chief in Clarkston, Washington. “It’s about the police department being part of the community and not segregated.”

Progress is being made to make police departments more transparent, with more and more officers wearing body cameras and being indicted for use of excessive force. Prohibiting police officers from talking to the media seems like a step backwards. However, the mayor of Idaho pointed out that they can change the new policy at any time if it ends up hindering public information. Hopefully he will keep an eye out for that.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Idaho City Bans Police From Talking to Media on Weekends appeared first on Law Street.

Police in the state of Oklahoma have recently brought the practice of civil asset forfeiture into the 21st century. Previously, if the police pulled you over, they could only seize assets that you physically had with you. But now, thanks to electronic scanners that can remove the funds from your pre-paid gift cards and your debit cards, they can seize even your electronic assets.

This change has led many to take a closer look at the law enforcement tool known as civil asset forfeiture. Civil asset forfeiture is in some ways a bizarre inversion of how we normally view crime and property. Most people think of asset forfeiture as something that occurs during a criminal proceeding. When the police charge the defendant with a crime or execute a search warrant, they can confiscate assets that they believe are profits from, or being used for, criminal activity. That is known as criminal asset forfeiture. But due to an expansion of the practice of civil asset forfeiture, the police can confiscate your assets without proving you have committed a crime or even charging you with a crime.

Flipped: How Civil Asset Forfeiture Works 

Many civil asset forfeiture cases are referred to as “highway interdiction” cases, so using that concept as an example would be helpful to understand how the process works. First, the police pull you over. Sometimes it is for a traffic violation that you have committed. In other instances, typically where civil asset forfeiture is being abused, these stops are part of a sweep of checkpoint stops. Once you are pulled over, a police officer questions you and may use a K-9 Unit to search for drugs or cash. Obviously, if they find drugs you’re getting arrested. However even if all they find is cash and they don’t arrest you (or even ticket you) they can confiscate the money.

Originally when the law that allows this–the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984–was enacted, it was part of an increase in power given to law enforcement to fight the War On Drugs. Drug trafficking and other criminal activities that this law would help fight such as organized crime, deal with large amounts of cash; allowing the police to seize that cash can cripple criminal organizations. It also provides much needed budgetary windfalls to state, local and federal law enforcement agents who split the proceeds. This process, known as equitable sharing, gives law enforcement officials an incentive to confiscate assets.

They don’t, at this point in the process, have to demonstrate that the money they took had anything to do with an illegal activity. And because it is a civil, not a criminal, matter, the burden of proof that the money is innocent falls on the owner, not on the police, if the case gets to trial.

Many of these cases go uncontested because the owners of the seized assets feel it would take more time, effort, and expense than the assets are worth to pursue the matter. Since they would have to hire attorneys to help them, they are probably right. According to the Washington Post, only one-sixth of the seizures were challenged in court. However, of the cases that were challenged, 41 percent resulted in the government returning the money.

And it is a lot of money. According to the Washington Post investigation, it totals over $2.5 billion in total since September 2001. Of that, $1.7 billion was split between state and local authorities and $800 million between the Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies In many cases, these seizures aren’t windfalls (although John Oliver did reveal that in some cases they represent a very literal slush fund) but are actually planned into the budget. This means that when creating their budgets, police departments are planning on seizing a certain percentage of the money they need. This gives the police even more of an incentive to seize assets–particularly from out of state motorists who are probably less likely to contest the seizure or create negative political consequences.

In the video below, the Institute for Justice, a libertarian public-interest law firm, explains some of the concerns with civil asset forfeiture and just how much money is involved. It also highlights the difference between civil and criminal forfeiture.

The proportion of forfeitures that are civil versus criminal is an important point that needs to be addressed. As explained, criminal forfeiture requires that the government prove that you actually committed a crime. Most would agree that we don’t want criminals to be able to keep the profits from their illegal activity and, once those assets are legally seized, they should be used for some constructive social purpose. But only 13 percent of forfeitures were criminal. That means that for every 100 people who had their assets seized, 87 of them were never convicted of a crime but their assets were taken anyway.

The video also more thoroughly explains how the process of equitable sharing allows law enforcement in states that have curtailed the practice of civil asset forfeiture to do an end-run around those restrictions. They turn over the assets that they seized to the federal government, which then takes 20 percent, and then returns the remaining 80 percent back to the state or local police department.

What Law Enforcement Has to Say

Some, of course, argue that civil asset forfeiture is a necessary tool for law enforcement officials. It gives them flexibility and power to seize money that they believe is being used to further criminal activity. Additionally, these law enforcement agencies need the money to fund their operating budgets. If we eliminated this as a source of revenue for agencies we would need to either cut funding, which could be dangerous as well as politically unpopular, or find the money somewhere else, which could also be difficult and politically unpopular. There are mechanisms to get assets back that have been wrongfully seized, so the real problem isn’t necessarily civil asset forfeiture itself but the fact that innocent parties don’t avail themselves of the process to recover their money.

Other police officers would argue differently. In this video, two former law enforcement officers who are involved in LEAP, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, argue that civil asset forfeiture creates a system that encourages corruption and theft by the government.

The argument that these agencies need the funds to operate is flipped here. It is precisely because these agencies need the money to operate, that allowing civil asset forfeiture is so dangerous. Seizures are incentivized for these agencies. And since they don’t require proof of wrongdoing, and the likelihood of being contested is so small, there is no effective counter-incentive to keep the police from unfairly seizing assets. In fact, these agencies sometimes want to get better at making these stops and seizures. The companies BlackAsphalt and the 4:20 Group train law enforcement to make successful “highway interdiction” stops.

Possible Solutions For Civil Asset Forfeiture

The question then becomes how do we give law enforcement the tools that they need to safely and effectively do their jobs while at the same time protecting citizens from government overreach? One possible solution is to completely eliminate civil asset forfeiture and only allow the criminal variety. This is an attractive option because the incentives for the police to seize assets wouldn’t be the main incentive at work. In civil asset forfeiture, they are able to take assets without proving, or even charging, someone with a crime so their only incentive is to seize assets. In contrast, criminal asset forfeiture requires a criminal conviction, so the first step in the process requires police to legally charge and convict an actual criminal. Their incentive, first and foremost, is to fight crime. The assets they get to keep, if successful, are a bonus.

Another potential solution is to decouple the financial incentive from civil asset forfeiture by funneling any assets seized to something totally separate from the police department or even law enforcement. For example, instead of the money going to the police department (or to the federal government and the local police through equitable sharing) the money could be sent to the local school district. This would allow the practice to continue but would help to reduce the direct payoff that police officers have when they seize assets, which in turn could reduce the number of stops they make. Local governments would have to ensure that the school budget money wasn’t then just reduced and given to the police to decrease the incentive to take assets. But if carefully structured, this could allow civil asset forfeiture to exist in the rare instances where it may be legitimate, but lessen the incentive to prevent abuse.

DUE PROCESS 

A third option, and one that the House Judiciary Committee believes will cure many of these ills, is the Deterring Undue Enforcement by Protecting Rights of Citizens From Excessive Searches and Seizures Act of 2016, or DUE PROCESS Act. It is supported by a variety of organizations, including the ACLU, and would greatly reform the civil asset forfeiture process.

Most of the proposed reforms focus not on the initial seizure of the assets but on the court process to reclaim them when they have been seized. The DUE PROCESS Act would alter the burden of proof in these cases, placing it with the government instead of the claimant. It would create a right to counsel and allow a claimant to recover attorney’s fees if successful. Since cost is one of the most significant obstacles to people who want to contest the forfeiture of their assets, this would increase the costs associated with wrongfully taking assets. It would also require that there be a proven connection between the property and the offense committed. While it wouldn’t fully eliminating civil asset forfeiture (you still wouldn’t need a criminal conviction to have your property taken) it would make it much more like criminal asset forfeiture in our legal system. All of these reforms would help to reduce police incentives and ability to seize assets while also encouraging people who have a valid case to pursue it in court.

Conclusion

We can and should give law enforcement a variety of ways to fight crime. Civil asset forfeiture is a powerful tool that law enforcement naturally has used to their benefit. But they have not only used it against convicted criminals, who make up a scant 13 percent of those who had their assets seized by the police, but also against ordinary citizens. Some of whom may have committed a civil offense, and many of whom were doing nothing more than driving with cash.

Reforms to civil asset forfeiture, either to eliminate it all together or to alter the balance of power in the relationship between citizens and the police, are necessary to ensure that this tool is no longer abused. But until it is reformed, when driving in Oklahoma you may want to use Bitcoin. 

Resources

The Register: Oooooklahoma! Where The Cops Can Stop And Empty Your Bank Cards–On Just a Hunch

Institute For Justice: Policing For Profit

The Future of Freedom Foundation: How Police Confiscation is Destroying America

The Heritage Foundation:Civil Asset Forfeiture: 7 Things You Should Know

The Washington Post: Stop and Seize : Aggressive Police Take Hundreds Of Millions Of Dollars From Motorists Not Charged With Crimes

ACLU: Asset Forfeiture Abuse

Generation Opportunity: Civil Asset Forfeiture: The Time For Reform Is Now

Bitcoin.com: New Civil Asset Forfeiture Tool Makes Bitcoin Even More Powerful

Mary Kate Leahy

Mary Kate Leahy (@marykate_leahy) has a J.D. from William and Mary and a Bachelor’s in Political Science from Manhattanville College. She is also a proud graduate of Woodlands Academy of the Sacred Heart. She enjoys spending her time with her kuvasz, Finn, and tackling a never-ending list of projects. Contact Mary Kate at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Reverse Robin Hood: The Benefits and Hazards of Civil Asset Forfeiture appeared first on Law Street.

A verdict in Utah v. Strieff was handed down by the Supreme Court yesterday, weighing in on how the Fourth Amendment applies to illegal searches. In a 5 to 3 decision, the Supreme Court reversed a ruling from the Utah Supreme Court, concluding that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment can be used in court.

The case began when a narcotics detective in Salt Lake City, Utah stopped Edward Strieff after he exited a house that was being monitored for potential drug activity. The detective had seen multiple people making brief stops at the house, calling Strieff’s activities into suspicion. When the detective stopped Strieff, he asked him what he was doing and to provide some identification. He relayed Strieff’s information to a dispatch officer who found that Strieff had an outstanding arrest warrant for a traffic violation. Strieff was arrested for this violation and promptly searched upon arrest.

So, what’s the Fourth Amendment question? The search revealed that Strieff had methamphetamine and a pipe on him, which were later used as evidence against him. Strieff challenged the case to the District Court, arguing that the evidence should not be used because it was obtained from an illegal search. The District Court and the Court of Appeals both ruled against Strieff, but when he appealed once again to the Utah Supreme Court, the ruling turned in his favor. Finally, the Utah Attorney General appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In his majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas argues that the evidence used to convict Strieff was legally gathered. Thomas writes that, although the original stop may not have been constitutional, the fact that the officer later obtained an arrest warrant meant that the evidence was collected legally. As Thomas puts it,

The discovery of that warrant broke the causal chain between the unconstitutional stop and the discovery of evidence by compelling Officer Fackrell to arrest Strieff.

Three justices–Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and Kagan–dissented from the majority opinion. In her dissent, Justice Sonya Sotomayor destroyed the opposing argument. She eloquently described exactly why police powers should not be so broad and how the court’s decision, and the unlawful stops that will likely follow, will have disastrous effects on the public. The end of her dissent is a chilling reminder of how far we have to go as a country when it comes to liberty and equality:

By legitimizing the conduct that produces this double consciousness, this case tells everyone, white and black, guilty and innocent, that an officer can verify your legal status at any time. It says that your body is subject to invasion while courts excuse the violation of your rights. It implies that you are not a citizen of a democracy but the subject of a carceral state, just waiting to be cataloged. We must not pretend that the countless people who are routinely targeted by police are “isolated.” They are the canaries in the coal mine whose deaths, civil and literal, warn us that no one can breathe in this atmosphere. They are the ones who recognize that unlawful police stops corrode all our civil liberties and threaten all our lives.

Several groups were also deeply disappointed with the case’s outcome and the effects it may have in the future. The ACLU tweeted its disapproval:

We are deeply disappointed. #SCOTUS got it wrong on the 4th Amendment in Streiff, with terrible repercussions, esp. for people of color.

— ACLU National (@ACLU) June 20, 2016

Regardless of the circumstances of this case, the decision gives unprecedented power to police under the Fourth Amendment. People may now be stopped on the streets without having committed a crime. Even worse, any incriminating evidence that results from an unlawful stop may be legally used against you in court. This decision has the power to lead to more and more unconstitutional searches by police.

In the words of Justice Sotomayor, people who are targeted by the police in the way that this decision will now expand, are a warning to us all. They point to injustice in our justice system and show us where we need to improve in order to ensure the liberty for all that is promised in our Constitution. She concluded her dissent saying,

“Until their voices matter too, our justice system will continue to be anything but.”

Alexandra Simone

Alex Simone is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street and a student at The George Washington University, studying Political Science. She is passionate about law and government, but also enjoys the finer things in life like watching crime dramas and enjoying a nice DC brunch. Contact Alex at ASimone@LawStreetmedia.com

The post Utah v. Strieff: SCOTUS Narrows Fourth Amendment Protections appeared first on Law Street.

The state of Louisiana wants to ensure that Blue Lives Matter. Recently, Governor John Bel Edwards expanded Louisiana’s Hate Crime Law to encompass protections for police officers. The new law, House Bill 953, also known as the Blue Lives Matter Bill, passed the Republican-controlled House and Senate with 92 to 0 and 33 to 3 votes, respectively. Now in the state of Louisiana, it’s unlawful to target people based on their perceived race, age, gender,  religion, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry of a person, or because of actual or perceived membership with, service in, or employment with law enforcement officer, firefighter, or emergency medical services personnel. While the Governor and State Representatives may have created the law under the pretense of protecting the people who protect us, in actuality it debases the previously established protected classes under the hate crime law, and fails to address issues of racism connected with police criticism.

All the other protected classes of hate crimes in Louisiana have one thing in common: immutable characteristics. People cannot remove themselves from the identity of their race, age, gender, religion, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, national origin, or ancestry; nor should they be harassed or vilified for these characteristics. It is for this reason that these groups benefit from special protection under the law. Adding a vocation to the same category as these groups stretches the bounds and limits of who or what qualifies as a protected class.

One of the organizations in opposition to the Louisiana law because of its categorization of emergency personal as a protected class is the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). According to the South Central Regional office’s website, the league is committed to combating anti-Semitism, hatred, and bigotry by investigating and exposing extremism while advocating for civil rights, religious freedom, and diversity. In a press release, ADL states its concerns,

Expanding the characteristics included in bias crime laws may open the door to a myriad of other categories to be added and simultaneously dilute current hate crimes legislation.  This bill confuses the purpose of the Hate Crimes Act and weakens its impact by adding more categories of people, who are better protected under other laws.

Essentially, House Bill 953 weakens the established law at an unnecessary expense since law enforcement groups can be protected by other laws.

State Representative Lance Harris wrote the bill after the murder of white Texas Deputy Daren H. Goforth by an African American man named Shannon J. Miles. The Blue Lives Matter organization itself began as a campaign to rally behind police officers after the targeted murders of Officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu during the heat of criticism against police brutality in New York.

But there are misperceptions on both sides. What the assailants of Deputy Goforth, Officer Ramos, and Officer Liu failed to understand when they attacked the officers is that the system under which police officers work is racist and unjust, but not necessarily every police officer carries those qualities. What Louisiana’s new law misunderstands is the climate in which police officers are serving. People in uniform are not under attack, however their trusted relationships with their communities continue to crumble under the deeply entrenched racism in this country.

Quite bluntly, House Bill 953 distracts from the issues of racism felt by many communities when it comes to police injustice. Before Blue Lives Mattered, Black Lives Mattered. Despite the fact that real issues of racism and injustice continue to rise within multiple police precincts across the U.S., Louisiana chose to focus on the protection of a group of people with contested vulnerability and established protection. As state representatives lose sight of the real issues, we as a nation cannot.

Dorsey Hill

Dorsey is a member of Barnard College’s class of 2016 with a major in Urban Studies and concentration in Political Science. As a native of Chicago and resident of New York City, Dorsey loves to explore the multiple cultural facets of cities. She has a deep interest in social justice issue especially those relevant to urban environments. Contact Dorsey at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Louisiana Bill Making Police a Protected Class Weakens Hate Crime Law appeared first on Law Street.

Preliminary statistics released by the FBI on Monday show that 41 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in 2015, a 20 percent decrease from the previous year. Although the statistics are preliminary and are subject to revision, these numbers indicate that police officer deaths are near historic lows. This release comes during national police week, which began with a candlelit vigil on May 13.

The preliminary statistics will likely add to the debate about a so-called “war on cops” that some argue is the result of recent police protests. While law enforcement work often involves danger, there is no evidence to suggest that police officer deaths are on the rise. The number of police officer deaths decreased significantly last year and is at the second-lowest level in the past decade.

Take a look at the graphics below to understand these statistics and how they fit into historical trends.

Officer Deaths Over Time

Source: FBI, Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted, 2014 and *Preliminary 2015 Release

Both felonious and accidental deaths were relatively low in 2015 compared to previous years. Felonious deaths experienced a 20 percent decrease from the previous year. With 41 felonious deaths, last year matched 2008 with the second lowest number in over a decade. The lowest number in recent history came in 2013 with 27 deaths from felonious incidents in the line of duty.

Accidental deaths did not change between 2014 and 2015, but at 45, that number is at its lowest level for over a decade. A death is considered accidental by the FBI when it was a result of something that was not willful or intentional.

Regional Breakdown

Source: FBI

The chart above details the distribution of felonious police officer deaths from the FBI’s preliminary data. The South saw the most with 46 percent of the total deaths, followed by the West with 22 percent, the Midwest with 12 percent, and Northeast and Puerto Rico with just under 10 percent each.

While the statistics released on Monday do not provide details about the number of law enforcement officers and the population covered by each region, it is important to note that historical data indicates that the South has both more people and officers compared to other regions. Based on data from the 2014 report, the last year with complete data available, the South had about 40 percent of all employed police officers and the South has historically had higher numbers of police officer deaths than other regions.

Weapons Involved

Source: FBI

The chart above details the weapons involved in the 41 felonious officer deaths based on the preliminary data for 2015. All but three deaths were due to the use of firearms, with handguns accounting for nearly three-quarters of firearm deaths. The FBI also notes that 30 of the 41 officers were wearing body armor when they were killed.

The vast majority of the 45 accidental deaths involved automobiles; 29 were due to automotive accidents, seven were struck by vehicles, and four were fatally injured in motorcycle accidents.

A Look at 2016

While the FBI does not have any information available for 2016, and likely won’t until it releases preliminary data this time next year, there are independent counts of law enforcement fatalities with more updated information. The Officer Down Memorial Page, which has tracked this data for a long period of time, has found 17 fatal shootings and one intentional death using a vehicle as a weapon so far this year. As the Guardian points out, if this rate continues for the rest of the year there would be 48 officer deaths–an increase from 2015 and the same number as 2014, based on the website’s count.

The final data, which will have expanded details and information on assaults that resulted in injury in 2015, will be released by the FBI in the fall with its annual Law Enforcement Officers Killed in Assaulted report.

For more Law Street Media Crime Coverage, Check Out Crime in America 2016

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police in America 2016: Preliminary Data Shows Drop in Police Deaths appeared first on Law Street.

Could you be arrested for attempting to be funny on social media? Apparently, yes. A 27-year-old man named Anthony Novak from Parma, Ohio is facing criminal charges for creating a Facebook account that parodied the Parma City Police Department.

The account confused people from all over the city of Parma as the two accounts were almost identical, except for what they were posting. While the real police department page featured posts about local happenings and updates surrounding crime in Parma, the parody account had satirical posts about the requirements to become a Parma police officer and other supposedly “inflammatory topics.” In one such post, Novak wrote

The Parma Civil Service Commission will conduct a written exam for basic Police Officer for the City of Parma to establish an eligibility list. The exam will be held on March 12, 2016. Applications are available February 14, 2016 through March 2, 2016. Parma is an equal opportunity employer but is strongly encouraging minorities not to apply. The test will consist of a 15 question multiple choice definition test followed by a hearing test. Should you pass you will be accepted as an officer of the Parma Police Department.

In response to the parody posts being shared on the fake account’s wall, the Parma Police department posted a statement to warn its followers about the Parma fraud:

The Parma Police Department would like to warn the public that a fake Parma Police Facebook page has been created. This matter is currently being investigated by the Parma Police Department and Facebook. This is the Parma Police Department’s official Facebook page. The public should disregard any and all information posted on the fake Facebook account.

Novak is facing potential felony charges for disrupting public services through his use of satire on his parody account. The question of whether or not this is an infringement on Novak’s freedom of speech has been brought up in the conversation about if he should be charged. Lieutenant Kevin Riley argues that the material posted on the fake website caused a risk to public safety because of its inflammatory and derogatory nature. Because this material crossed the line from funny satire to potentially harmful, Novak’s arguments are criminal.

Did Novak’s satire cause any harm to the citizens of Parma? The answer is unclear. Some people voiced a love of the parody on twitter.

The fake city of Parma police department page was hilarious

— Abby Roetzel (@abbyroetzel) March 3, 2016

Others voiced their irritation with the account in attempt to try to clarify what was going on for confused onlookers.

Somebody set up a fake Parma Police Department Facebook page. The REAL Police are working with FACEBOOK to shut it down.

— Scott Taylor (@ScottTaylorTV) March 2, 2016

Regardless of the public opinion, Novak will appear before a grand jury next week to determine whether or not he should face any charges for his actions. Ever since his arrest, several parody accounts on Facebook have popped up in his absence claiming to be sticking up for free speech. This case certainly poses an interesting question about how far is too far when it comes to satire and could be setting a dangerous precedent by telling someone they will face jail time for a parody Facebook account.

Alexandra Simone

Alex Simone is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street and a student at The George Washington University, studying Political Science. She is passionate about law and government, but also enjoys the finer things in life like watching crime dramas and enjoying a nice DC brunch. Contact Alex at ASimone@LawStreetmedia.com

The post Ohio Man Arrested for Creating Parody Facebook Page of Local Police Department appeared first on Law Street.

The American police have taken on a new level of stereotypical behavior–the kind that they have been notoriously alleged to partake in, yet vehemently refuse to admit. However, they do not have to admit it this time–their words, followed by their request for action will provide ample evidence to show that they are working hard to further discriminate against the black population. Their new adversary? Beyonce. Yes, Queen B is being targeted by a number of police unions as an individual unworthy of protection due to her blanketed and generalizing depiction of law enforcement and her advocacy for the #BlackLivesMatter social movement. Sounding ironic? It should be.

Before addressing Beyonce’s advocacy and creative interpretation, I would like to make the following observations: John Lennon worked tirelessly to develop a peaceful revolution through song, performance, and lyric. Paul McCartney continued that very public and non-discreet political picture. U2 and Bono have been devoted, active, and outspoken pioneers for Africa in the fight against HIV-AIDS and promoting education, often times criticizing the lavish lifestyles of the rich and famous and taking a stark political stance. Bruce Springsteen has had a longstanding devotion to his outspoken political views, dedicating songs to his beliefs and publicly providing support for various political candidates. And who could forget the Dixie Chicks’ controversial stance against the War in Iraq?

These megastars represent a short list of artists and performers who have taken a political stance, used performance and creativity to depict political ideologies, or issued a statement based on a personal view or belief. However, none of those artists have suffered the same level of scrutiny and extreme backlash like the Queen B.

On Saturday, February 6, the diva released a video for her first new song since 2014, entitled “Formation.” The video instigated rapid fire responses about Beyonce’s exploitation of a marginalized and traumatized black New Orleans’ community, particularly post Hurricane Katrina, her open representation of southern blackness, more specifically that of a southern black woman, and resistance practices exercised by black individuals and communities.

The next day, she followed up the release of her video with a live Halftime Show performance of the song during Super Bowl 50.

Beyonce’s 2-day delivery was calculated and intense. Her message was important–that formation and organization are necessary to combat racial-based violence and embark on a path of social movement. Yet, her delivery was controversial–utilizing the black tragedy within New Orleans and exploiting the voiceless and marginalized community as her backdrop without ever giving the appropriate credit to those, like Messy Mya–a “household NOLA name” who was shot and killed at the age of 22, that provided Beyonce with the tools to tell a story that she portrayed as her own and solely for the “paper” that she sings so freely about. Whether one agrees with Queen B’s message or her in-your-face delivery, it is quite blatantly open for discussion and debate.

However, what is not readily open for discussion is the number of various police unions that are calling for an outright boycott of law enforcement for Beyonce’s upcoming world tour. While the police state that they would respond should Beyonce need help at any time, they are calling for a boycott that “would involve officers refusing to work paid off-duty security for the event, not refusing to perform regular law enforcement duties.” So why are privately-hired individuals who have the right to turn down a job boycotting under the entity of a police union that is, by law, required to defend and serve? Do they not realize that by boycotting the performance they are also refusing to protect all of the thousands of individuals in attendance? Is this a public entity’s agenda presented within the vehicle of a private sector approach? Is a police union an appropriate outlet for boycott under the circumstances? And more so, what kind of message are the police sending?

Arguably, one could inquire about Beyonce’s message and what she is trying to convey to the American people. Like Rudy Giuliani, we could be critical of her approach and view it as a vicious and very public attack on law enforcement. However, that would be blatantly ignoring the fact that Beyonce is an entertainer protected by the ideologies and legal complexities of free speech who does not possess any kind of duty to the public. She is free to say, create, depict, and perform as she pleases so long as she stays within the confines of legality–which she did.

The police, however, live by a different standard than the pop star. Furthermore, as private individuals hired for a private event to serve as security detail, they can absolutely boycott and not take the job. But is it fair to accuse Beyonce of being a cop-hater and spreading anti-police rhetoric? Does advocacy of the #BlackLivesMatter movement automatically associate one with an anti-law enforcement campaign? Are the two mutually exclusive or can we support the #BlackLivesMatter movement while also appreciating the danger and difficulty with which officers do their jobs?

The Miami Fraternal Order of the Police, the Sergeants Benevolent Association in New York City, as well as the Tamp and Nashville police unions seem to find the two mutually exclusive and have urged their respective associations and organizations to boycott the tour. Other police organizations, such as the Raleigh police, are choosing not to boycott the concert held by Beyonce in their respective state.

Like Giuliani stated, we have “to respect the uniform, not to make it appear as if they are the enemy.” Well, I think that applies to all people, not just “the uniform.” Even celebrities have a right to speak out against issues such as police brutality, regardless of whether we agree or disagree with the delivery of their messages.

Ajla Glavasevic

Ajla Glavasevic is a first-generation Bosnian full of spunk, sass, and humor. She graduated from SUNY Buffalo with a Bachelor of Science in Finance and received her J.D. from the University of Cincinnati College of Law. Ajla is currently a licensed attorney in Pennsylvania and when she isn’t lawyering and writing, the former Team USA Women’s Bobsled athlete (2014-2015 National Team) likes to stay active and travel. Contact Ajla at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Officers Boycotting Beyonce: Isn’t this a Little Ironic? appeared first on Law Street.

The University of Missouri assistant professor who sparked nationwide controversy for yelling at a student reporter is in the spotlight and raising ethical questions yet again.

Assistant communications professor Melissa Click can be seen on a recently released Columbia Police Department video cursing at a cop who is attempting to clear a road for cars during the Mizzou homecoming parade in October. The footage was taken with two cops’ body cameras.

The footage, first published by the Columbia Missourian, shows Click as a part of a group of student demonstrators who were linked arms blocking the road. The cop can be seen trying to usher the group off of the road and onto the sidewalk in order to allow the parade to continue.

In November, Click, a communications teacher, was captured on video calling for a student journalist to be ejected from a protest site on campus. She requested “some muscle” to help her kick the student out. This incident caused many to call for her dismissal from the university.

So why are her actions especially troublesome and still being talked about now?

Well, what is increasingly frustrating while watching the 12-minute video from November is that the protest as a whole was completely overshadowed by the actions of the professor and the students that she didn’t wish to correct. Instead of a commendable peaceful protest being documented and praised, that message was lost in the actions of few.

Click, while not the center of the entire video, played a vital role in the fact that she did not aid the student reporters by allowing them to do their job. She of all people should have been able to understand their rights just as she understood the rights of the protesters.

All of a sudden the possible headline of “Peaceful Activists Protest for Black Lives Matter Movement,” turned into “Professor Needs Muscle to Block Student Journalists.” And that is really a shame.

The lack of trust of the media is understandable, but should you really shut out someone for trying to accurately document your protest just because they are a journalist? Is it worth the negative backlash from the country just to push a student reporter around whose ‘agenda’ is just to take photos from the event? Not only did the actions of those shown in the video hinder their cause, but it shed such a poor light on the university and the protesters, when it didn’t have to.

What is even more of a shame is the lack of understanding of basic rights. Students were screaming that the photographer, Tim Tai, had to back up and could not legally be there and photograph the event. He was surrounded and barricaded from what was going on and at times pushed by protesters. The right that the students were citing as to why they should be left alone to protest is the same right that allows the journalists to be there documenting what is going on. In addition, they were in public space–which grants the photographer and videographer the right to document freely.

What strikes me most are the ethical dilemmas that come with this debate. As a teacher who is up for tenure, a heavily sought-after academic position, Click will surely be hearing about these two incidents during her deliberations. I hope the board members ask themselves, can she be an effective communications professor if she has gotten herself into these communications conundrums? How can she teach a topic that she herself doesn’t seem to have mastered in her practice? It is certainly hard to support her in her communications endeavors when she curses at cops and calls for the obstruction of the media from a protest on public property.

Check out the November incident in full below (I highly recommend watching the entire video):

And check out the video of the October incident below:

Julia Bryant

Julia Bryant is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street from Howard County, Maryland. She is a junior at the University of Maryland, College Park, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Journalism and Economics. You can contact Julia at JBryant@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Mizzou Teacher Melissa Click Seen Cursing at Cops, Raises Ethical Concerns Again appeared first on Law Street.

Those of us in the Mid-Atlantic are probably snowed in, which means that it’s time to check out the weirdest arrests of the week. They’re all in the slideshow below:

Do You Want Fries with that Fire?

Image courtesy of Mike Mozart via Flickr

Timothy Alejandro Ortiz was arrested after he didn’t return his uniform to a Burger King located in Florida after he was fired. Instead, on his way out, he flame-broiled the uniform. He’s being charged with damage to property, resisting an officer without violence, and disorderly conduct.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Baltimore recorded its 300th homicide of 2015 last month, marking the highest number of killings for the city since 1999. Given the decrease in the city’s population over the past several decades, the actual murder rate in 2015 may be the highest in the city’s history. While the rising number of homicides is certainly troubling for Baltimore, it is not the only U.S. city experiencing a spike in homicides. The explanations for this abrupt rise, after years of decline, range from the after-effects of much-publicized police killings to a drug epidemic to simply warmer weather. This article will examine this rise and seek to determine if it is an outlier or a sign of some new trend.

Murders on the Decline?

Before even getting to whether homicides are an increasing threat or even up in 2015, the numbers have to be put into perspective. The much larger trend at play has been a large and consistent decline in violent crime, including homicides, over the past few decades.

Since 1993, the violent crime rate per 100,000 people in the United States has dropped by more than 50 percent. Additionally, while the drop was felt nationwide, it was also specifically evident in cities like New York that have historically been associated with crime, though that association may be starting to wear off. In 1990, there were 2,245 homicides in New York City. By contrast, there were 328 murders in 2014, the lowest number seen since 1963 when New York was also a much smaller city. In other words, crime is down, way down, from twenty years ago. Two other examples are Los Angeles and Washington D.C., which saw their murder rates drop 90 and 76 percent respectively since 1992.

The explanations behind these drops range far and wide. A number of factors have been suggested, including a better economy, higher incarceration rates, the death penalty, more police officers, and even the greater acceptance of abortions to name a few. While all these have been suggested, however, none has necessarily been shown to hold water. Interestingly one of the most scientifically supported reasons has been the reduced use of lead in everyday goods because lead exposure in children is believed to cause more violent behavior. Reduced drug and alcohol use is another factor that has been cited in the reduction.

What’s Going on This Year?

In August, the New York Times published an article noting that 35 U.S. cities have seen their murder rates rise in 2015. This includes a number of major cities in the U.S. such as New York, Chicago, Philadelphia and even the nation’s capital, Washington D.C. After years of dramatic decline, what could be causing these rates to reverse course and begin to rise again?

The Devil is in the Details

While the data seems to suggest a rise in violent crime and there are several plausible sounding theories to support it, is it actually happening?  The answer to that question is both yes and no. After the New York Times published its article, Five Thirty Eight decided to take a closer look at the statistics. Using partial-year data for the nation’s 60 largest cities, it found that homicides are indeed up 20 percent from last year in 26 of the nation’s 60 largest cities and 16 percent overall. However, they were also down in 19 of the same 60 cities including places like Boston, Las Vegas, and San Diego to name a few. In other words, the results used in the sample from the Times article may be skewed. While certain cities’ homicide numbers are up, at most they are only up a fraction or not at all. It is also important to look at the raw numbers in addition to the percentages when there is a relatively small number of homicides to begin with. For example, Five Thirty Eight found that Seattle, Washington experienced a 20 percent increase in homicides at the end of August relative to the previous year, but that increase was the result of three additional murders–going from 15 in 2014 to 18 this year. It is also important to acknowledge that the data is preliminary and only includes part of the year. The full, definitive dataset will not be available until the FBI publishes its annual statistics next fall.

While certain cities’ homicide numbers are up, in most they are only up a fraction or not at all. It is also important to look at the raw numbers in addition to the percentages when there is a relatively small number of homicides to begin with. For example, Five Thirty Eight found that Seattle, Washington experienced a 20 percent increase in homicides at the end of August relative to the previous year, but that increase was the result of three additional murders–going from 15 in 2014 to 18 this year. It is also important to acknowledge that the data is preliminary and only includes part of the year. The full, definitive dataset will not be available until the FBI publishes its annual statistics next fall.

Thus, while the overall rise in the national rate of 16 percent is statistically significant–Five Thirty Eight’s finding among the largest 60 cities–many cities’ individual changes are not. Statistical significance is a test to determine whether or not a change or relationship is the result of chance. It is also worth noting that in 2005 almost an identical rise of 15 percent in the national rate of homicides occurred before the number regressed to the mean and continued its slow decline.

The Who, What, Where, and Why

There seem to be as many explanations for murders may be rising in these cities as there were in explaining the large decline in violent crime over previous two decades. However, many of theories behind the recent rise in homicides do not seem to stand up to scrutiny either.

One that has gained a lot of traction is a theory known as the “Ferguson Effect.” According to this theory, a major contributing factor to the spike in violence is a growing reluctance among police officers to carry out routine police work in fear of criticism. This theory is largely a response to the controversial shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri as well as the death of Freddie Gray while in the custody of Baltimore policy. Put simply, bad guys are running free because police officers fear public damnation.

Ironically, there is competing theory from a community perspective, arguing that police actions have made regular citizens less likely to go to the police for assistance and more willing to take matters into their own hands. In either case the rise in violence in St. Louis or Baltimore, which has been attributed by some as the result of a Ferguson Effect, actually started prior to the highly publicized incidents of police brutality so these explanations do not seem very plausible. Attorney General Lauretta Lynch also testified before Congress saying that there is “no data” to support that theory.

Another explanation is the vast number of guns in the United States. While the exact number of guns in civilian circulation is impossible to pinpoint, it is estimated there are as many as 357 million nationwide–approximately 40 million more guns than U.S. citizens. Once again, while having more guns around likely leads to more gun-related deaths, there were hundreds of millions of guns around prior to this year so that explanation is also not very convincing.

Others argue that an increase in gang violence, fueled by drugs, has led to increased homicides. Of the reasons given, increased gang warfare is one of most likely explanations because it would likely affect only certain neighborhoods or cities and not the entire country. Some argue that cities like Chicago, are experiencing an increase in gang violence and illegal guns, which may explain recent spikes in homicides, but that is unlikely to be the case for every city.

Even the economy has been blamed as part of the “routine activities theory,” which suggests that when people are better off financially they more likely to go shopping or out to eat and thus more likely to encounter criminals. Others argue that crime generally goes down when the economy is doing well. However, John Roman, a senior fellow at the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute, noted in an interview with Vox that a good economy can also lead to higher crime if improvements are not distributed equally and the needs of the underserved are not addressed.

When you look at all of the data and try to make sense of it with the competing theories, it seems likely that each city has its own explanation. We do not yet know whether or not the spike identified this summer is indicative of a trend, but if that is the case we likely need more data to determine what might be causing it.

The accompanying video looks at the increase and some of the reasons suggested for it:

Perception is Believing

Despite what the numbers say or whether the theories much of this data is based on are viable, people ultimately make up their own minds on what is true or not. In a 2013 Pew Research Center survey, 56 percent of  those polled believed that gun violence was higher than it was 20 years earlier, but in reality, gun homicides had nearly been cut in half by 2013.  This poll was conducted before the recent spate of highly publicized police killings, indicating the number may even be even higher now. It is not surprising the notion of higher homicide rates resonate with people, even if they are a one term aberration and near historic lows. The following video looks at the perception or misperception of crime in the United States:

Conclusion

While violent crime, including homicides, has been decreasing since the early 90s, recent evidence suggests there may be a spike in homicides this year–at least in some of the United States’ largest cities. But it remains unclear whether this is emblematic of a trend, or even if it was just a brief increase as has often occurred in the past. Even with this increase, however, the rate is nowhere near approaching the record highs from two-decades ago.

In light of these findings, many questions emerge. Why is the homicide rate up this year? Are these numbers skewed by an unrepresentative sample? Is this the sign of a trend or just a temporary blip? Questions like these will not be answered for years if they are answered at all. While it is necessary to try and understand the data in order to improve policing and crime-related public policy, it is important to take a more local look at why homicides might be going up in each city. A spike in several cities is not necessarily indicative of a national problem.

Resources

The Washington Post: Baltimore’s 300th Killing This Year: A violent Milestone in a Riot-Scarred City

NYC: News from the Blue Room

The New York Times: Murders in New York Drop to a Record Low, but Officers Aren’t Celebrating

Forbes: What’s Behind the Decline in Crime?

The New York Times: Murder Rates Rising Sharply in Many U.S. Cities

Vox: Why Murder Rates are Up in St. Louis, Baltimore and Some Other Cities

The Washington Post: There are Now More Guns Than People in the United States

Five Thirty Eight: Scare Headlines Exaggerate the U.S. Crime Wave

Stat Pac: Statistical Significance

Pew Research Center: Gun Homicide Steady After Decline in the 90s; Suicide Rates Edge Up

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rising Homicides in Some American Cities: What’s Actually Going on? appeared first on Law Street.

This weekend the New York Times published the article “Get Home Safe,” My Rapist Said, in its opinion pages. In it, Alisson Wood tells the story of her boss raping her one night after work. She sought justice and solace from her company and the law, but only received dismissals. It was her word against her boss’s, and he claimed the situation was consensual, slut-shaming her. This situation is not uncommon for many other survivors of rape in America, victimized by a culture that often finds more fault in its victims than its perpetrators. Rape culture undermines the power imbalances at the core of rape by diverting attention away from why and how a rapist takes advantage of a person, and instead focuses on the character of the rape victim. For example, a boss takes advantage of an employee, a man takes advantage of a woman, or a cop takes advantage of a citizen. But last week, justice beat the power of rape culture. The prosecutor in the Daniel Holtzclaw case convinced a jury of the power imbalances of a white police officer raping African American women, and for Holtzclaw’s 29th birthday he received a recommended 263-year prison sentence.

Holtzclaw has been standing trial since November 2 after sexually assaulting 13 women in Oklahoma City. Jannie Ligons, a 57-year-old grandmother, went to the police after Holtzclaw attacked her on June 2,2014. Holtzclaw’s record revealed more allegations of rape, catching national attention and leading to his arrest. He faced 36 charges ranging from multiple counts of first degree rape to stalking and sexual battery. Officer Holtzclaw clearly underestimated the courage Ligons possessed as a survivor of sexual assault, and as a woman who could put trust in a police department whose own officer violated Ligons’s most basic right to her body.

Holtzclaw targeted 12 other African American women in a low income neighborhood ostensibly because of their vulnerability and unlikelihood to press charges. A couple of the victims were guilty of criminal activity of their own. The defense tried to use to this to its advantage by discrediting the victims and questioning why they did not contact the police after their assaults. But, who could those victims trust? The fact that they would likely not be perceived as “innocent victims” halted many from contacting authorities. “What kind of police do you call on the police?“–that was a question of one of the victims, who was only 17-years-old.

Race has factored into this case from the onset. Holtzclaw intended to protect himself by preying on these women with full knowledge of the future juxtaposed images of an All American Football player-turned-cop against black women. While the verdict supplies some justice to these victims, the all-white jury hardly seemed fair with about a 15 percent African American population in Oklahoma City.

Some activists see Holtzclaw’s verdict as a good milestone in a long history of black women as victims of sexual assault and domestic abuse. I agree with and welcome the justice served to this rapist. However, the lack of mainstream media attention garnered by this case validates all the fear these women had in reporting their rapes. It’s an indication of the intersectional obstacles women of color face in our lives, our problems often invisible, and rape culture even more prominent. So, it is an insult to see Holtzclaw’s tear stained face. Are those tears because he did not beat the odds? Or because white privilege did not win out and he did not get away with his exploitative assaults? As for me, I’d rather read through the brave testimonies of these 13 women in their own words than see his tears.

Dorsey Hill

Dorsey is a member of Barnard College’s class of 2016 with a major in Urban Studies and concentration in Political Science. As a native of Chicago and resident of New York City, Dorsey loves to explore the multiple cultural facets of cities. She has a deep interest in social justice issue especially those relevant to urban environments. Contact Dorsey at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Power of Justice: A Guilty Verdict for Daniel Holtzclaw appeared first on Law Street.

On December 4, Spike Lee’s much debated new film “Chi-Raq” hit theaters. Some viewers approached the trailer and storyline with trepidation in the wake of its release, as the movie satirically approaches the issue of gun violence in Chicago. After an innocent seven-year-old girl dies in crossfire between the Spartans gang, led by rapper Chi-Raq (Nick Cannon), and rival Trojans gang, led by Cyclops (Wesley Snipes), Lysistrata (Teyonnah Paris), Chi-Raq’s girlfriend, leads a sex strike. The plot is loosely based off the ancient Greek comedy “Lysistrata,” by Aristophanes. Dolmedes (Samuel L. Jackson), the narrator of the film, alludes to such a connection in the opening scene.

Initially, I found the idea of a satirical film about gun violence in Chicago misguided and disconcerting, especially considering the disheartening reality of tragic loss multiple Chicagoans endure everyday due to guns. The name of the film itself references a Chicago nickname dubbed several years ago, its origins unknown, which compares the homicides in Chicago to the death of Americans in the Iraq War. The movie begins with the statistic: between 2003-2011 American deaths totaled 4,424, while homicides in Chicago from 2001-2015 topped 7,356. This year alone there have been 2,221 shootings in Chicago, and police have confiscated 6,521 illegal guns.

Some of the consistently serious tones of the movie revolve around Irene (Jennifer Hudson) the mother of the seven-year-old girl killed. No one admits to the killing, and witnesses neglect to come forth about it. The painstaking silence is strikingly similar to the case of Tyshawn Lee–a nine-year-old boy lured into an alley and killed on November 7th in Chicago in gang retaliation against his father. Not until November 27th did police take Corey Morgan into custody and charge him with first degree murder.

“Chi-raq’s” fictional storyline blatantly mixed with reality during a powerful scene when Lysistrata and her sex strike supporters shouted the names of victims Trayvon Martin, Sandra Bland, and Tamir Rice, among other names. But missing from the list was Laquan McDonald who, sadly, actually might have made the movie had Chicago Police not withheld footage of his shooting for over a year.

“Chi-Raq” could not come at a more relevant time. Yet the lag in political action against gun violence almost ensures that any moment would be appropriate for “Chi-Raq.” While politicians discuss stricter gun regulations yet again on account of the tragedy in San Bernardino someone will lose a son, daughter, brother, or sister to a gun. However, terrorism or assault rifles will not necessarily be the blame for these deaths. Instead, Lee brings attention to the realities of gun violence not always discussed after mass shootings.

Some Chicagoans may dislike “Chi-Raq” for its failure to depict the lived reality of the South Side of Chicago in a genuine form, but it is not meant to be absolutely true to life. Kevin Willmont and Lee poetically infuse insightful criticism of the politics of gun regulations, the systemic oppression of the black community, and the impact of gang violence. The satirical foundation of the plot might not appeal to everyone and the movie has its issues, but the serious moments constantly remind viewers of the real-life victims. Now the only thing I find disconcerting about the film is its likeness to the front page news: how long will the same tragedies continue to happen until things change?

Dorsey Hill

Dorsey is a member of Barnard College’s class of 2016 with a major in Urban Studies and concentration in Political Science. As a native of Chicago and resident of New York City, Dorsey loves to explore the multiple cultural facets of cities. She has a deep interest in social justice issue especially those relevant to urban environments. Contact Dorsey at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Chi-Raq: Not Just Satire appeared first on Law Street.

On October 24, the RiseUpOctober group held a three-day rally in New York to protest police brutality. The biggest story of the rally was Quentin Tarantino’s attendance and the director’s fiery remarks. He has since received incredible backlash for his comments, from pundits as well as some police unions. But the twisting of his words and generally poor coverage of the rally highlights the media’s chronic inability to cover groups and events that try to bring attention to the issue of police brutality.

In a three-day rally against police brutality, the media decided to only focus on Tarantino’s comments, as opposed to the families of unarmed individuals killed by police officers. When given a chance to speak, Tarantino addressed the crowd by saying “I am a human being with a conscience, and when I see murder I cannot stand by, and I have to call the murdered the murdered, and the murderers the murderers.” A number of people expressed disapproval with Tarantino’s remarks and criticized him. Pundits, as well as his own father, went as far as to call his comments “dead wrong.” They criticized him for denigrating police officers and many people misquoted him as calling all police officers murderers, even though he was referring to the specific instances of killings of unarmed citizens that the rally was focused on.

Recently Jim Pasco, the director of the national Fraternal Order of Police, warned that the union has a “surprise” in store for Tarantino, a veiled threat that follows the Pasco’s plea for police officers to boycott Tarantino’s next film. While he does not represent the viewpoint of all police officers, it is unfortunate that someone so influential has decided to escalate this issue, instead of taking the value of the entire rally to heart. Granted, Tarantino’s comments were certainly inflammatory and it is totally fair for people, especially police officers and their relatives, to be unhappy. Still, this does not make what Tarantino said any less valid. It is important that we as a nation remain open to critically analyzing all of our social institutions to ensure that they are operating as best as they can. By making it taboo to criticize law enforcement, we keep one of the most important foundations of our society from being the best it can be.

The rhetoric surrounding Tarantino’s comments is not new; rather, the false dichotomy between protesting police brutality and respecting police officers is constantly present in the media. Critics of the BlackLivesMatter movement, and other attempts to address police brutality often equate criticizing excessive police force with hating police officers. Some blame these protests for the recent spike in crime in some major cities–often called the “Ferguson Effect.” Proponents argue that this increase in crime can be traced to changes in police tactics due to a fear of excessive force. Even if this were true, this logic is faulty. Firstly, these movements are not directly responsible for the changes that have occurred in police tactics. Secondly, even if there appears to be an overcompensating response, this does not invalidate these movements. It is important that police brutality be addressed and prior to the activities of such groups, this issue was largely ignored.

Finally, one of the biggest issues with the coverage of the BlackLivesMatter movement is the assumption that it is a single-minded movement. The actions of anyone who associates with the group are taken as a representation of all the members. In reality, like any social movement in history, individuals have different ideas, tactics, and goals, even if they associate with the same movement. Unfortunately, pundits will change the subject to black-on-black violence, and accuse the movement of promoting violence instead of dealing with the actual issue of police brutality. Like so many issues nowadays, police brutality is poorly handled by the media, which leads to a polarized and sometimes uninformed public and prevents the issue from being addressed. This failure in media is disheartening and it is the same reason why Quentin Tarantino has received undeserved backlash for his comments.

Maurin Mwombela

Maurin Mwombela is a member of the University of Pennsylvania class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer 2015. He now blogs for Law Street, focusing on politics. Contact Maurin at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Quentin Tarantino Takes on Police Brutality appeared first on Law Street.

Sharing the details of a sexual assault can be a frightening and invasive experience for a victim, which is just one explanation for why a staggering amount of rapes go unreported each year in this country. The reasons for why these women and men choose not to share their stories are vast, making it a challenge for police to catch their abusers. But what happens when police goad a unwilling victim into sharing her story, only to later arrest her for lying? A rape survivor in Prince William County, Virginia found out.

In a recent in-depth profile by Buzzfeed, Lara McLeod, 23, shared that when she was 19 she was raped by her sister’s fiancé Joaquin Rams–just two weeks after her sister, Hera, had given birth to Rams’ son Prince. When Lara confided in her family about the rape, it confirmed Hera’s unsettling suspicions about her fiancé. Lara’s family supported her decision not to report the rape, but Hera wanted to immediately cut ties with Rams.

Hera called Prince William County police to request an escort to pick up her belongings from the house she shared with Rams, but upon seeing the police, a “confused” Rams starting yelling that he hadn’t touched Lara. That’s when Buzzfeed reports that the routine escort request turned into an investigation for an alleged rape.

Despite her reluctance to report the assault, Lara was persuaded by police to go on record accusing Rams for the rape. However, the tables quickly turned after police began questioning her about specifics in the case like “why she didn’t try harder to escape.” Investigators’ biases on how rape victims “should act” lead them to conclude that Lara was lying, so they arrested her and charged her with making a false report.

Lara McLeod was arrested for reporting her own rape. Later her rapist murdered her n… https://t.co/fNItkxBB1a #news pic.twitter.com/b55oFSsqXn

— [ Police News ] (@InsidePolice) September 28, 2015

Her sister Hera was also charged with obstruction of justice, after allegedly deleting  video footage of her sister’s rape, that Rams had apparently filmed without either sisters’ knowledge. These charges were devastating for the two sisters, especially for Lara who watched as her reputation was ruined as more and more people learned of her supposed “fake rape.” It took years before the charges were finally expunged, but the experience left Lara with deep mistrust for law enforcement. But as reporter Katie J.M. Baker put it, the “worst was yet to come.”

According to Buzzfeed,

In the ensuing battle for custody over Prince, Hera and Joaquin’s infant son, it emerged that not only had Joaquin lied about his name, employment history, and age — he was a decade older than he had claimed — but he had also once been a suspect in his ex-girlfriend’s shooting death and a person of interest in his mother’s death, too, although he was never successfully charged in either case. He had been accused of child abuse by his other son, although never convicted, and ran an amateur porn site.

But thanks to the charges against Hera and Lara, Joaquin was able to portray himself as a comparatively fit parent — and the victim of a smear job. The judge granted Joaquin unsupervised visits. Three months later, EMTs found Prince unconscious on the floor of Joaquin’s house. The 15-month-old died the next day. Months later, Joaquin was charged with capital murder.

This story manages to combine almost everything that’s bad in this world into one perfect storm. A woman was raped, her life was ruined, and incompetence from the legal system led to her baby nephew’s death. The actual intricacies of the case are mind boggling. There was mishandling of evidence, miranda rights weren’t read, and the police involved operated under the bias that many women lie about being raped.

Until this kind of prejudice against rape victims is erased, sexual assault will continue to plague this country, rapes will continue to go unreported, and confidence in our police forces with only continue to dwindle. I hope Lara’s story sparks some change for the better.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Convinced This Women to Report her Rape, Then Arrested her for Lying appeared first on Law Street.

Last week in Kansas City, Missouri Tyrone C. Brown went into a community auditorium expecting to hear a presentation from law enforcement officials to help end violence in his community. Instead, to his surprise, he watched a slide show of mug shots of people the police were cracking down on. Brown then saw a familiar face pop up on the screen–his own–linking him to a criminal group that had been implicated in a homicide. Brown, who relayed this story to the New York Times, described feeling “disturbed,” acknowledging that he has been involved in crime but has never been involved in a killing. But Brown’s reaction to this accusation is just what the authorities desired. Brown’s situation is an example of an experiment taking place in police departments around the country, in which authorities have started to use complex computer algorithms to try and pinpoint people most likely to be involved in violent crimes in the future. Unfortunately, this tool might end up being more harmful than helpful.

This strategy combines aspects of both traditional policing, like paying attention to “hot spot” areas or communities or close monitoring of parolees, and more technological data like social media activity and drug use statistics. The program applied to Brown’s case is referred to as the Kansas City No Violence Alliance, assuring Brown and others that “the next time they, or anyone in their crews, commit a violent act, the police will come after everyone in the group for whatever offense they can make stick, no matter how petty.”

Although the goal of this program, and similar programs, is to do everything possible to prevent crimes from happening and may be benevolent, this is not the way to achieve that goal. This program only perpetuates the enormity of our racial profiling problem. The nature of these programs are essentially spitting in the face of the Black Lives Matter movement and other related groups. These programs say they are using a “complex computer algorithms” to try and predict crime, meaning authorities will be relying on the very skewed and racist demographics of those who are charged with crime. The nature of these programs could forever put a halt to building more positive relationships between the police and those who are too often targeted and subsequently charged with crimes–people of color.

How can reform of the system and those involved in crime be possible when programs like Kansas City No Violence Alliance are spreading across the nation? This vicious cycle will only continue with police “pinpointing” individuals who live in poorer areas or who are people of color. Over the last few years, in the midst of infuriating tragedies like the deaths of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, there has been important outcry and work toward reforming flawed institutions. Sadly, programs like the one implemented in Kansas City and across the country are working against this positive progression. There is a way to both combat crime and to stop racial profiling, and these programs are not the answer. 

Kui Mwai

Kui Mwai is a junior at American University, studying Law and Literature. She is from Nairobi, Kenya. Contact Kui at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post To Serve and Protect? New Police Program May Perpetuate Racial Profiling appeared first on Law Street.

Over the past couple days I’ve seen a post floating around on Facebook, Twitter, and other forms of social media. It shows a blue strip of paint on a curb and is accompanied with an explanation of something dubbed the “Safe Harbor Initiative.”

Safe Harbor Initiative – a blue line on your curb to show support to your local police #SafeHarborInitiativepic.twitter.com/3vYzByXz8G

— Caitlin Gold (@shaolinmomma) September 16, 2015

The original Facebook post, which appears to have originated from the account of a San Antonio man named Anthony Welichko, explained the purpose of the blue line, saying:

To all law enforcement who see this line, know that the residents of this home appreciate your service and dedication to keeping the peace. Know that when you enter the neighborhood and see these lines that you are not alone or without “back-up”. We do not need the media to make our voices of support for our police and emergency services heard ( though it would be nice). Lastly, if you are in my neighborhood and mean to harm a member of law enforcement, know that decision may be hazardous to you health as someone has that officers back!

Please share.

As of right now, the original post has over 80,000 shares, and will probably continue to grow.

It’s a nice gesture, in theory. But it’s also important to recognize that despite being well intentioned, this could actually end up being a really fantastically bad idea. Police officers aren’t just civilians who pick up guns and badges are suddenly equipped to deal with emergency scenarios. Instead they go through serious and intense training–much of which emphasizes the need to protect civilians and secure a particular area. Suddenly having civilians barge in as “backup” could potentially be a distraction, and way more harmful than helpful.

As Snopes, the famous online debunker of viral claims, put it:

Police departments across the United States are consistent and firm in their guidance on this matter: civilians should not intervene with crimes in progress, especially when police are already on the scene. Those who do may end up injured (potentially fatally), and untrained intervention poses severe risk to both other civilians and responding officers. This reason alone is enough to be extremely cautious about spreading the “blue strip” rumor, as the police require cooperation with the commands they’ve issued to bystanders more than they need encouragement for the public to act as crime scene cheerleaders.

The post is being lauded as a great way to show support for our nation’s police officers. But concerns that the social media campaign is misguided are incredibly valid. There’s a lot of ways to support police officers in the community, including donating time, money, or resources. But encouraging vigilante support is fundamentally a  bad idea–keep that in mind before painting a strip on your curb.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Viral “Safe Harbor Initiative” to Support Police Officers May Be a Bad Idea appeared first on Law Street.

Zachary Hammond, 19, was on a date on July 26 when he was fatally shot twice by a police officer during a drug bust in South Carolina.

Hammond was driving his car when police attempted to make a stop. The undercover officers staged a drug bust with Hammond’s 23-year-old date, Tori Morton, who had ten grams of weed on her person ready to sell. During the encounter, Morton was arrested and charged with possession, and Hammond was shot twice, in the shoulder and in the torso. The police officer who shot him claimed it was in self defense. He claimed Hammond was driving toward him with his vehicle when he fired the two shots.

However, the autopsy report seems to clearly disprove the police officer’s claim of self defense. The family’s attorney, Eric Bland, stated,

The shots were so close in proximity to each other that it would be physically impossible unless the car was stopped and the officer came up very close to an open window.

Hammond’s death has prompted numerous questions, few answers, and, surprisingly, no national outrage. Hammond’s family wants to know why there hasn’t been much coverage, and looked to the so-called #AllLivesMatter advocates for answers. Bland told The Washington Post this week:

It’s sad, but I think the reason is, unfortunately, the media and our government officials have treated the death of an unarmed white teenager differently than they would have if this were a death of an unarmed black teen. The hypocrisy that has been shown toward this is really disconcerting…The issue should never be what is the color of the victim. The issue should be: Why was an unarmed teen gunned down in a situation where deadly force was not even justified?”

While it is extremely unfortunate what happened to Zachary Hammond, the reason there are no advocates responding in outrage to Hammond’s death is because the #AllLivesMatter movement does not really exist. Instead, the #AllLivesMatter movement serves as a detraction from the acknowledgement of black lives being targeted by the police. That is not to say those who advocate for “all lives matter” do not care about Hammond’s death, but there is no reaction because the movement does not really exist. As a result, the response from the #BlackLivesMatter movement has been in many ways focused on pointing out the lack of attention from #AllLivesMatter.

Hammond’s death however, does raise continued questions about the way police officers respond to what they classify as “dangerous situations.” What does this say about the way police officers have been trained? In the situations where their responses have resulted in the loss of black lives, it was very easy to assume their motives–usually proven through series of incidents with police officers who have histories of racist behavior, recordings that show intentions, and many deaths that often seemed staged or unclear. But in this specific case, the motive for killing Hammond is not clear at all. Police officers are now being faced with even more questions in regard to how they effectively execute their jobs. Now that these white parents are asking the questions, maybe everyone will get the answers they deserve.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Unarmed White Teen Fatally Shot by Police Officer: Do #AllLivesMatter? appeared first on Law Street.

Police have the duty of serving and protecting our communities. They are supposed to stop crime and make us feel a little safer knowing that we have people to help us during our times of need. Unfortunately this perception of the police has completely changed due to the enormous amount of unnecessary police brutality and senselessness that has affected the lives of many. A white Alabama police officer who was once awarded for his great work has been exposed to be another officer that may not be very heroic after all.

Alabama officer kept job after proposal to murder black man and hide evidence http://t.co/CT3Sw69SpF pic.twitter.com/9sr9YP1sfA

— The Guardian (@guardian) August 4, 2015

Officer Troy Middlebrooks, 33, was caught a few years ago on a secret recording device discussing how to kill Vincent Bias (an African American man) and get away with it. However, the tape was just revealed on Tuesday, sparking controversy.

In 2013 Bias was at his brother-in-law’s house when Middlebrooks showed up because of an unleashed dog. Bias was cited for the dog being unleashed even though it belonged to his brother-in-law. Bias alleged that at the time he was being repeatedly harassed by city officers, including Middlebrooks. He claimed he was singled out because he was a black man and because he was in a relationship with a white woman. Middlebrooks had previously arrested Bias on drug charges earlier in the year, but he had been released on bail after paying a bond. Reportedly frustrated that Bias had been released, the officer pulled aside his brother-in-law, who is white, and told him he did not trust Bias. The brother-in-law then secretly began to record Middlebrooks’ statements. On the recording, Middlebrooks is heard saying if he were in the same position he would, “f-cking kill that motherf-cker with whatever I had in that f-cking house”. He continued to say, “And before the police got here, I’d f-cking put marks all over my shit and make it look like he was trying to f-cking kill me. I god damn guarantee you. What would it look like? Self f-cking defense. F-ck that piece of sh-t. I’m a lot different from a lot of these other folks. I’ll f-cking tell you what’s on my f-cking mind.”

He also began to mock Bias’ brother stating, “That motherf-cker right there needs a god d-mn bullet. And you f-cking know exactly what I’m talking about. The way he f-cking talks to you? Like you’re a f-cking child? Like he’s your … Are you his b-tch or something? He talks to you like that.”

After receiving the tape, Bias hired lawyers and played the recording for police chiefs and the mayor and told the city that he planned to sue for $600,000. The situation ended up being handled quietly outside of court, and Bias was given a much smaller amount of $35,000 by Alexander City authorities so they could avoid being publicly sued. He told NBC News that he took the money in hopes of moving away from Alexander City, so that he would no longer be targeted unfairly by the police. But members of the Alexander City Council said they had not been told about the case or the payment to Bias. One city council member, Tony Goss, said he was “absolutely flabbergasted” to learn of the details. Goss also said,

 This is absolutely unbelievable. Thirty-five thousand dollars is a lot of money and our city council is being left out of deliberation.

While referring to the recording he stated:

If an officer is recorded saying something like that, there are potential grounds for termination.

Middlebrooks shockingly kept his job and could not be reached for comment. Police Chief Willie Robinson stated that Middlebrooks was disciplined, but would not give out any details. Robinson also tried to cover for Middlebrooks and said that he was suggesting for the brother-in-law to carry out the killing. “He wasn’t saying that he was going to do that,” said the police chief. “He was talking about the man doing it himself.” Middlebrooks was repeatedly investigated and cleared by the State Bureau of Investigation.

However, it is downright frightening that a policeman that may have tried to tell someone how to kill a person is still on the workforce. In an environment where distrust of police appears to be at an all time high, and many questions are being raised about the ethics of our police forces, the fact that this was covered up is simply unacceptable. 

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Alabama Police Officer Caught on Tape Explaining How to Get Away With Murder appeared first on Law Street.

Celebrities are constantly in the spotlight, with cameras watching their every move. Magazines speculate over the details of celebrities’ lives like vultures, working to photograph every moment that they can. For those who enjoy following the lives of their favorite celebrities, the paparazzi can be seen as a good thing because they provide an inside look at our favorite stars. But the celebrities being followed often don’t agree. Over the years, celebrities have gotten very creative in the ways that they have tried to get rid of the paparazzi. Naomi Campbell definitely falls into that category, and she recently got into a lot of trouble in Italy for that creativity.

Campbell was just convicted of assault by a Sicilian court after scratching paparazzo Gaetano di Giovanni’s eye with her purse in August 2009. The English model had reportedly just gotten to the Sicilian island of Lapri when the photographer began to immediately snap photos of Campbell and her then-boyfriend, Vladimir Doronin. Di Giovanni then continued to take photos of her as she walked the streets, and she proceed to hit him with her purse, scratching and bruising his eye in the process. The photographer reportedly sought medical treatment and took three days to recover. In 2013, when Campbell was ordered to stand trial, di Giovanni said, “I had just started taking some shots of her and I did not expect such a violent reaction.”

Campbell’s lawyer was able to reach an agreement with the photographer so that he withdrew the charges against her, but prosecutor Francesco Massara ordered the trial to go ahead for public interest reasons because of the gravity of the charges against her, Italy’s national news agency Ansa said. She was recently found guilty of assault and received a six-month suspended prison sentence. Essentially that means she probably won’t actually face jail time, unless she gets in trouble again during that time period or fails to finish her community service requirements. However, Campbell has also said that she will be appealing her sentence.

This isn’t the first time that Campbell has had to defend her actions in court. In the past, the model has faced legal troubles due to her quick temper, as early as 2002. In addition, she has been arrested and sued for different acts of violence and abuse, including assaulting police officers in 2008, and throwing her phone at her personal assistant and maid on different occasions.

But while Campbell has had a history of aggression, that doesn’t mean the paparazzi is completely innocent. Di Giovanni originally dropped the charges because he was not distraught by the situation, but ended up pursuing the lawsuit anyway, possibly because he wanted to take advantage of her being a public figure.

The entire situation is certainly messy, and does say a lot about the expectation of privacy that celebrities simply don’t have. There have been many who have spoken out about the way they’re treated by the paparazzi–for example, last year Kristen Bell created an anti paparazzi campaign, calling for the paparazzi photographing children to stop. Campbell was probably in the wrong for hitting di Giovanni, but there’s two sides to this story, and the harassment that celebrities have to undergo certainly does deserve to be taken into account. Campbell’s appeal is now pending, so this fight, and the overall question of celebrity privacy, is far from over.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will Naomi Campbell Be Walking the Runway in Italian Prison? appeared first on Law Street.

One of the most important problems facing college students today is sexual assault, and a recent poll by the Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation further solidifies this fact. The poll found that one in five women are victims of sexual assault in college. The poll also indicates that very few cases of sexual assault are actually reported to police or campus authorities.

Conducted between January and March, the Post/Kaiser poll surveyed 1,053 college students who live on or near their school’s campus.

According to the Rape Assault Incest National Network (RAINN), 68 percent of sexual assault victims nationwide do not report the crime to the police, and the rate on college campuses is even strikingly lower. According to the Post/Kaiser poll, 72 percent of the respondents who experienced unwanted sexual contact or sexual assault said that they told someone about it. Of that, only 11 percent told the police or campus authorities.

How can a crime as traumatic and prevalent as sexual assault be reported at such a low rate?

A wide range of factors may prevent sexual assault survivors from reporting or even openly discussing the crime that has been perpetrated against them. Victims often remain silent because they fear that the police, school administrators, or their peers won’t believe them. A 2007 study by The U.S. Department of Justice found that 42 percent  of forcible sexual assault victims who did not report the attack said it was because they “did not want anyone to know.”

The fact that most victims know their assailant as well as the fear of being unfairly blamed and victim shamed, particularly when alcohol is involved, can make reporting very difficult. When a victim knows the person who assaulted them it can become very difficult to talk about what happened to friends or authority figures. According to the Post/Kaiser poll, 70 percent of victims said that they knew the person in some way, and nearly 50 percent said they knew the person well or very well. While those who are sexually assaulted are never to blame for what happened to them, victim blaming remains a reality for many on college campuses. This is particularly prevalent when alcohol is involved, which according to the Post/Kaiser poll happens in more than 60 percent of cases.

Finally, victims of sexual assault may not report the crime because it is simply unlikely that the perpetrator will actually receive punishment. According to RAINN, of the 32 percent of sexual assaults reported to the police nationally, only seven percent lead to an arrest, and an even lower two percent were convicted or spend a day in prison. Theories have posited that the reporting rate is so low because many victims believe that a two percent conviction rate is not sufficient enough to go through filing a police report, an invasive rape kit, and possibly testifying in a trial. Federal data also shows that punishment remains an issue on college campuses, as administrators often warn, suspend, or order counseling for offenders rather than expel them.

While the Post/Kaiser poll provides important insight into the issue of sexual assault on college campuses, and the one in five statistic is certainly striking, a lot remains unknown. The factors behind underreporting to the police may also affect the results of anonymous surveys. While these surveys provide a much better understanding of sexual assault compared to the number of cases reported to the police, polls still face their own challenges. Because the issue of sexual assault likely varies between campuses, national surveys cannot help us understand all of the problems that individual institutions face.

As sexual assault becomes an important national issue, colleges around the country are starting to take important steps to prevent assaults on campus. New programs and policies are starting to encourage victims to come forward, raise awareness,  and provide new resources to students. Programs like the Campus Grant Program and the Bystander Intervention Programs are just a few examples that can help reduce sexual assault cases. Last year, a dozen House members called on U.S. News and World Report to include efforts to prevent sexual assaults in its annual college rankings.

The White House launched the “It’s On Us” campaign to increase awareness and empower men and women to actively prevent sexual assault. The Obama Administration is also encouraging the Department of Education (DOE) to proactively deal with the issue using its Title IX authority. These efforts have led the DOE’s Office for Civil Rights to investigate more than 100 colleges and universities for potentially mishandling sexual violence cases.

It’s clear that sexual assault cases on college campuses are a huge problem that must continue to be addressed nationally. As a society, we must take action to deter these crimes instead of blaming victims. Colleges must create an environment where victims are encouraged to come forward and we can all work together to make sure these alarmingly high rates become a thing of the past.

Kwame Apea

Kwame Apea is a member of the University of Maryland Class of 2016 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Kwame at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Sexual Assault: Still a Problem for Colleges appeared first on Law Street.

There’s a new police chief in Ferguson, Missouri and his name is Andre Anderson. Ferguson leaders have introduced him as the city’s first African-American head of the police, because they believe he’s the right man for the very tough job.

Anderson is taking a six month leave from his Glendale, Arizona commander post to take on the new role of the city’s interim police chief. If all goes well, this is a role that could potentially become permanent by the end of his service.

Anderson told reporters his first priority would be “simply to build trust” and enhance the city’s recent efforts to get officers to develop positive relationships with people in the areas they patrol. Anderson explained this is not something the force can do on its own. He said to the residents “we cannot do this without you. I believe together, we can forge better relationships.” In addition, Anderson also plans to train his officers to guard against bias and escalation, and focus on hiring more qualified Black officers.

While the effort for a change within this department is appreciated, this does not mean the problem has been solved. Change will not come with just a new temporary police chief who is Black and has plans to hire more Black cops and work with the community. Yes, these are all steps in the right direction, but change will not come until our society, which includes police officers, respect Black lives.

After the August 9 shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown, an unarmed Black teenager who died at the hands of a white Ferguson police officer, the Ferguson Police Department was suddenly under the microscope. Brown’s killing sparked a revolution in Ferguson, creating weeks of fiery protests and threw a national spotlight on the St. Louis suburb of 21,000. The protests only increased when Wilson was not indicted by a grand jury.

Darren Wilson made comments describing what he did as the “right thing to do,” because he wasn’t quite sure what Brown could be capable of. He claimed that during their scuffle, Brown was abrasive, and tried to lunge at him more than once. He also claimed that Brown told Wilson he was “too much of a p– to shoot him.” But many people question the accuracy of his story, as well as Wilson’s reasoning. Even though he claimed the outcome would have been the exact same had Brown been white, this is something many are uncertain of, as Brown was also unarmed. The controversy has continued, as the department  saw many resignations after the release of a report from the Justice Department that found a culture of racism in the police department and municipal offices. Former Police Chief Tom Jackson was among the city officials who resigned.

A large issue between police officers and minority communities is that community members fear or do not respect white police officers. If there are more Black police officers in the community, this relationship could change, but it’s not enough. This is a great step in the right direction, but that does not mean the problematic culture doesn’t still exist. There’s still a long way to go to ensure that everyone is treated fairly by the law.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Ferguson’s New Interim Police Chief: Step in the Right Direction, But Still Not Enough appeared first on Law Street.

One increasingly important tool used by law enforcement and various organizations is forensic imaging software. This technique can be used to create images of victims whose bodies are unidentifiable, photos that display how a missing person is projected to look in present day, or to bring to life skeletal remains in the hope of finding someone who recognizes the deceased. A recent Massachusetts case involving an unidentified young girl nicknamed “Baby Doe” has once again validated the importance of investing in investigative technology.

One group pioneering this technology is the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), a nonprofit organization that works with law enforcement agencies and families to aid in cases of missing and exploited children. The NCMEC utilizes a variety of functions to fulfill its mission of helping to find, aid, and protect children. The agency has had great success in the past through its initiatives, as it has assisted in the recovery of more than 208,000 children.

Computer generated imagery is a relatively new technology, although it has been used heavily in recent years in cases of missing or unidentified children and has proven to be vital in investigations. This unit was first instituted by the NCMEC in 1990, and has been used so far in 6,000 age progressions, 1,300 of them leading to children being found or identified through the pictures. CNN reports, “forensic imaging and age progression are often fairly accurate and can help find the missing or unidentified children.” When comparing images created by forensic artists to real life photographs, it is evident that they are very close to the real thing, and are an integral tool in most cases.

For example, a recent case in Massachusetts has renewed focus on the benefits of forensic imaging technology. The remains of an unidentified young girl, who is believed to have only been about four years old and has been dubbed “Baby Doe,” were found in a trash bag on a Boston Harbor beach about three weeks ago. Even though the following computer-generated image of her has been seen by millions of people, authorities have had little to no luck in their efforts to identify her. This tragic case has mystified law enforcement and captivated the hearts of Americans nationwide, as people continue to search for any clues that could lead to the identification of this girl.

Christi Andrews of our forensic imaging unit answers questions about her #BabyDoe computer generated image on @AC360 pic.twitter.com/REcBzAsxWR

— NCMEC (@MissingKids) July 14, 2015

"How can nobody miss her?" The plight of a "Baby Doe" found in a trash bag has moved millions: http://t.co/pucotZhcuI pic.twitter.com/fqE8fJbau8

— CNN (@CNN) July 9, 2015

Authorities are working furiously to find any possible lead that could help them to identify the girl, perplexed as to how no one has recognized her yet. It is not clear whether her death was accidental or intentional, and investigators are desperate for any information at all that could lead to her identity or the cause of her death. Law enforcement in Massachusetts has teamed up with the NCMEC since this agency is well trained in these types of situations and offers many useful resources, including its expertise in forensic imaging.

The image of Baby Doe was created by Christi Andrews, a forensic artist who works with the NCMEC and who tried to make the face of the girl look as realistic as possible using Adobe Photoshop. In order for Andrews to join the Forensic Imaging Team and become a specialist, a job she has had for twelve years now, she had to first receive extensive training in order to master the software. She constructed the image by studying the precise details and photos from the autopsy. The picture has been shared hundreds of thousands of times on multiple different social media platforms and seen by over fifty million people, but unfortunately, no valuable tips have arisen.

This type of software is instrumental in many cases because it assists investigators in their efforts to identify deceased victims, create realistic, up-to-date photos of missing people that can be used when searching for them, and can garner useful information from the public once released. In the case of Baby Doe, Andrews was limited to pictures and information given from the coroner, although when creating age progression images, artists can often utilize pictures of family members to analyze similarities and use this to generate life-like images. Our culture’s obsession with taking photos has actually proven to be useful when it comes to creating these age progression images because it gives the specialists more to study and compare to.

After these images are produced, they are distributed to the masses via a variety of platforms, such as social media, billboards, flyers, through news stations, or other sources. The goal is to have as many people view it as possible so that the likelihood of someone recognizing the subject and contacting the police increases. This tool is especially helpful in cases of children who have been missing for many years, because the age progression feature gives investigators a glimpse of what the children might look like currently. This is crucial because not only does it increase the chances of other people recognizing this person, but also the missing person themself might see it. There might be children out there who were abducted at too young of an age to remember and are raised in a new family, so if they were to see these images displaying missing children that resemble them, this might cause them to recover old memories or even come forward if they suspect that they could be the child. Forensic imaging software is a critical tool for a multitude of reasons, although most importantly, it can be used to solve cases that seemingly have come to a screeching halt.

Toni Keddell

Toni Keddell is a member of the University of Maryland Class of 2017 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Toni at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Forensic Imaging Software: A Tool to Break Cold Cases? appeared first on Law Street.

Since 1981, the number of children of incarcerated parents has increased by an extremely dramatic 80 percent. Along with the more than 50 percent increase in the number of incarcerated women–75 percent of whom are mothers–well over half of all adults incarcerated in state and federal prisons today have at least one child under the age of 18.

Though the numbers are grim, they are far from the whole story. How does mass incarceration affect children of incarcerated parents, and how have these children come together to advocate for their needs?

Consequences of Parental Incarceration for Children

Having a parent in prison can have an impact on a child’s mental health, social behavior, and educational prospects. The emotional trauma that may occur and the practical difficulties of a disrupted family life can be compounded by the social stigma that children may face as a result of having a parent in prison or jail. Children who have an incarcerated parent may experience financial hardship that results from the loss of that parent’s income. Further, some incarcerated parents face termination of parental rights because their children have been in the foster care system beyond the time allowed by law.

Unlike children of the deceased or divorced who tend to benefit from society’s familiarity with and acceptance of their loss, children of the incarcerated too often grow up and grieve under a cloud of low expectations and amidst a swirling set of assumptions that they will fail, that they will themselves resort to a life of crime or that they too will succumb to a life of drug addiction.

Children Fighting Back

1. I have the right to be kept safe and informed at the time of my parent’s arrest.
2. I have the right to be heard when decision are made about me.
3. I have the right to be considered when decisions are made about my parent.
4. I have the right to be well cared for in my parent’s absence.
5. I have the right to speak with, see, and touch my parent.
6. I have the right to support as I struggle with my parent’s incarceration.
7. I have the right not to be judged, blamed, or labeled because of my parent’s incarceration.
8. I have the right to a lifelong relationship with my parent.

1. I have the right to be kept safe and informed at the time of my parent’s arrest: (1) Develop arrest protocols that support and protect children; (2) Offer children and/or their caregivers basic information about the post-arrest process.
2. I have the right to be heard when decisions are made about me: (1) Train staff at institutions whose constituency includes children of incarcerated parents to recognize and address these children’s needs and concerns; (2) Tell the truth; (3) Listen.
3. I have the right to be considered when decisions are made about my parent: (1) Review current sentencing law in terms of its impact on children and families; (2) Turn arrest into an opportunity for family preservation; (3) Include a family impact statement in pre-sentence investigation reports.
4. I have the right to be well cared for in my parent’s absence: (1) Support children by supporting their caretakers; (2) Offer subsidized guardianship.
5. I have the right to speak with, see, and touch my parent: (1) Provide access to visiting rooms that are child-centered, non-intimidating, and conducive to bonding; (2) Consider proximity to family when siting prisons and assigning prisoners; (3) Encourage child welfare departments to facilitate contact.
6. I have the right to support as I face my parent’s incarceration: (1) Train adults who work with young people to recognize the needs and concerns of children whose parents are incarcerated; (2) Provide access to specially trained therapists, counselors, and/or mentors; (3) Save five percent for families.
7. I have the right not to be judged, blamed, or labeled because my parent is incarcerated: (1) Create opportunities for children of incarcerated parents to communicate with and support each other; (2) Create a truth fit to tell; (3) Consider differential response when a parent is arrested.
8. I have the right to a lifelong relationship with my parent: (1) Re-examine the Adoption and Safe Families Act; (2) Designate a family services coordinator at prisons and jails; (3) Support incarcerated parents upon reentry; (4) Focus on rehabilitation and alternatives to incarceration.

Led by youth who have had a parent incarcerated, Project WHAT! raises awareness about children with incarcerated parents with the long-term goal of improving services and policies that affect these children.  WHAT! stands for We’re Here And Talking, which is exactly what the team is doing. Over seven million children have a parent on parole, probation, or incarcerated. The program employs young people who have experienced parental incarceration as the primary curriculum content developers and facilitators for trainings.

By directly employing youth in their advocacy efforts, Project WHAT! utilizes both long-term advocacy and direct-action strategies. By striving toward long-term goals–like the ones described above–while offering short-term assistance–immediately empowering youth and children through both their programming and their paid employment opportunities–Project WHAT! is a prime example of youth-led organizing across the country. Indeed, children of incarcerated parents in Michigan have also organized to open their own chapters of Project WHAT!.

So where are we now?

Children of incarcerated parents are uniquely impacted by the criminal justice system, even when they are not, themselves, incarcerated. From emotional and psychological trauma, to increased poverty, to being separated permanently from their parents without parent or child’s consent, mass incarceration devastates many of the children whose parents are incarcerated. However, coalitions of children like Project WHAT! are working to ensure that their needs are met, even if the criminal justice system is not interested in meeting them.

Resources

Osborne Association: Children of Incarcerated Parents: A Bill of Rights

Rhonda L. Rosenthal, PC: Severing the Parental Rights of Inmates

California Watch: Number of Children With Parent in Prison Growing

IndiGoGo: Project WHAT! Building a Youth-Led Movement for Prison Reform in Michigan

Community Works: Project WHAT!

San Francisco Children of Incarcerated Parents: From Rights to Realities

Reporting on Health: Children Who Witness Parent’s Immigration Arrest May Suffer Lifetime Health Consequences

Annie E. Casey Foundation: Children of Incarcerated Parents Fact Sheet

Youth.gov: Children of Incarcerated Parents

Justice Strategies: Children on the Outside: Voicing the Pain and Human Costs of Parental Incarceration

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: The Effects of Parental Incarceration on Children

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Children of Incarcerated Parents: What Are Their Rights? appeared first on Law Street.

Columbia University made history last week when it became the first U.S. university to divest its endowment from the private prison industry. A student-led activist campaign has put pressure on the Board of Trustees to divest since early 2014 when a small group of Columbia students discovered that the school was investing in G4S, the world’s largest private security firm, and the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), the largest private prison company in the United States. After a vote last week, Columbia’s $9 billion endowment will now be void of its shares in CCA and its estimated 220,000 shares in G4S. Divesting from an industry that makes its money by breeding human suffering is a move that should be loudly applauded.

The divestment vote occurred within the larger discussion of mass incarceration and the tribulations that stem from the systemic injustices that American prisons propagate. While local jails and state and federal prisons all seem to value a punitive rather than rehabilitative approach, private prisons are by far the cruelest. There is an inherent conflict between the supposed goal of the criminal justice system–rehabilitation–and companies’ profit motives. For-profit, private prisons make up a multibillion-dollar per year industry. The U.S. Department of Justice reports that as of 2013, there were 133,000 prisoners in private prisons, or 8.4 percent of the U.S. prison population. These numbers break down to 19.1 percent of the federal prison population being detained in privately owned prisons, and 6.8 percent of the state prison population.

Since 1990, violent crime in America has dropped 51 percent, property crime has fallen 43 percent, and homicides are down 54 percent. But incarceration rates since 1990 have increased by 50 percent. If crime is down, why do we have so many more people in prison? Due to the war on drugs and the increase of harsher sentencing laws, more low-level and non-violent offenders are sent to prison. Almost half of state prisoners are serving time for non-violent crimes, and more than half of federal inmates are imprisoned for drug offenses. Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz wrote, “This prodigious rate of incarceration is not only inhumane, it is economic folly.” The United States has 5 percent of the world’s population but 25 percent of the world’s prison population. We incarcerate a greater percentage of our population than any other country on Earth, and our compulsion to incarcerate costs taxpayers $63.4 billon per year.

The overcrowding of jails and prisons across the country and a reluctance to adequately finance these correctional facilities precipitated the movement toward private prisons, which proponents claimed could result in overall prison cost reductions of 20 percent. However, allowing the facilities to be operated by the private sector has resulted in a meager 1 percent cost decrease. With crime rates on the decline, private prisons began doing everything they could to increase imprisonment rates so that they could stay in business and continue to make money. From 2002 to 2012, CCA, GEO Group, and Management & Training Corporation (MTC), a contractor that manages private prisons, spent around 45 million dollars lobbying state and federal governments, arguing for harsher laws and more arrests. These corporations also poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into the election campaigns of governors, state legislators, and judges in order to ensure that their plans become laws that guarantee more people will be incarcerated, so they can continue to make money.

Some people try to justify this system with the thought that people who are in prison are there for a reason. But this wishful thinking is untrue. About 50 percent of immigrants who are in prison are detained in privately owned prisons, and the majority of these people are simply being detained while waiting for their cases to be decided in court. In other words, immigrants who have not been convicted of any crime are being housed in violent, corrupt, dangerous private prisons while they wait for months for courts—that are often illegally being paid off by corrupt companies like CCA to keep people in prison—to decide their fate. The private prison industry has an incentive to keep people in jail. If their business plans included imprisoning to rehabilitate and treating people for mental health or drug addiction issues that may have contributed to their arrests, the industry would collapse. Instead, private prisons are rampant with abuse, neglect, and misconduct; private prisons understaff their facilities to save money, ignore pleas for help and prisoner-on-prisoner violence within the prison, and even refuse healthcare to inmates. In order to make the most profit, the private prison industry wants harsher drug laws, longer sentencing, and wants to increase recidivism rates.

In New York, about $60,000 of government money is spent per year to keep just one inmate imprisoned, while just under $20,000 is spent to educate an elementary or secondary school student. This trend extends nationally: no state in the country invests more—or even an equal amount—on educating an individual student than on housing a prisoner. Maybe if we relaxed drug laws and unreasonable sentencing, focused more on rehabilitation than punishment, did not allow prejudiced and ill-intentioned companies like CCA to spend millions on lobbyists, and we invested more on education than on our corrupt criminal justice system, the United States would be a happier, healthier place.

Columbia University’s divestment from the private prison industry will not solve the issue of mass incarceration. It will not redesign the broken system that we call criminal “justice” in America. It won’t even put CCA or G4S out of business or make a sizeable dent in their net worth. But what divestment will do is beyond economic comprehension. Refusing to reap benefits from companies founded upon violence forced on people by virtue of their race, class, or citizenship status is a social stance that proves a complete rejection of everything private prisons stand for. When you stop investing in something, you’ve stopped believing in it. And no one should believe in the private prison industry.

Emily Dalgo

Emily Dalgo is a member of the American University Class of 2017 and a Law Street Media Fellow during the Summer of 2015. Contact Emily at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Columbia University Backs Away From Private Prisons: We Should Follow Its Lead appeared first on Law Street.

Najee Harmon is a 20-year-old man, and the primary suspect in the shooting of a Wauwatosa, WI detective on June 19. He’s been charged with three counts of attempted first degree intentional homicide and one count of felony possession of a firearm. After investigating a recent burglary, officers were on foot observing reported stolen vehicles, when Harmon fired several shots at Detective Jeffrey Griffin, injuring the officer. A manhunt took place for 24 hours, and he was finally found hiding in the basement of a long-time friend, Stephanie King.

But what struck me was what happened when King was interviewed; her comments raise a lot of questions about the “us vs. them” mentality that has begun to take hold between Black communities and the police.

While the focus from the media was on Harmon’s violent acts, King defended him saying, “To me he ain’t do no wrong, he just shot a cop. Everyone comes around when they shoot the cop. But when the cops shoot people, do they come around?”

While it’s never ok to shoot someone–particularly an innocent someone, what frustrates me so much about this interview is that she is partially right. Given recent events involving instances of police brutality many Black people are afraid for their lives. Recent events have proven that you can be the best looking, speaking, well-mannered, and respectful Black person and still be killed for the color of your skin. So, King’s logic makes some sense, although it certainly doesn’t make Harmon’s actions right. But you can’t fully blame her for this logic–this is what the newest frontier in the race war has come to look like in the United States. 

The tension between minority communities and the police is neither a small nor a dying issue. #BlackLivesMatter protests across the country have called for reforms and increased accountability surrounding police shootings and a reduction in the use of military equipment by local police departments.

“The system of policing has earned our mistrust,” said Opal Tometi, a New York-based activist and co-founder of the #BlackLivesMatter campaign.

It seems like every day you turn on the news and hear a story of yet another Black male who has died at the gun of a White police officer. There are tensions between communities and police officers, particularly when stories of corrupt police officers stealing drugs or money abound. Stigmas develop as these stories are passed throughout communities. This anger has built up to an all-time high. Black Americans are frustrated, sick of being mistreated, and it has gotten to the point where they believe the only solution is to take matters into their own hands. Black communities often feel like the people who are supposed to protect them are becoming those who victimize them instead. 

There are some understandable explanations for this. Police officers do not always understand the communities they are patrolling. Sometimes they enter these communities, and don’t know what they’re dealing with or how community members are feeling. There are many factors that can contribute to problems with the police, but this is a common problem with police officers in minority communities. This does not, of course, excuse genuine wrong they’ve done, but can be a starting point for a discussion about the issues they face as officers of the law.

On the other hand, in the defense of the police officers, their jobs require them to risk their lives regularly. In interviews with media outlets, officers often speak of being afraid during particular incidents and discharging their weapons because they feel it’s the best way to protect themselves. Granted, there are police officers who lie about this to cover something they’ve done, but  fear can certainly affect how a police officer does his job. It’s easy to forget that our police officers may genuinely be scared in some instances–after all we don’t want to picture our protectors fearful. But they’re certainly not perfect–just like the rest of us experience personal problems and pressures outside their jobs, they do too.

Arguably the biggest issue between minority communities and police officers is a lack of respect. Minority communities do not respect police officers, and because police officers know there is disrespect, they have the potential to act out of anger and frustration. So how can we improve this growing issue? One way is to advocate and speak up. For example, Black Lives Matter has given national attention to the growing mistreatment African-Americans face. People usually turn the other cheek because it’s not their problem, but this really is a problem for all of us. 

There is some potential for improvement–by investing in solutions like community policing, we can hope to build that mutual respect. Through partnerships with community organizations, community members can feel heard, respected, and empowered to help police control crime in their neighborhoods. Developing these relationships, while not a complete solution, is certainly a step in the right direction, and may break the us vs. them narrative. Harmon’s actions and King’s statements are just one example of the compelling need to fix this horrible division in American society. 

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post An Us Vs. Them Mentality Won’t Fix the Problem of Police Brutality appeared first on Law Street.

As mass incarceration and state violence vis a vis police brutality are coming increasingly under fire, even in mainstream media, many communities are turning toward alternative methods of addressing violence. Transformative justice–as opposed to criminal justice–seeks to create alternatives to incarceration in a similar manner to its less-radical cousin, restorative justice. But transformative justice does something else, as well: transformative practices encourage communities to avoid involving police in crimes, even in instances of violence.

How can community practices of transformative justice transform the larger criminal justice system? Can community-based methods of addressing violence be the key to transforming this society?

What is Transformative Justice?

According to Generation Five, an organization dedicated to transformative justice in cases of gender-based violence, especially child abuse, transformative justice is described as the following:

Transformative justice [is] a liberatory approach to violence…[which] seeks safety and accountability without relying on alienation, punishment, or State or systemic violence, including incarceration or policing.

Three core beliefs:

Individual justice and collective liberation are equally important, mutually supportive, and fundamentally intertwined—the achievement of one is impossible without the achievement of the other.

The conditions that allow violence to occur must be transformed in order to achieve justice in individual instances of violence. Therefore, Transformative Justice is both a liberating politic and an approach for securing justice.

State and systemic responses to violence, including the criminal legal system and child welfare agencies, not only fail to advance individual and collective justice but also condone and perpetuate cycles of violence.”

Because of these core beliefs, rather than seeking to integrate transformative practices into the current criminal justice system, transformative justice practitioners actively advocate for remaining outside of state intervention.

Transformative Justice is a response to the State’s inability to provide justice on either individual or collective levels. Therefore, in this paper, we propose a model that responds to experiences of violence without relying on current State systems. We believe this to be a liberating politic that creates opportunities for healing and transformation rather than retribution and punishment. Transformative Justice moves us toward equity and liberation rather than maintaining the inequality that the current State and systems maintain.

Transformative justice practitioners argue that there is a choice, however: by equipping communities to engage in transformative practices instead of resorting to the only option often presented to people–involving the police in cases of violence–harm can actually be repaired and further harm can actually be prevented.

Can Transformative Practices Achieve Justice?

While many people across the country increasingly accept alternatives to incarceration for youth who are convicted of minor, nonviolent offenses–indeed, restorative practices dealing with those kinds of cases are becoming more common–many are skeptical about transformative justice advocates’ claims that alternatives to incarceration should also be used in cases as grave as rape and child abuse.

But does anyone actually practice transformative justice?

In one example of transformative justice principles being used in an effort to keep targeted communities safe without resorting to state intervention, the Bed-Stuy, Brooklyn queer of color youth collective Safe OUTside the System launched a campaign in 2007 in line with transformative justice principles and practices:

In 2007, the collective launched the Safe Neighborhood Campaign. Similar to the Dorchester Green Light Program of the 1970s, the campaign provides safe havens from sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and racist language, behaviour, and violence of all sorts. The campaign has three phases. In the first, neighbourhood public spaces such as restaurants, schools, churches, and businesses agree to visibly identify themselves as safe havens for those threatened with or fleeing from violence. In the second phase, the campaign incorporates an educational component to address some of the causes of anti-gay and anti-trans violence. Members of the campaign train the owners and employees… [on] ways to prevent violent without relying on law enforcement. In the third phase, Safe Space advocates recruit other community members and public figures into the campaign.

In ways that are formal–like these Safe OUTside the System’s effort–and informal, strategies of transformative justice are providing alternatives to the criminal justice system across the country.

Transforming criminal justice?

While transformative justice can be criticized for not offering a structured, consistent approach to providing alternatives to policing, transformative justice advocates continue to emphasize the importance of promoting truly individual and community-based alternatives–which vary with each circumstance–rather than attempting to dictate what is best for different communities. This is because ultimately, the priority of transformative justice advocates is not to transform the criminal justice system, but rather to work outside of it until it can be dismantled and rebuilt in a transformative way that does not continue to target already marginalized peoples.

Resources

Generation Five: Transformative Justice

Generation Five: Toward Transformative Justice

Huffington Post: Seeking Transformative Justice in Ferguson, Dearborn, and Beyond

Huffington Post: Criminalizing Victims: How the Punishment Economy Failed Marissa Alexander

Philly Stands Up!: Transformative Justice Anti-Sexual Assault Action Camp!

US Prison Culture: Thoughts About Community Support Around Intimate Violence

Safe OUTSide the System: The SOS Collective

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Transformative Justice Transforming Mass Incarceration? appeared first on Law Street.

Sharonda Coleman-Singleton.

Reverend Clementa Pinckney.

Cynthia Hurd.

Tywanza Sanders.

Myra Thompson.

Ethel Lee Lance.

Reverend Daniel L. Simmons.

Reverend Depayne Middleton-Doctor.

Susie Jackson.

So, fellow white folks. Know any of these names? Any of these lives?

No?

But we all know the name in the headline.

Stop saying his name. Stop sharing his manifesto. Infamy was one of his goals. #Charleston #DontSayHisName

— David M. Perry (@Lollardfish) June 20, 2015

That’s why you clicked on this post, right? Outraged, right, because we would never pick up a gun and murder Black people, in a church for crying out loud, so how can we possibly all be this killer kid?

But we don’t need a gun and we don’t need a confederate flag to be the Charleston shooter.

Because the murderer in Charleston was, yes, an individual young person, but the murderer was also all of us white folk.

It’s all of us who tweeted #notallwhitepeople after the shooting but criticized Black people in Baltimore for rising against state violence.

We know #NotAllWhitePeople are racist; we're attacking a white supremacist system, so stop whining. pic.twitter.com/Y5wR0ebSVv

— • J a y n a • (@jxchristine_) June 18, 2015

It’s all of us who let him say that he slaughtered Black people to “protect” white women, and we still remained on the proverbial sidelines, letting him murder people in our name.

It’s all of us who prioritize our white tears over the lived experiences of people of color.

It’s all of us, even when we don’t remain passive in the face of state violence.

Because even when we don’t remain passive, we can travel down the street–or even run down the street–confident that we won’t get shot by cops.

Because even when we do protest against white supremacist state violence, we benefit from it.

We benefit from it, and we can do nothing to change that except, maybe, beginning to acknowledge it, and encouraging other white folk to acknowledge it, too.

Because the Charleston shooting is not an exception. This young man’s racism and racist violence are not exceptions.

Dylann Roof is not an extremist, he's the logical expression of #WhiteSupremacy & nostalgic settler-colonialism: http://t.co/Q1f822CCpG #USA

— Kamal Fizazi (@kamalfizazi) June 23, 2015

He has been honest. He has been explicit about what every single structural foundation of this country is entrenched in.

The young man who took so many lives in Charleston is simply more honest than the rest of the country. He explicitly states what all of these foundational fixtures of U.S. society implicitly yet violently impose on people in this country and across the world every day–from our slavery-defending and genocide-based Constitution; to the racist “war on drugs” that is actually a war on communities of color; to the fact that Black History Month is the only time narratives by any kind of POC are highlighted in our schools; to the microaggressions that dominate the workplace, internet, media, and just about everything else; to the environmental racism that is killing even more people of color than police violence–white supremacy.

White people — all of us, no matter how radical our politics or how intersectional our identities (my dis/abilities and queerness do not make me any less white)–materially benefit from and participate in white supremacy.

So yes, we are all Dylan Roof.

And if we don’t want to be?

Well, acknowledging our positions in a white supremacist country and turning off our white tears in favor of genuinely prioritizing those that white supremacy kills is a fine place to start.

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Fellow White Folks: We Are All Dylan Roof appeared first on Law Street.

Human trafficking is the second largest form of organized crime in the world behind the illegal drug trade. The industry affects 12.3 million people each year, and generates more than $32 billion worldwide, yet many Americans don’t necessarily expect it to take place close to home. Yet the two most common forms of human trafficking, sex trafficking and labor trafficking, are on the rise in many states such as Pennsylvania. In a horrifying example of this phenomenon, a Pennsylvania man named Paul Sewell was just sentenced to 23 years in prison for prostituting young teenagers and producing child pornography, illustrating the prevalence of the crime.

According to the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, it has become a source, destination, and pass-through state for human trafficking. Sewell, 49, of Reading, PA, ran a prostitution ring from his home and used the building next door as a brothel. He once ran a car dealership, a bail bond business, and even held a job as a school counselor with the Reading School District. Sewell, who often referred to himself as “God,” would bring in the girls, many of whom were minors, and have sex with them to “test them out.” He would then brand a chosen girl with a tattoo on the back of her neck stating “God” as well as a nickname he gave her. Sewell also advertised the women on his website, and emailed explicit pictures of them to potential clients. The business serviced eight to nine clients a day and Sewell kept 40 percent of the profits that the girls made. When girls no longer wanted to work for Sewell he would sometimes subject them to physical violence to force them to continue working. One of the prostituted children spoke up and stated,

It’s like I had given my soul away in exchange for money… . If it wasn’t for me having a child, I would have killed myself by now. I’m so disgusted with myself.

Sewell has been previously convicted for impersonating a police officer, resisting arrest, and making terroristic threats. Sewell applied to become a police officer in the 1980s but was dismissed from the academy after an altercation at the school’s pistol range. Sewell pleaded guilty in September 2011 to four counts of sex trafficking and three counts of producing child pornography. In addition to the 23-year sentence that he was given yesterday, he will be required to serve five years of supervised release and pay $52,000 in restitution.

Many trafficking victims enter this industry between the ages of 12-15. Not only can trafficking create serious physical harm, it can damage victims mentally and emotionally as well. It is scary to think that someone who was once a school counselor could also run a sex ring. While operating this business, Sewell allegedly had sexual relations with his 13-year-old niece and has fathered fourteen children with ten different women. Even more disturbingly, most of his children lived with him along with many of the women who worked as prostitutes. To think of children living with a man of this sort and being around such a disgusting crime is saddening.

Human trafficking is ruining the lives of countless girls, and it routinely happens right here in the United States. As these businesses continue to grow, the police need to continue to be vigilant. Sewell’s crime should not have gone unnoticed for so long.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Human Trafficking in the U.S.: Pennsylvania Man Sentenced for Horrifying Crime appeared first on Law Street.

With mass incarceration under scrutiny, questions arise about alternatives to the punitive practice. One such set of alternatives–a process called restorative justice–is on the rise across the country in youth courts and schools.

Restorative justice has been practiced around the world for quite some time, but how do these dialogue-based alternatives to incarceration operate within the United States’ criminal justice system? Is restorative justice a radical means to advance social justice in an age of mass incarceration, or is it merely another way to reinforce the power structures of the current system? Read on to learn more.

Retributive Versus Restorative Justice

In order to appreciate the differences in approach that restorative justice poses, it is important to first understand that the United States’ criminal justice system operates under a retributive justice approach. Retributive justice is based on the idea of punishment, and the theory behind it is that the state is the ultimate victim of crimes and thus has the power to punish people it deems criminals. This domination-based form of justice is one basis for punishing “victimless crimes” such as drug offenses so harshly. Under retributive justice theories, the state is positioned as the victim.

In other words, the current criminal justice system’s emphasis on retributive justice relies on the logic that:

Retributivism answers the question ‘why punish’ by saying that the offender deserves punishment, and as simple as this statement sounds, its underlying meaning contains a couple of important points about morality and law.  Retributivism as a theory of punishment requires retribution as a rationale for law.  A retributionist assumes that the law exists for a reason — a moral reason.  All crime, even victimless crime, involves a social harm — a moral harm.  In other words, violating the law not only offends against the law of the land, but the moral code of the land.

Restorative justice, however, is grounded in an entirely different logic, philosophy, and practice. Restorative justice is defined by restorative agencies such as the Insight Prison Project as:

A philosophy and a social movement which provides an entirely different way of thinking about crime and victimization.  Our current retributive justice system focuses on punishment, regarding the state as the primary victim of criminal acts and casting victims and prisoners in passive roles. Restorative Justice, by contrast, focuses on healing and rehabilitation… It assumes that the persons most affected by crime should have the opportunity to become involved in resolving the conflict.  The goals of restoring losses, allowing prisoners to take responsibility for their actions, and helping victims move beyond their sense of vulnerability stand in sharp contrast to the conventional focus on past criminal behavior and increasing levels of punishment.

By taking the ideals of community and individual accountability and upholding the goal of mutual understanding and healing, restorative justice processes ensure that police, prosecutors, and judges are not the only ones with power over deciding someone’s fate after a crime has been committed. When prosecutorial and/or judicial discretion is utilized to make restorative processes available to people, the power of deciding how to move forward shifts to the person accused of committing a crime and the people most closely impacted by that crime.

This power shift can involve processes such as victim-offender mediation, conferencing, service provision, and “victim” assistance, as applicable. In the most well-known and widely used forms of restorative justice–mediated community conferences and circles–the offender(s), victims(s), and other closely impacted community members will come together in a mediated dialogue to address the context and harm done by the crime. During this process, the offender is expected to accept responsibility and agree to the group consensus of how to move forward, whether through community service, rehab, or other options. In these types of processes, the offender must agree to following through on the agreement; failing to do so will trigger a return to a traditional, retributive justice approach that will likely result in jail time.

Restorative Justice in Action

Currently in the U.S., restorative justice is most often used in the context of youth offenders and the juvenile justice system. Especially due to the extremely high rates of recidivism in the juvenile justice system, restorative justice, which often produces extremely low recidivism rates, is becoming increasingly popular as an alternative to incarceration in many juvenile courts across the country.

Many schools are using restorative processes as a way to keep their youth out of the school-to-prison pipeline. By engaging in restorative processes of mediation, schools are doing the following:

Forging closer, franker relationships among students, teachers and administrators. It encourages young people to come up with meaningful reparations for their wrongdoing while challenging them to develop empathy for one another through “talking circles” led by facilitators.

These talking circles, a trademark of restorative processes, often serve as alternatives to the suspensions and expulsions that fuel the school-to-prison pipeline. By resisting racialized zero-tolerance policies that do not give students a chance to repair any harm they might have done–and that might have been done to them–restorative practices in schools give students, teachers, and administrators the opportunity to identify deeper causes of problems in schools that allow more holistic approaches to students acting out.

Schools from California to Colorado to New York are implementing and expanding their restorative justice programs in order to avoid shipping their students directly into the juvenile justice system. In New York City, restorative programming in schools is being used with increasing frequency and impact:

Over the past few years, the Department of Education has been building its capacity to implement restorative justice programs. The department has provided training to teachers from 55 middle and high schools through the Morningside Center for Teaching Social Responsibility, which will be training 45 more schools this July and plans to add another 45 in the fall.

At Flushing International High School, where students hail from over 40 countries, social worker Tania Romero said that restorative practices have decreased incidences of violence between students of different nationalities and allowed for deeper conversations on issues like racism. “All schools should be entitled to this,” she said.

While experts acknowledge that restorative justice does not offer a quick fix either to juvenile justice or to schooling issues, many schools are becoming committed to advocating for the kinds of structural and cultural changes that can make restorative justice processes even more effective.

In other cases, however, restorative processes resemble traditional court processes more than they do school-based conferencing or mediation. In Brownsville, New York, for example, where youth of color are particularly targeted by the criminal justice system and jailed at extremely high rates, the city has established a youth court system in which youth offenders try and sentence each other to various sanctions, including community service, essay-writing, and tutoring. In this program, youth are trained for 30 hours and take a 16-page bar exam to prepare for the responsibility of trying and sentencing their peers. Though some might be skeptical of the ability of youth to effectively diminish the crime rates of their peers, the youth going through these restorative processes have a 93 percent compliance rate, which indicates an extremely low recidivism rate–much lower than that produced by the traditional juvenile justice system.

What Are We Trying to Restore?

Despite its success at lowering recidivism rates, restorative justice is often the recipient of criticism. Because restorative justice is a process that relies on the actions of those in the criminal justice system–judges and prosecutors must refer defendants or people convicted of crimes to restorative processes, and reserve the right to re-enact retributive processes if restorative methods are deemed ineffective–many people and organizations criticize restorative justice for being powerless to truly change the criminal justice system from within.

The co-opting of restorative processes by the state actually risks reinforcing the power structures that shape the harm done by crimes to begin with. For example, state-mandated restorative processes may force mediation event participants like police and youth of color together, ignoring the extreme power differences between these individuals and therefore ignoring structural power dynamics and risking perpetuating harm upon people who may have committed a particular crime, but who are also targeted by state violence.

As such, it is crucial to note that restorative practices may be practiced in disproportionate ways that ignore societal power structures. One study shows that schools with more Black students are less likely to use restorative processes because of racialized assumptions about the student population. Further, some question whether restorative practices are accessible to people living with certain dis/abilities.

What then does restorative justice seek to restore? If structural inequality was the baseline condition under which a crime was committed, is restorative justice satisfied with restoring that unjust baseline? Critics of restorative justice and advocates of the more structurally minded transformative justice argue that restorative justice, by nature of working within the criminal justice system, can never truly address these issues of systemic oppression.

So What’s the Verdict?

Restorative justice–especially in the context of the juvenile justice system–has tremendous potential to offer alternatives to incarceration for people who would otherwise be targeted for mass incarceration. Recidivism rates decline and community involvement increases, and these are all impacts that critics of mass incarceration certainly applaud. However, while restorative justice is certainly an important move toward reforming the criminal justice system as is, its lack of emphasis on structural and systemic oppression that is the basis for mass incarceration to begin with makes it an inadequate means of truly transforming the criminal justice system.

Resources

Primary

Oakland Unified School District: Welcome to Restorative Justice

Additional

Conflict Solutions Center: Retributive vs. Restorative Justice

Conflict Solutions Center: What is Mediation?

Partnership for Safety and Justice: Restorative and Transformative Justice: A Comparison

Insight Prison Project: A Restorative Justice Agency

Restorative Justice Online: What is Restorative Justice?

The New York Times: Opening Up, Students Transform a Vicious Cycle

Chalkbeat New York: City Preparing to Expand Restorative Justice Programs

National Public Radio: An Alternative to Suspension and Explusion: ‘Circle Up!’

New York Daily News: Teens are Judge and Jury in Brownsville Youth Court, Delivering “Restorative Justice”

PBS Newshour: To Curb Conflict, A Colorado High School Replaces Punishment with Conversation

Eastern Mennonite University Center for Justice and Peacebuilding: How Effective is Restorative Justice?

Restorative Justice Online: Restorative Justice in Schools: The Influence of Race on Restorative Discipline

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post How Can Restorative Justice Change the Criminal System? appeared first on Law Street.

Two sisters from Overton, Texas are receiving an outpouring of support after local police shut down their roadside lemonade stand. (Ex-squeeze me?)

Zoey and Andria Green, 7 and 8 years old respectively, were trying to raise money to buy their dad a Father’s Day present. They harnessed their entrepreneurial energies and decided to sell lemonade and kettle corn to drivers and passers-by until they earned enough money to take their dad to a nearby water park for his special day.

Overton Police Chief Clyde Carter told the girls they could not continue operating their stand. He said they needed to pay $150 for a peddler’s permit, noting that they were also in violation of certain health codes since they prepared the kettle corn themselves.

(Just a reminder: these were kids…in a residential area in Eastern Texas…selling snacks).

Aren’t there bigger issues that a Police Chief should be focusing on? Couldn’t the fees or permit be waived at the discretion of the commanding officer? I guess Police Chief Carter never saw this video from 2010, wherein a county official in Oregon apologized to a little girl for the closure of her lemonade stand.

The Green sisters have since received tons of support from their community, and have discovered how to use one of America’s most sacred tools: the loophole. As long as the girls “give away” their snacks and ask for donations, they are not breaking any laws–and do not require any permits.

Hundreds of East Texans have pledged their support and plan to visit the sisters’ stand this Saturday. The girls were given (free) water park tickets to both Six Flags and Splash Kingdom after their story broke.

Mom Sandi Green Evans told reporters that additional donations collected on Saturday will be given to the Deana Rinehart and Felicia Roach Overton High School Sports Scholarship Fund.

Any police officers in the area won’t be doling out tickets–they’ll be directing traffic.

Corinne Fitamant

Corinne Fitamant is a graduate of Fordham College at Lincoln Center where she received a Bachelors degree in Communications and a minor in Theatre Arts. When she isn’t pondering issues of social justice and/or celebrity culture, she can be found playing the guitar and eating chocolate. Contact Corinne at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Kids’ Lemonade Stand Shut Down by Texas Police For a Ridiculous Reason appeared first on Law Street.

Within the past few years there has been an enormous amount of shocking incidents involving police brutality. Even with protests nationwide it seems that nothing has been done to stop this issue. Now, people are angry yet again over another incident involving the ridiculous actions of a police officer. The video aftermath of a pool party in McKinney, Texas has gone viral, and infuriated many who have seen it.

On Friday, June 5, a group of Texas teens gathered together at Craig Ranch North Community Pool. Craig Ranch’s strict homeowners’ association rules prohibit bringing more than two guests to the pool. But the invite to the pool party spread around Twitter, leading to many other guests. According to bystanders, when a crowd of teenagers showed up, stood by the gate, and yelled to be let in, things got out of control. Kids began to jump over the fence as a security guard tried to get them to leave. The security guard was outnumbered, and called the police. The authorities were told there was a “a disturbance involving multiple juveniles at the location, who do not live in the area or have permission to be there, refusing to leave.” There were also numerous calls to the police reporting fights as well.

But Tatiana Rhodes, the 19-year-old girl who hosted the pool party, shared a different side of the story. Tatiana said that she and some friends had organized the party and were enjoying it when a conflict with a white neighbor broke out. Rhodes told E. Johnson IV, a photographer who recorded the conversation and uploaded it online:

This lady was saying racial slurs to some friends that came to the cookout. She was saying such things as ‘black effer’ and ‘that’s why you live in Section 8 homes.’

According to Rhodes, who is black, a white neighbor approached her and smacked her in the face.“That’s when both of the women attacked me,” the teen said.

However, what really sparked national outrage was a video taken by Brandon Brooks and posted on Twitter. In an email to NBC News Brooks stated:

When I started the video was right after all the kids who got put on the ground had gotten up and ran away. The cop was chasing after all those kids just putting every black person he saw on the ground.

Here’s the video, but keep in mind, it is NSFW due to language and violence:

The video went viral, leaving people truly disgusted at the actions of the police. One of the officers, later identified as Eric Casebolt, was recorded forcefully pinning an unarmed 14 year-old-girl in a bikini to the ground and handcuffing her. In the video Casebolt can even be seen pulling the girl’s hair and pushing her face toward the ground. The officer also drew his gun and pointed it at several unarmed teens in the area as well. Casebolt, a Navy veteran with 10 years on the McKinney force, has been place on administrative leave after the video surfaced. Police Chief Greg Conley stated:

Our initial reaction was to place the officer on administrative leave until we can conduct a complete and thorough investigation of the incident….The McKinney Police Department is committed to treating all persons fairly under the law. We are committed to preserving the peace and safety of our community for all of our citizens.

The girl who was tackled by Casebolt was detained and released. “Ultimately, everyone was freed. Other than the person who was arrested, everyone was released to a parent or guardian or to a responsible adult,” Conley said. McKinney police had to call in extra dispatchers to handle incoming phone calls, many asking for Casebolt to be fired. Mayor of McKinney, Texas, Brian Loughmiller, described feeling “disturbed and concerned” over this incident. Overall, the incident left many people with one question: how threatened could an experienced police officer feel by an unarmed 14 year-old-girl?

Spoke with my family about #McKinney. My dad’s response: “If you are that afraid of a bunch of teens in bikinis, you shouldn’t be a cop.”

— Russell Drew (@RussOnPolitics) June 8, 2015

Who can we call when the police are the ones threatening our safety? Police once made citizens feel safe and secure but many now feel even more threatened when the police are present. This video leaves parents angered and frightened for their children’s safety, as well as teens who could become an officer’s next target. With situations like these becoming more and more common, one can only hope that justice will begin to be served.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Brutality in McKinney, Texas? Video of Officer Goes Viral appeared first on Law Street.

New York City experienced four fatal shootings last Friday night, including the death of Jahhad Marshall, a 22-year-old chef who was killed in Queens. Stacey Calhoun, the victim’s uncle, told the media the next day, “We need stop-and-frisk.” This comes amid a significant call for the return of the controversial NYPD policy. In particular, Stop-and-Frisk supporters cite the nearly 18 percent increase in murders in New York City between January 1 and May 30, 2015 compared to the same period in 2014. Moreover, there was a 7.7 percent increase in shootings–from 403 to 434–during the same period.

In the wake of the increase in murders, particularly shooting-related murders, the heated debate over the efficacy of stop-and-frisk has returned. Supporters of the policy cite the dramatic decrease in crime in New York City since 2002, when stop-and-frisk became more frequently used. Between 2002 and 2011, there was a steady increase in stop-and-frisk related stops from 97,296 to 685,724. In this same period, there was a steady decrease in shooting deaths, as well as overall murders. Proponents argue that the threat of being searched leads to decreased gun possession and thus decreased gun violence. Therefore, many supporters of stop-and-frisk blame Mayor Bill de Blasio’s reigning in of the policy for the increased number of murders in 2015, particularly firearm murders. In a recent interview with FOX News, former NYPD Commissioner Bernie Kerik blamed the increase in crime in 2015 on the dismantling of stop-and-frisk, citing it as the reason for the decrease in crime in New York City.

Contrarily, a lot of  evidence suggests that stop-and-frisk was not a successful policy. The policy’s opponents point to the general inefficacy of the stops, about 90 percent of which did not result in further police action. Although former Mayor Michael Bloomberg and others have defended the racial disparity of the stops by asserting that blacks and Hispanics are more likely to commit crimes, the NYCLU found that whites were twice as likely to possess  a weapon when stopped. Furthermore, the dramatic increase in stops between 2004 and 2011 did not lead to a dramatic increase in the number of weapons found (176 additional guns found in 524,873 additional stops). Following the controversy over the policy in 2011, the use of stop-and-frisk was dramatically reduced, and while searches decreased by 72 percent between 2011 to 2013, murders fell by 35 percent, and shootings fell by 29 percent. This shows that the continued trend of declining crime in New York City, as well as across the country, that has occurred since 1993 continued even with a dramatic cutback in the use of stop-and-frisk. This evidence seems to suggest that increased use of stop-and-frisk does not guarantee a decrease in the number of murders or shootings.

The bottom line is that it is statistically and logically imprudent to assert that the changing of one police policy is the cause of the increase in murders in New York City so far in 2015. It is possible that stop-and-frisk does limit violent crime; however, it is too soon to tell whether the policy’s removal under Mayor de Blasio is the reason for the additional murders this year. The small sample size of five months, relative to the 24 year trend of decreasing murder, also makes such assumptions fairly weak. Furthermore, the decrease in other crimes, including robbery, felony assault, burglary, and grand larceny point to the issue being more nuanced and complicated than some will admit. Other issues such as the growing civil unrest over police brutality and the possibility of a spike in gang activity are all possible causes. Mayor de Blasio has addressed those who blame his cutbacks on stop-and-frisk for the increased violence and has cited, among other factors, the possibility of gang-on-gang violence.

Contrary to opinions on both sides of the debate, the presence of stop-and-frisk is not an “all-or-nothing” situation. It is possible that the NYPD could return to the frequency of stops that it employed in 2002 while still limiting violence. Perhaps the threat of being searched does limit the possession of guns, as proponents of stop-and-frisk assert. On the other hand, the statistics don’t show that an increase in stops will lead to significantly more weapons seizures. Furthermore, the correlation between greater searches and fewer murders is far from definitive.

It is important to separate legitimate criticism of police tactics from a lack of respect and gratitude for their work. Some sensationalist defenders of stop-and-frisk will try to spin the attacks on the policy as such, and thus delegitimize an important debate. While there is no doubt that those who serve in police forces are brave and essential to our well being, it is important to constantly question and refine police methods.

Maurin Mwombela

Maurin Mwombela is a member of the University of Pennsylvania class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer 2015. He now blogs for Law Street, focusing on politics. Contact Maurin at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Is the End of Stop-and-Frisk to Blame for the Growth in NYC Murders? appeared first on Law Street.

There are a lot of reasons you should be discrete when you rob people. The most important one is that if you are not, then you might get caught red-underweared. Just ask Taykim Ross, whose flashy undies led to his arrest.

The Fashion Police–or, the Events Leading to Arrest

Taykim Ross has been accused of stealing $200, some electronics, and a pair of blue Air Jordans from an apartment. And once he got his hands on those sneakers, he could not wait to get his feet in them.

So instead of getting out of there as fast as he could, he decided to take a break in the backyard to change shoes. I do not know what he was thinking when he did this, but I have to assume that he thought he was in for a high-speed chase and that the only way for him to run fast enough to escape was if he had on more athletic gear. Perhaps he had previously been wearing sandals. Perhaps, even, that is why he grabbed the shoes in the first place.

Courtesy of Giphy.

Really, it is hard to say what he was thinking. All we can really do is say that he should have thought a little more. Or that maybe he should have nabbed a belt while he was creating his new purloined wardrobe. Because his fashion choices ultimately turned out to be his downfall.

You see, the neighbor of the victim happened to be looking outside that day and happened to see Ross changing kicks. So he shot a picture of him. What was clearer than anything else in the shot was Ross’ prominent red boxers hanging out of his jeans.

Red undies and blue shoes? And perhaps he had on a white shirt. Maybe he was just trying to pull together a patriotic outfit. America is the land of the free to dress how you want, after all. However, in this case, Ross should have been worrying a little less about style and a little more about stealth.

Pull Up Your Pants!–or, How He Was Nabbed

Later that day, Officer Russell Harris was returning from a neighborhood canvas when he noticed a young man being responsible and doing household chores. To be more specific, the boy was taking out the trash.

On most days, Harris would not have thought all that much about such an innocent activity, but this time he did. You see, he noticed something about the kid that made him a little suspicious. Something was flashing in his mind making him believe everything was not alright.

Over the top of the kid’s baggy pants, the officer saw a pair of bright-red underwear. Because this happened to be the same color boxers being worn by the possible robber, Harris had to take a closer look.

Upon examining the picture and the person, the officer determined that it was an exact match. And not with just the underwear. The person was a match as well.

After this embarrassing wardrobe malfunction, Ross was arrested and arraigned on a burglary charge.

Harris said that if Ross had been wearing a belt–or presumably had changed boxers after the theft–he probably would have gone unnoticed; however, apparently the red undies acted like a giant target that even the worst dart player could hit.

Courtesy of Giphy.

Ross, maybe it is time for a makeover because your fashion choices are just plain humiliating. You might not ever be able to live this down, my friend. I hope next time you go shopping, whether at a store or in someone else’s house, you make some better decisions. Follow some fashion guidelines; don’t fly by the seat of your pants.

Dress to Impress–or, What You Can Learn from Ross

Here is what you can take away from poor Ross.

• Always wear a belt. Not only will it make sure your pants don’t fall off if you have to make a quick getaway, they will also protect your showy undies from prying neighbors’ eyes.
• Do not stop for a wardrobe change in the middle of a robbery. If you do, you might give the prying neighbor a perfect shot of your thieving behind.
• After a robbery, change. Lady Macbeth scrubbed her hands to get out a red spot of blood that she imagined was there. So, at the very least, you should take the time to rid yourself of the giant red spot that is going to stick out like a clown’s nose and lead to your arrest.
• Just don’t rob people or commit similar crimes. If stupid criminals have taught us anything it is that there is always a newer and dumber way to commit a crime. So to avoid these embarrassing faux pas, let’s all just stop trying to commit stupid crimes. Also, you know, for moral reasons.

For all of my Friends fans out there, this is the story of the real Red Ross.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Red Underwear is Thief’s Downfall appeared first on Law Street.

Mayor of London Boris Johnson just announced that by the end of March 2016, the majority of Metropolitan Police officers will be supplied with 20,000 body cameras in an effort to help officers gather evidence to fight crime and boost public confidence. Metropolitan Police Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe said, “For too long our equipment has lagged behind the technology almost everyone has in their pockets to capture events as they unfold.” But while this now-international trend toward implementing body cams can help to uphold the law in theory, there are still concerns about whether this technology can really do its job in practice.

Mayor Boris Johnson confirms plans to roll out 20,000 police body cameras across the Met: https://t.co/JTlW1tKUpj pic.twitter.com/2W32Hznv4K

— MOPAC (@MOPACLdn) June 3, 2015

This development will make London the most body camera heavy city in the world, further advancing Britain’s status as one of the most surveilled states. The British Security Industry Authority (BSIA) estimates that there are up to 5.9 million closed-circuit television cameras in the country, or one camera for every eleven people in the United Kingdom.

For the past year, police officers in London have undergone trials of the body cameras and have reported positive results. The trial has allowed officers to generate about 6,000 video clips per month, which are uploaded daily and referenced when the footage is considered necessary for evidence. These trials, set to end later this summer, suggest that the implementation of body cameras can increase the number of guilty pleas and reduce complaints, speeding up the justice system. London police have come under scrutiny for controversial stop-and-search laws, which disproportionately target minority groups. London officials hope that body cameras will help to improve public trust and increase officer accountability in these scenarios.

While body cameras may be useful for monitoring daily operations of police officers, some civil rights groups are concerned that the technology will prove to be an intrusive surveillance tool that can be easily exploited. There is also concern about who has access to the footage and if it will be publicly accessible. The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime has plans to lead a citywide public engagement training to explain how the cameras work and when Londoners might encounter them. The London Policing Ethics Panel intends to produce the United Kingdom’s first report regarding the ethics of officers’ use of the cameras, which will be published in the fall.

Cities across the United States are also providing their officers with cameras. The company Taser, a maker of body cams, reported a 50 percent increase in sales in the first three months of 2015. While continued proliferation of body cameras seems forthcoming, critiques of the cameras’ use are also widespread. Most footage caught on camera is not considered public record, which has proved problematic–police departments can easily erase destructive footage. In some cases, officers forget to turn on their body or dashboard cameras, since neither device is constantly recording, but needs to be manually switched on. Some police officers’ cameras have conveniently malfunctioned at the time of an encounter, leaving victims of police brutality without evidence of their claims. Had the Ferguson, Missouri police department mandated the use of police officer body cameras or used dashboard cameras in patrol cars, the mystery surrounding what truly happened leading up to and during the fatal Michael Brown shooting of 2014 would have been absolved.

Necessary changes must be made to officer accountability in the wake of years of unrest. London is taking a huge step forward in what may become a revolution in police liability and encouraging a positive shift in public discourse about law enforcement. Video clips should be accessible by the public. Police officers should be held individually accountable for the use of their cameras, by disciplining those who routinely forget to turn on their body cams. Police departments, prosecutors, and every other chain of command throughout the justice system should work toward preserving footage to protect the rights of the abused, even if—and especially when—police officers are in the wrong. While implementation of body cameras is the first move going forward–and London should be applauded for its efforts–effective, ethical execution of their use is the most important step.

Emily Dalgo

Emily Dalgo is a member of the American University Class of 2017 and a Law Street Media Fellow during the Summer of 2015. Contact Emily at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post London Moves Forward with Police Body Cams: Will the U.S. Follow? appeared first on Law Street.

In 2006, the criminal justice system helped Josh Duggar’s family expunge his record of abuse and protected him from being exposed in media reports as someone who had “forcibly fondled” younger girls (a.k.a. molested children).

Every day–then, now–the criminal justice system targets people of color–especially women and trans people of color–for abuse and shootings (a.k.a. public executions for walking while Black or Latina).

And yet.

And yet we continue to use pictures of him in suits instead of finding pictures that try to reflect him negatively (see featured photo), like the mainstream media insists on doing with young people of color slaughtered by cops.

When Black young men are murdered by cops, they are cast as “thugs.” When a young white man is accused of child abuse, he retains his status as ‘poor cult victim.’

This serves both racist and misogynist ends: white perpetrators remain victims, and his misogyny is cast as an exception (caused by his cultish family).

The mainstream media likes to speculate on the “scandalous” aspects of how the family helped cover up the abuse; how the family, in fact, abused him through their extremism and his isolation from “mainstream culture”; but we don’t like to speculate on how Josh Duggar is not, in fact, an exception. Josh Duggar is the rule.

Duggar is an embodiment of rich white cis male non-dis/abled privilege, and while the control his family exerts over him is indeed frightening, their misogyny is not an exception.

The Duggars may be particularly explicit in the ways they preach and practice misogyny, but what pieces focusing on the cultish aspects of the Duggars that facilitated the abuse miss is that every person in this country–every. single. person.–is raised to hate women. The Duggars may be more explicit than most, but they are not alone: Josh Duggar’s apparent belief that women and girls exist for male pleasure is the same belief that we are all raised with.

It’s called rape culture, and it’s everywhere.

The fact that the Duggars isolated their children so much that they didn’t have a TV misses the point: all of us with TV, too, receive the same message–in a heteropatriarchal society like this one, women are disposable.

Because rape culture is not isolated to “cults.” It is everywhere.

Because women–especially women of color–are disproportionately targeted by the same criminal justice system that protected Duggar when the first police report was issued against him.

Because living in a heteropatriarchal society makes us much more vulnerable to debilitating mental health issues.

Because “strong women” in the mainstream media is still the only trope we’re allowed to hope for.

Because the kind of misogyny that the media ascribes to the cult of the Duggars is the same kind of misogyny that we are exposed to every single time we turn on the television, interact with men in the street, or are educated in a public school system that still focuses on “great” [read: genocidal] white men and does not teach consent as the golden rule in health classes (a.k.a. teach rape culture to all students).

Because we can condemn–or pity–Josh Duggar as much as we’d like.

But ultimately, we must recognize that his privileged positions and entitled, abusive actions are the rule, not the exception.

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Josh Duggar is Not an Exception: On Rape Culture in the U.S. appeared first on Law Street.

The number of police officers in the United States has increased significantly over the last several decades, according to a Bureau of Justice Statistics report released last week. Local police departments are also becoming more diverse, as women and minorities continue to make up a larger share of forces.

The report provides an interesting snapshot of American police in 2013, highlighting some notable trends that have occurred over the last 26 years. In addition to becoming more diverse, the number of sworn police officers has also steadily increased. Since 1987, the number of sworn police officers has gone up by approximately 35 percent, with a total of 477,000 officers in 2013.

Another interesting finding in the BJS report is that the most American police officers work in cities with large populations. Only three percent of local police departments serve populations greater than 100,000, but these departments employ 54 percent of all sworn officers. In fact, many police departments in the United States are very small. Nearly half (48 percent) of the 12,326 local police departments have fewer than ten sworn officers.

The racial diversity among officers has become a very important issue in light of the growing tensions between minority communities and the police, which was highlighted in the Justice Department’s review of the Ferguson Police Department.

The recent BJS report indicates that ethnic and racial minorities are increasingly being represented in local police departments. Roughly 27 percent of all full-time police officers were members of a racial or ethnic minority in 2013. In contrast, the number of minority police officers was less than 15 percent in 1987. The chart below details the growth in minority police officers over time based on BJS surveys.

Police departments serving cities with large populations tend to be much more diverse than those in small towns. As you can see in the chart below, nearly three-quarters of all police officers are white, but as the size of a police department’s jurisdiction increases that number goes down considerably. While the composition of larger police departments tends to be more representative of the populations that they serve, this remains an issue for many departments, particularly those in smaller cities. For example, at the time Michael Brown’s death last summer, 50 of the 54 police officers in Ferguson, Missouri were white, yet 65 percent of the city’s residents were black.

The BJS data further indicates that more and more women are joining the ranks. As of 2013, one in eight police officers and one in ten first-line supervisors were female. The total number of female police officers has increased by roughly two percent since 2007, the last time that this data was collected. Much like racial diversity, larger police forces typically have a significantly higher proportion of female officers relative to smaller departments. According to the report, “the percentage of female first-line supervisors was more than twice as high in departments serving 250,000 or more residents (15 percent), compared to departments serving fewer than 50,000 residents (six percent).”

The percentage of women serving in supervisory positions was lower than the percentage of female police officers in all population groupings. In total, women make up 12.2 percent of the American police force and 9.5 percent of those serving in supervisory positions. This survey marked the first time that data on female representation in supervisory and managerial positions was collected so historical data is not available for comparison.

The findings from this report indicate the extent to which diversity has increased in police departments in recent decades, as well as the overall growth in the number of police officers in America. While there have been significant improvements in overall police diversity, there remain several significant gaps among individual police departments. Although larger police departments tend to be much more diverse than smaller ones, many departments are still much more white than the populations that they serve. Having greater racial parity between police and the residents that they interact with may be a important step toward improving community relations. The recent growth in diversity marks one step toward better representation, yet in cities like Ferguson, Missouri, there is still a long way to go.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Forces Are Getting More Diverse, But is That Enough? appeared first on Law Street.

Hey, fellow white people. If you’re not going to be in support of people rising up against racism in Baltimore–and elsewhere–then shut up about it. And listen (or read, or watch. There are plenty of sources that aren’t from white people–like the ones cited throughout this piece–that we can tune into).

Now. People of color who are incensed by white supremacy and the murder of Freddie Gray (and so, so many others) have as many viewpoints about the efficacy and ethics of property damage as there are… well… people. There is no one way to understand or react to protests, anger, and anti-racist (and racist) rhetoric, so I’m not suggesting here that all or even most people of color are comfortable with or support the hashtag #BaltimoreRising as opposed to #BaltimoreRiots (for example). The reactions of people of color to racist violence are not, nor have they ever been, monolithic.

But.

Go lecture the police about non-violence.

— Brienne of Snarth (@femme_esq) April 27, 2015

But. As people with white privilege–the privilege (even when we are queer, poor, and/or dis/abled) of living in this world without our every action being viewed as suspicious; without our every action being interpreted as representative of all white people; without fear that ourselves, our students, our children, our friends, our family, or our colleagues will be murdered by cops because they were walking down the street while Black–we don’t get to watch the uprisings via Twitter, shake our heads, and produce tweets like this:  

Can we just focus on the real issues and injustice behind the #BaltimoreRiots? People have the right to be angry, not violent. — Sarah K (@wildflower93x) April 28, 2015

Or this:

If you act like wild animals and ruin others property dont get confused when you end up in a cage. #BaltimoreRiots #BlackPrivilege

— The Counselor (@anyclinic) April 28, 2015

As people with white privilege (there is no such thing as Black privilege, as is made clear by the dehumanizing, racist animalization that accompanies “The Counselor’s” claim above), we don’t get to condemn Black people’s responses to systemic, pervasive, ever-present, white supremacist, violent oppression. This hypocrisy is especially clear when, as Derrick Clifton over at Mic highlights so well, we do not flinch when white people start fires in the streets.  

If we view rioting as a mass temper tantrum expressed through violence & property damage, white sports fans do that monthly. #Tradition — jesseWilliams. (@iJesseWilliams) April 28, 2015

We do not flinch when white men–their privileged masculinity popping out of their face paint and sports jerseys–burn cars, set fires, vandalize businesses, cause millions of dollars in property damage, or injure over 100 people… drum roll… because their favorite sports team either won or lost a game.

Where are all the think pieces & coverage of the pathology of white culture every time white frustration vents violence & destruction?

— jesseWilliams. (@iJesseWilliams) April 28, 2015

So… according to the white-mediated mass media, Black people pouring into the streets because yet another young Black person was murdered by police for making eye contact with a cop is apparently more disturbing than white men whose entitled rage is so close to the surface that they will set cars on fire over sports and military forces covered in armor and locked-and-loaded with various deadly weapons aimed at Black youths…

You can’t “reform” the brutality out of the police. There’s no reforming systematic violence. You dismantle the institution itself

— Roqayah Chamseddine (@roqchams) April 28, 2015

We really need to re-evaluate what we’re afraid of, white folks. And we need to do it now.

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Hey, Fellow White People: We Need to Shut Up About Baltimore appeared first on Law Street.

Freddie Gray was a Baltimore man who died after injuries he received while in the custody of the Baltimore police department. Multiple protests, some violent, have occurred against Gray’s treatment that Gray received in police custody on April 19. Although exact numbers appear unknown, reports cite that 34 people have been arrested as a result of the protests.

Arrests last night in Baltimore during a protest of the death of #FreddieGrayhttp://t.co/j5mU7B7Jfjpic.twitter.com/5JcRDP2vtg

— Newsweek (@Newsweek) April 26, 2015

Demonstrators in Baltimore continue protesting #FreddieGray‘s death. PHOTOS: http://t.co/FvUWbmnHi4pic.twitter.com/Dh9LGIJFPf

— 99.1 WNEW (@WNEW) April 23, 2015

#UPDATE: Crowd continues to grow. Protestors want officers suspended in death of #FreddieGray arrested. pic.twitter.com/XVRtcIZP55

— WJZ | CBS Baltimore (@cbsbaltimore) April 21, 2015

Gray was arrested after he saw a police officer and then started running. Regardless of that not being a reason to arrest someone,  police caught up to him. At this point it was discovered that Gray had a knife on him, and was brought into police custody. He sustained a spinal cord injury at some point during this incident, and desperately needed medical attention. It’s not clear how he got the injury–although hopefully that will eventually become clear as a few different investigations delve into the events. The bigger issue here, however, is that once officers caught up to Gray and arrested him, they should have sought medical help for him. Their failure to do so appears to have directly led to Gray’s death. The Baltimore police have even admitted that they should have gotten medical help for Gray. According to CNN:

Police Commissioner Anthony Batts told reporters there are no excuses for the fact that Gray was not buckled in as he was transported to a police station.

It’s in light of this news that protesters have taken to the streets in Baltimore. Some are calling for the arrest of the six officers involved in Gray’s case–they have already been suspended without pay. Last night an estimated 1,200 people gathered in protest at City Hall in Baltimore. This caused some problems for the city–thousands of fans were trapped inside the Baltimore Orioles’ Stadium last night after the game. Unfortunately, as protests continued, things did grow violent. Looters damaged a local convenience store, and at one point a protester “tossed a flaming metal garbage can toward police officers in riot gear trying to push back the crowd.”

After the deaths of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and Tamir Rice in 2014, and the recent death of Walter Scott, the United States is still dealing with discontent over police violence and the treatment of black men by police officers. While Baltimore PD admitting that it should have sought treatment for Gray sooner certainly can be viewed as a step in the right direction when it comes to accountability, what exactly happened to Gray still needs to be determined. Until then, there will almost certainly still be protests and critics.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Protests Continue After Freddie Gray’s Death in Baltimore appeared first on Law Street.

Across the United States, it is estimated that more than 61,000 youth are incarcerated each night, and more than 65 percent of these young people are youth of color. The overwhelming majority, 75 percent, are incarcerated for non-violent offenses.

The U.S. incarcerates youth at vastly higher rates than any other country in a world. Given that these incarcerated youth die from suicide at a rate of two to three times higher than the non-incarcerated youth population, there is no shortage of controversies surrounding the jailing of youth.

Read on to learn about the different controversies surrounding the incarceration of juveniles in the American justice system.

Death in Prison Without a Jury: An Overview of Youth Incarceration

Though all 50 states and the District of Columbia have defined legal differences between adults and youth who are accused of committing crimes, different states have different standards and definitions for what age someone has to be in order to be prosecuted as a juvenile. Additionally, there are many provisions that allow for certain juveniles to be prosecuted as adults, even if they are technically considered to be juveniles.

For some youth, this can be seen as an initial advantage: juveniles accused of crimes are not entitled to a trial by jury in light of a 1971 Supreme Court decision. Instead, youth are sentenced at the discretion of judges. But this exposes youth to tremendous vulnerability at the hands of judges who are accused of making decisions on the basis of race, even if it’s unconsciously. As Judge LaDoris Cordell argues, regarding the grossly disproportionate number of youth of color in the juvenile justice system:

What is hard is that if you go up to your average juvenile court judge, and that judge is the one who sends these kids off–we’re the ones ultimately responsible for these statistics–that judge will look you dead in the eye and say, “I’m not unfair, I’m not racist, I’m not prejudiced. I do the best I can.” And that judge is telling you the truth. . . . But what is at play here in most cases? I’m not saying there aren’t those judges who are so prejudiced and so racist; there are those. But I think, in the main, most are not. But I think what happens is that stereotypes are so embedded in the psyche of human beings, that those stereotypes come to play. So that when a young black kid comes into court before a white male judge, who perhaps doesn’t have any experience dealing with young black males… a mindset comes up in that judge’s head… Assumptions get made. . . . I think, in the main, that’s what happens, and I think that’s what accounts for those statistics. . . .

However, the risks of being tried in adult courts are also astronomical: approximately 2,500 youth are currently enduring life in prison without parole for crimes committed when they were children. In addition, youth are likely to experience extreme abuse in adult prisons. According to the Equal Justice Initiative, “Children are five times more likely to be sexually assaulted in adult prisons than in juvenile facilities and face increased risk of suicide.”

Additionally, according to Human Rights Watch, while one out of every eight black youths who are convicted of killing someone are sentenced to life in prison, only one out of every 13 white youths convicted of killing someone are sentenced to life in prison.

In New York and North Carolina, this fate is particularly dangerous for youth: these are the only two states that try 16 and 17-year-old young people as adults. In both of these states, the age of adult criminal responsibility is 16, so judges must automatically treat these youth as adults. The prosecution of 16 year olds as adults–and their subsequent processing through the adult, rather than juvenile, system of incarceration–occurs in New York automatically, regardless of the severity of the accused crime. This means that every year, over 200,000 youth under the age of 18 in the U.S. are tried, prosecuted, and incarcerated as adults.

Even young people who are incarcerated as juveniles, however, experience tremendous hardship within the system. In addition to some debilitating and abusive conditions, youth in the juvenile justice system, whether currently incarcerated or on probation, are required to pay money to the courts for their own incarceration and probation. Youth on probation are responsible for payments such as supervisory fees, as well as fees for staying in juvenile hall while awaiting placement in group homes.

The School-to-Prison Pipeline

As schools are militarized across the country–with increased police presence and military training for the police placed in some of our schools–the number of students being funneled from schools into the juvenile justice system is correspondingly increasing. Overall, a 38 percent increase in law enforcement presence in schools between 1997 and 2007 is intimately related to 5 times more students being arrested in schools.

Most of these youths–even those who are not incarcerated extensively after their arrest–lose out on further educational opportunities due to schools’ zero tolerance policies. Zero tolerance policies in schools, which mandate harsh punishments for first-time (and often minor) offenses, emerged from zero tolerance approaches to President George H.W. Bush’s “war on drugs.” According to Professor Nancy A. Heitzeg, sociology instructor and the Program Director of the Critical Studies of Race/Ethnicity program at St. Catherine University, zero tolerance policies in schools are directly related to the funneling of students from schools into prisons:

While the school to prison pipeline is facilitated by a number of trends in education, it is most directly attributable to the expansion of zero tolerance policies. These policies have no measurable impact on school safety, but are associated with a number of negative effects‖ racially disproportionality, increased suspensions and expulsions, elevated drop-out rates, and multiple legal issues related to due process.

By criminalizing “bad behavior” among children in schools instead of supporting students who are in need, zero tolerance policies have, according to Washington Times reporter Nikki Krug, “produced unnecessary student suspensions for even the slightest violations of conduct, leading to higher risk of failing, dropping out and criminal prosecution for minors.” These higher drop-out rates make recidivism and further involvement in both the juvenile and adult justice systems much more likely, with 70 precent of students who become involved with the juvenile justice system dropping out of school entirely.

Young People in Solitary Confinement

Once involved in the juvenile justice system, many youths find themselves devastated by the impacts of solitary confinement. While New York has recently stated that it will end the solitary confinement of youth and those who are pregnant, the punishment is still a reality for many incarcerated youth elsewhere.

Locked in total isolation in small cells for 23 hours a day, children under the age of 18 are locked in solitary for days, weeks, and months on end across the United States every day. The mental health consequences of youth being locked in solitary are even more extreme than they are for adults. The Attorney General’s office has reported, for example, that half of youths who kill themselves while incarcerated do so while they are in solitary. Of those who are not in solitary at the time of their death, 62 percent had endured solitary confinement before.

The youths who do survive solitary are often plagued by the trauma they endure for years to come. In fact, Juan E. Méndez, a United Nations expert on torture, has argued that solitary confinement, especially when practiced on children under 18, amounts to torture.

Juvenile Justice and Racial Justice

According to the National Juvenile Justice Network, youth of color are disproportionately targeted by the juvenile justice system: “In every juvenile offense category—person, property, drug, and public order—youth of color receive harsher sentences and fewer services than white youth who have committed the same category of offenses.” This means that even though white youth commit the same crimes as youth of color, youth of color are criminalized and receive harsher sentences while white youth are more likely to get community service rather than incarceration.

Among these youth of color who are targeted by the juvenile justice system, a great number identify as LGBT. According to the Center for American Progress, around 300,000 LGBT youth are arrested and detained each year in the U.S., and approximately 60 percent of these youth are black and Latina. These youth are much more likely than non-LGBT peers to be targeted for abuse once incarcerated.

Juvenile Injustice?

Though issues abound in the juvenile justice system, many individuals and organizations are committed to making changes to the system. While efforts to reform and overhaul the juvenile justice system are underway, it is clear that youth who have gone through the juvenile justice system are taking the lead in efforts to ensure that justice, rather than injustice, is served. Until these problems are solved, the youth justice system may continue to be unjust.

Resources

Annie E. Casey Foundation: A Collection of Juvenile Justice Resources

Human Rights Watch: The Rest of Their Lives

Human Rights Watch: Growing Up Locked Down

American Civil Liberties Union: Stop Solitary

Center for American Progress: The Unfair Criminalization of Gay and Transgender Youth

PBS: Is the System Racially Biased?

Equal Justice Initiative: Children in Prison

Colorlines: Paying to Get Locked Up

Colorlines: More Police in Schools Means More Students Arrested

Advancement Project: Momentum Grows Against Zero Tolerance Discipline and High-Stakes Testing

NOLO: Do Juveniles Have a Right to Trial by Jury?

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Juvenile Justice System: Inequality and Unjust Treatment appeared first on Law Street.

Something is rotten in the city of Akron, and we finally know what (or rather who…unfortunately we’ve known the what for a while). That’s right, it’s official. After years of reported sightings, elusive behavior, and terrorized citizens, we have finally gotten a real picture of the legendary creature. He does exist, and if you park your car in his territory, he will mark it. So whatever you do, be careful.

Courtesy of Giphy.

I’m not talking about Big Foot, just in case that is where your mind went. Nope. The weirdo that was finally caught on film was the mysterious car pooper–in no way related to the party pooper. The car pooper is a guy who has been terrorizing the Akron, Ohio area for the last three years, using people’s vehicles as his own personal toilet.

Here’s a video clip of an interview with the man who caught the priceless photo–the only image captured of the culprit.

In middle school, my entire school was pulled into a meeting with the vice principal where we were told, “Stop wiping your feces all over the bathroom walls. The janitors shouldn’t have to clean that up.” I remember very clearly thinking how ridiculous it was that we needed to have this conversation at our advanced pre-teen ages. So imagine how I feel about this guy.

Mr. Crapper, which as far as I know is not his real name, has reportedly pooped on at least 19 cars in the last three years. Some of those cars have been defaced more than once, more than twice even. At what point does finding feces on your car in the morning just become part of your regular routine? I hope I never find out. I’ve walked to my car many times before and found something weird that made me say, “What is that crap?” But I have never had the answer to my question actually be crap. I didn’t realize that this was something to be thankful for.

Anyway, if this was not bad enough on its own, if you were unwise enough to leave your door unlocked, you might not find a package on the hood of your car, you might just find one on your passenger seat. So imagine being the person complaining about his bad day because he had to wash crap off of his car that morning, literally, and still not being able to win the worst-story-of-the-day award because some other poor sucker had to scrub crap out of his cloth seats. That’s a smell that cannot be easy to get rid of.

While the culprit had left his mark all over town, he has in the past been as hard to find as the mythical Yeti. Nobody has even gotten a picture. But that all changed earlier this year, when photographic evidence of the man finally surfaced. A man caught him mid-deed in what was hopefully the weirdest photo he has ever taken or will take again. Now that police know who they are hunting it will hopefully not be that long before the cops catch him.

Courtesy of Giphy.

Waking up to find your car has been pooped on (or worse, in) is a crappy way to start your day–and I refuse to apologize for my bad pun here. I hope for the sake of the people in this neighborhood, this man is placed behind bars and given toilet training rehabilitation lessons while he stinks up his cell.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Akron Police One Step Closer to Catching Serial Car-Pooper appeared first on Law Street.

From the time we are in elementary school, we are told that copying from someone else’s paper is wrong. As we get a little older, we are given other names for this copying: plagiarism and intellectual property theft. Often, even those who believe that intellectual property laws are a threat to creativity and equitable access to knowledge recognize that even if something is not illegal, it is better form to give credit where credit is due. But a new question has popped up recently: does this logic apply to culture, as well? Some say yes and call it cultural appropriation. But what exactly is cultural appropriation, and when do we cross the line between appropriation and appreciation?

 What is cultural appropriation?

Cultural appropriation is often defined as being similar to intellectual property theft, but with more overt and culturally offensive aspects.

Cultural appropriation is the adoption or theft of icons, rituals, aesthetic standards, and behavior from one culture or subculture by another. It generally is applied when the subject culture is a minority culture or some how subordinate in social, political, economic, or military status to the appropriating culture. This ‘appropriation’ often occurs without any real understanding of why the original culture took part in these activities or the meanings behind these activities, often converting culturally significant artifacts,practices, and beliefs into ‘meaningless’ pop-culture or giving them a significance that is completely different/less nuanced than they would originally have had.

Viewed as a direct continuation of imperialist violence–which assumes that the land, labor, and bodies of people of color are available for white consumption–cultural appropriation “treats all aspects of marginalized cultures… as free for the taking.”

Conversations about the controversy also often come up when discussing music, such as this interview with Azealia Banks over white artists’ cultural appropriation.

But can you really steal a culture?

On the flip side of things, some people believe that accusations of cultural appropriation need to be wielded much more carefully. Arguing that “you can’t ‘steal’ a culture,” American political commentator and linguist John McWhorter asserts that, “with gay white men and black women, for example, it’s not as if the black women are being left without their culture after the ‘theft’ or as if gay white men are somehow out there ‘out-blacking’ the women they ‘stole’ from.” (This refers to white gay men who affect speaking patterns and mannerisms that are often more readily culturally associated with black women.) McWhorter warns that people accusing others of “stealing” culture through appropriation are using the very specific term too loosely. He argues that the loosening of our language allows flippant accusations to be made when more serious issues can be dealt with.

Additionally, accusations of cultural appropriation often generate assumptions about the race, ethnicity, religion, or sexuality of the people involved. This is alluded to by Howell in the video above, which he starts by cautioning viewers not to pre-judge what he says by the color of his skin. He goes on to argue that it is a compliment to people of color (specifically, he is talking about black people) when white people want to engage in aspects of black culture that they find attractive and fun. Reminding his viewers that it is not “wrong” or “low-class” to be black or to perform blackness through dress or actions, Howell argues that cultural appropriation is not actually appropriation at all, but rather a form of a compliment that has the potential to dismantle racist and/or classist assumptions about black people.

In a similar vein, it is often argued that accusing someone of appropriating another culture can force unwanted assumptions onto people. These incorrect assumptions happened to a bride named Krista, who was accused online of cultural appropriation for pictures of her wedding that were posted online. The wedding integrated aspects of Lenape culture, a Mid-Atlantic Native American tribe. Krista, however, reminded online discussants that she has a Lenape background, even though people assumed she was white based on her features and the color of her skin.

Appreciation or Appropriation?

Here are some examples of widely-talked about accusations of cultural appropriation in recent pop culture.

Case Study: Miley Cyrus

Accused by many as putting on a tremendously racist “minstrel show” in her “We Can’t Stop” video and its performance at the 2013 VMAs, Miley Cyrus has been resoundingly condemned by Anne Theriault for having “used black women as props — like, literal props... Miley was, at one point, slapping a faceless black woman on the ass as if she was nothing more than a thing for Miley to dominate and humiliate.” Critics also noted the historical significance of Cyrus’ performance; like so many other white performers before her, Cyrus used black culture and black bodies to re-brand her own image. Her unapologetic use of black women’s bodies to make herself look “cooler” was described by Jody Rosen of Vulture: “Cyrus is annexing working-class black “ratchet” culture, the potent sexual symbolism of black female bodies, to the cause of her reinvention: her transformation from squeaky-clean Disney-pop poster girl to grown-up hipster-provocateur.”

Following Cyrus’ performance there were powerful calls for black female performers to “just say no” to requests to be in her videos or shows in the future. Musician Big Freedia made sure Cyrus knew she wasn’t even succeeding at her attempts to twerk, sardonically offering, “just get me and Miley together so I could give her ass some lessons.”

In the midst of these accusations of Cyrus’ cultural appropriation, however, there were calls to “go easy” on the performer. In the rush to defend Cyrus, Washington Post columnist Clinton Yates asserted that, “it is inherently racist to imply that there is anything wrong with anyone other than black women twerking.” Arguing that the term “hood” connotes affection when said by white people today, McWhorter had a series of questions for those calling Cyrus out on racism. He wanted to know, “How do we know Cyrus isn’t sincere when she says she loves “hood” culture? Because she’s white? I’m afraid that’s a little 1955.”

Entering the realm of accusations of “reverse racism,” these writers argued that cultures are inherently going to borrow from each other whenever they coexist in society. Restraining white people from borrowing from people of color is unfair if the expectation is that it is not culturally appropriate for people of color to adapt aspects of white culture.

Case Study: #BlackLivesMatter

In the wake of the highly publicized and protested murders of Trayvon Martin and Eric Garner, the slogans “I am Trayvon Martin” and “I Can’t Breathe” rose to the fore of social justice forums. White people were frequently seen in hoodies claiming to “be” Trayvon Martin, and–as seen above–white people were frequently seen claiming to not be able to breathe. Here, the violent potential of cultural appropriation became explicitly clear to some. White users of the hashtag #AllLivesMatter, or asserting that “I am Trayvon Martin” or “We Can’t Breathe” were accused of cultural appropriation because they were attempting to take the experiences of black people as their own. In doing so, they erased the racist dimensions of police violence by “deracializing” the issue, making it about “All Lives” instead of “Black [and Brown] Lives.”

According to critics, by claiming false solidarity–and thus appropriating the cultural experiences of black people–with the deaths of these and other black people at the hands of police, white people were shifting the focus from #BlackLivesMatter to #AllLivesMatter. These hashtags have been used to refer to two related social movements. #BlackLivesMatter refers to activism attempting to call attention to police violence against black people. #AllLivesMatter refers to activism that states that while police violence against people of color is a problem, it is damaging to focus on race in discussions of police violence. In doing so, people using the hashtag #AllLivesMatter claimed that we live in a colorblind society, which threatens to erase the fundamental violence of racism.

However, the #AllLivesMatter hashtag and protests were largely framed as a response to the shooting of two police officers in New York City. These activists pointed out that in addition to black lives mattering, as Raleigh Police Chief Cassandra Deck-Brown stated, “I must say that blue lives do matter. But as I close, I must say that we as a community must begin to recognize that all lives matter.” Basing their rhetoric off of an impulse to ensure that people didn’t feel threatened by, but rather welcomed to join in solidarity with protests surrounding the violent deaths of young people, #AllLivesMatter advocates have decided that it is more important to embrace a less specifically racial call in favor of avoiding any accusations of divisiveness.

ALL LIVES MATTER! United We Stand! Divided We Fall.. Let's Get it together! #AllLivesMatter… http://t.co/uJmI7h8bG0

— Destined (@theatreprince) December 14, 2014

So, is cultural appropriation ever appropriate?

In a scathing critique of Cyrus’ performances as cultural appropriation, Dodai Stewart cautioned readers, “Let’s not get it twisted: The exchange and flow of ideas between cultures can be a beautiful thing. I believe in cross-pollination and being inspired by those whose experience is not like your own.” There’s obviously no clear line here. Perhaps the key is constantly checking in on the impacts of actions, all the while drawing and abiding by distinctions between admiration and exotification, inspiration, and appropriation.

Resources

Zine Library: Cultural Appropriation or Cultural Appreciation?

Hot97: Azaelia Banks on Iggy Azalea

Daily Beast: You Can’t ‘Steal’ a Culture: In Defense of Cultural Appropriation

OffBeatEmpire: Think Twice Before Appointing Yourself Cultural Appropriation Police

Colorlines: On Saying No to Miley Cyrus, the Habitual Cross-Twerker

Huffington Post: What Miley Cyrus did was Disgusting — But Not for the Reasons You Think

Washington Post: Miley Cyrus and the Issues of Slut-Shaming and Racial Condescension

New Republic: Miley’s Twerking wasn’t Racist

Jezebel: Yes, All Lives Matter. Now Shut Up About It

Georgia Political Review: ‘I Am Not Trayvon Martin’: Dismantling White Privilege in Activism

CBS Los Angeles: Things Heat Up as Pro-Police Demonstrators Hold ‘All Lives Matter’ Rally

WRAL: Raleigh Police Chief: Black, Blue, All Lives Matter

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Cultural Appropriation: What’s Appropriate? appeared first on Law Street.

Last November, Rolling Stone shocked the nation with its 9,000-word article entitled “A Rape on Campus.” The piece told the horrific story of a University of Virginia freshman known only as “Jackie.” She claimed to have been gang raped by seven Phi Kappa Psi frat members during a frat date party. The article accused UVA of a “cycle of sexual violence” and “institutional indifference” that preferred to silence girls like Jackie who reported rape instead of helping them. The piece started an impressive national dialogue about rape culture, particularly rape culture on college campuses. Now after four months of investigating and roughly 70 interviews, police have concluded that the gang rape that reignited a movement most likely never even happened.

Charlottesville police announced Monday that they have found “no substantive basis” to support the gang rape detailed in Rolling Stone’s article. Investigators also found “no evidence” that a Phi Kappa Psi frat party even took place on the night of Sept. 28, 2012, which was when the rape was reported to have occurred.

In the above video Chief Longo says,

We’re not able to conclude to any substantive degree that an incident occurred at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house, or any other fraternity house, for that matter. That doesn’t mean something terrible didn’t happen to Jackie on the evening of Sept. 28, 2012. We’re just not able to gather sufficient facts to determine what that is.

There were a number of unsubstantiated claims made by Jackie in the Rolling Stone article that investigators detailed debunking. For starters, police found no proof that a party even occurred at the frat house the night of the alleged rape, but instead proved the Phi Kappa Psi brothers were attending a formal at their sister sorority, Delta Gamma, that evening. Jackie also claimed to have been hit over the head with a glass bottle during the rape, and that her roommate at the time, a nursing student, later removed glass shards from her face. But when police interviewed the roommate, she denied removing any such glass and claimed the wound was more consistent with an abrasion from having fallen. The list of inconsistencies didn’t stop there. For the full text from the Charlottesville police statement detailing their findings in the UVA rape case click here.

According to Chief Longo, the case is not closed but rather suspended until police are able to gather more information or someone comes forward providing more information.

So, what does this mean for Rolling Stone and its journalistic integrity? The magazine, which operated under the assumption that everything Jackie told it was true, already released a statement taking responsibility for its mistakes in handling the article. It admitted to its failure to contact the accused in the story, known as “Drew,” and get his side of the story. Now it’s opening itself up for further review by allowing the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism to complete its own investigation into the magazine’s reporting, which will later be published in Rolling Stone in early April.

As for Phi Kappa Psi, the accused fraternity might be seeking legal action against Rolling Stone for “defamation”. UVA’s Phi Psi chapter said in a statement provided to Business Insider:

Phi Kappa Psi is now exploring its legal options to address the extensive damage caused by Rolling Stone — damage both to the chapter and its members and to the very cause upon which the magazine was focused.

From a legal perspective the frat has a pretty good case, due to the magazine’s gross lack of fact checking and failure to even contact the frat for its side of the story. However if the fraternity members plan to follow through with a suit, they must be willing to expose themselves yet again to scrutiny that could result in even more unwanted publicity.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Find No Evidence to Support UVA Gang Rape Story appeared first on Law Street.

On Tuesday night, 20-year-old University of Virginia student Martese Johnson was brutally arrested. His treatment has sparked outrage around the country, and has led to protests at the university. Moreover, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe has called for an investigation into the police officers’ use of force.

Read More: Militarization: Arming the Police Against Against American Citizens

Like many Americans, students at the University of Virginia went out to celebrate St. Patrick’s Day Tuesday night. Martese Johnson, a junior double majoring in Media Studies and Italian, was one of them. Johnson was with friends trying to get into the Trinity Irish Pub, when he was stopped by a bouncer guarding the door. At this point, an agent from the Virginia Department of Adult Beverage Control, or ABC, grabbed Johnson and brought him over to a group of other ABC agents. According to eyewitness Bryan Beaubrun, when Johnson asked the agent to let go and backed away, he was grabbed from behind and then wrestled to the ground by multiple agents. In the process, he hit his head on the ground, and sustained injuries that required ten stitches.

I stand with Martese Johnson. There is no excuse for this. @VirginiaABC you should be ashamed. pic.twitter.com/4j3bnfDlBI

— UVAProblems (@UVAProbs) March 18, 2015

After being arrested, Johnson was charged with resisting arrest, obstructing justice without threats of force, and profane swearing or intoxication in public. He was released on bail later the next morning.

After the release of pictures and footage of the aftermath of Johnson’s arrest, many have been protesting the way in which he was treated. McAuliffe has authorized an investigation into the circumstances, and UVA president Teresa Sullivan has put out a statement detailing her concerns. In an email sent to the student body, she stated:

Today, as U.Va. students, faculty, and staff who share a set of deeply held values, we stand unified in our commitment to seeking the truth about this incident. And we stand united in our belief that equal treatment and equal justice are among our fundamental rights under the law.

She also stressed, however, that details aren’t yet clear at this time, and encouraged anyone with any information about the arrest to come forward and provide eyewitness testimony.

Last night, hundreds of UVA students, as well as faculty and other members of the community, rallied in support of Johnson, who also attended the march. His face clearly still showed signs of his injury from the night before.

Photos from protest at #UVa in response to #MarteseJohnson‘s injuries from ABC arrest http://t.co/i6XFYmlsz0pic.twitter.com/rXCJX33Et1

— Amy Friedenberger (@AJFriedenberger) March 19, 2015

Johnson thanked the community for coming out to support him, saying:

This University opened me up. You being here is the reason why I still believe in the community of trust even with a busted head standing here on this stage.

The gathering featured other students speaking about their personal experiences, expressing dismay about how Johnson was treated, and talk about how to move forward. It’s certainly moving to see the university community standing together to protest the inhumane treatment of one of its own, but the fact that such inhumane treatment happened in the first place remains troubling. It’s yet another example in national conversation about race and discrimination that seems to get more complicated and upsetting every day.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post UVA Community Gathers in Support of Martese Johnson appeared first on Law Street.

There have been edits made to Wikipedia pages about some high profile deaths at the hands of police in New York City. Those edits have now been traced to 1 Police Plaza, the headquarters of the New York Police Department (NYPD).

The edits seem to have focused on the pages regarding three of those deaths–Eric Garner, Sean Bell, and Amadou Diallo. Eric Garner was killed on July 17, 2014, after being put into a chokehold by an NYPD officer. While in the chokehold, he wasn’t able to breathe, lost consciousness, and passed away. Sean Bell died after being shot by an NYPD officer in Queens in 2006. He and two friends were shot a total of 50 times after leaving his bachelor party. Amadou Diallo was shot at approximately 41 times by NYPD officers and passed away in 1999. These three instances are often cited as examples of profiling, discrimination, and racial biases in the ranks of NYPD.

Most of the edits to those entries attempted to diminish the seriousness of the situations, and downplay the allegations levied against NYPD after each of them. For example, the Garner entry was edited so that “chokehold” was changed to “respiratory distress.” There was also an instance in the Garner entry where the sentence “use of the chokehold has been prohibited” was edited to read “use of the chokehold is legal, but has been prohibited.” The explanation of what happened before the takedown was changed from “Garner raised both his arms in the air” to “Garner flailed his arms about as he spoke.” The line “Garner, who was considerably larger than any of the officers, continued to struggle with them” was also added. While some of these changes seem subtle, they are clear attempts to imply that the NYPD’s actions against Garner were justified.

There was also an attempt to delete Sean Bell’s page altogether. According to Capitol New York, the user made a note on Wikipedia’s list of “articles for deletion” saying:

He [Bell] was in the news for about two months, and now no one except Al Sharpton cares anymore. The police shoot people every day, and times with a lot more than 50 bullets. This incident is more news than notable.

There were also attempted edits or edits made to other pages, including NYPD’s very controversial “stop-and-frisk” policies. Capitol New York pointed out (bolding theirs):

‘The stop-and-frisk program of New York City is a practice of the New York City Police Department to stop, question and, if the circumstances of the stop warrant it, conduct a frisk of the person stopped.’ was changed to ‘The stop-and-frisk program of New York City is a practice of the New York City Police Department by which a police officer who reasonably suspects a person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a felony or a Penal Law misdemeanor, stops and questions that person, and, if the circumstances of the stop warrant it, conducts a frisk of the person stopped.’

This was also added to the entry on stop-and-frisk:

The rules for stop and frisk are found in New York State Criminal Procedure Law section 140.50, and are based on the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Terry v. Ohio.

An internal review is being conducted due to the edits. At this point, it’s not known who was involved or how many pages were affected. A watchdog Twitter account has been set up to tweet whenever Wikipedia edits are made from a computer with an NYPD IP address, although it has yet to catch anything since it was created. It may have been inspired by one of those for Congress, called @congressedits. That account tweets anytime a computer with a Congressional IP address edits a Wikipedia entry.

The NYPD’s edits look bad–it’s an attempt to downplay legitimately dark spots in its history. Its time and resources would certainly be better served working to prevent incidents like the deaths of Eric Garner, Sean Bell, and Amadou Diallo in the future.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post NYPD Caught Editing Negative Wikipedia Entries appeared first on Law Street.

Logic tells us that if two wrongs don’t make a right, then many, many wrongs can’t possibly make any sort of right either. That’s all I could think about when I saw the coverage of the shooting of two police officers in Ferguson, Missouri Wednesday night.

It’s the latest event in a saga that in some ways began this August with the police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown, and in some ways has been happening for years. It’s sparked conversations on police brutality and militarization, racism, systemic biases against young black men in our society, the justice system, and so much more. But even though those conversations are happening on a national level, what’s happening on the ground isn’t quite as academic or theoretical. It’s real, it’s scary, and honestly, last night’s events show that it probably isn’t going to get better anytime soon.

Ferguson’s police chief Tom Jackson resigned. That was probably inevitable after the release of a pretty damning Department of Justice report that highlighted serious racial biases and constitutional breaks in Ferguson. For a more extensive look at the main takeaways of that report, check out fellow Law Streeter Alexis Evans’ article here.

After Jackson resigned, a rally started at the Ferguson police department. While the protesters were obviously pleased that the head of the Ferguson police department had resigned, they didn’t think it was enough to stem clear instances of racial profiling, bias, and intimidation within the force. Protesters actually advocated for the mayor of Ferguson, James Knowles III, to step down as well. Around midnight, those protests took a turn when gunshots rang out. Witnesses say there were four in all. Two found targets–one in the shoulder of a 41-year-old St. Louis County officer, and another in the face of a 32-year-old officer from the nearby town of Webster Groves. Both were in serious condition, but were recently released from the hospital.

Details of who exactly fired those shots remain a little fuzzy. Police have stated that they came from the cluster of protesters, but the protesters themselves are saying that they came from further away on a nearby hill. Police are saying that they have leads, but other than that, what will happen seems up in the air.

In light of the incident, St. Louis County Police and the Mississippi Highway Patrol are going to be taking over controlling the protests in the hopes that things don’t become more violent.

Many around the country have condemned the actions of the shooter. Attorney General Eric Holder, for example, stated:

This heinous assault on two brave law enforcement officers was inexcusable and repugnant. I condemn violence against any public safety officials in the strongest terms, and the Department of Justice will never accept any threats or violence directed at those who serve and protect our communities. … Such senseless acts of violence threaten the very reforms that nonviolent protesters in Ferguson and around the country have been working towards for the past several months.

Despite the fact that new forces are being brought in, I’m not sure it’s safe to say that issues in Ferguson are going to get any better. This is turmoil that has been stewing for years, and Michael Brown’s death just set it boiling. While the protesters have been mostly peaceful, there are always people who do bad things–people who commit those wrongs that can never add up to a right. Hopefully, real dialogue and reform will start happening soon.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Officers Shot in Ferguson Show Tensions Haven’t Abated appeared first on Law Street.

This week’s most popular stories ran the full gamut from the sublimely ridiculously to the deadly serious. The number one article of the week, by Ashley Shaw, follows the story of a Nebraska man who tried to fool cops by labeling his weed “not weed;” the number two article, from Alexis Evans, takes a look into the world of people taking the law into their own hands and patrolling their streets as private cops; and the number three article, from Anneliese Mahoney, recounts Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s divisive speech to Congress.

#1 Man’s ‘Not Weed’ Label Does Not Fool Nebraska Cops

Jordan Meir of Nebraska thought he found the perfect way to disguise his stash–just mark it up as ‘not weed.’ After all, labeling it as weed is a sure fire way to get caught, so the opposite must be the solution, right? Maybe in the rest of the world, but the cops in Nebraska must be extra smart because this ingenious scheme actually did not end up working in their neck of the woods. Read full article here.

#2 Special Conservators of the Peace: Private Police Forces of One

If he looks like a cop, talks like cop, and acts like a cop, he’s probably a cop right? Well, sort of. A growing trend shows civilians are forming private police forces of one to patrol our streets. Armed with a gun and a badge, they can write citations and make arrests. The kicker? The whole thing is completely legal. Read full article here.

#3 Netanyahu’s Speech Shows Israel Isn’t Always a Bipartisan Issue

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the United States Congress today. The speech was much anticipated after weeks of political back and forth regarding the invitation extended to Netanyahu by Speaker of the House John Boehner; however, Netanyahu did end up giving his speech as planned, and it focused heavily on Iran and the ongoing American-Iranian talks over nuclear power. That being said, in some ways the speech is less interesting from an international politics standpoint as it is from a domestic policy window. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

A few months back I wrote a story about “California Police Officers Found Stealing Suspects’ Nude Photos.” It centered around a few cops in Contra Costa County, California who were stealing nude photos off of female suspects’ cellphones while those cellphones were in police custody. They would share the pictures among themselves, and then discuss and rank the women, rendering it a kind of perverted “game.” Well, when I wrote that piece, I kind of expected that this wouldn’t be the only example we heard of such disgusting behavior. I expected a similar story to pop up in another city or state. I was right–although it happened a little closer to home than I anticipated. Similar allegations are now being waged against a police officer in my city of Washington, D.C.

An Alexandria woman named Natalia Argote has filed a lawsuit against the Washington D.C. Police Department (MPD) and the cop in question, Terrence Richardson. According to Washington City Paper Richardson no longer works for MPD.

The suit claims that Argote was stopped by Richardson and another officer on March 3, 2012 on suspicions of driving under the influence. Her phone and drivers license were taken from her, which seems like a normal enough procedure. One of the officers administered a sobriety tested, while the officer went through her phone. She claims that he saw a nude photo she had taken for her boyfriend, and without her consent sent it to himself.

Argote’s suit doesn’t just claim that it was Richardson who violated her rights. She claims that this is a pervasive problem in the ranks of the MPD. The suit states:

On information and belief, MPD officers regularly rifle through the phones of female citizens without their permission or a warrant, searching for salacious photos.

On information and belief, MPD officers regularly share the salacious photos with each other and individuals outside the MPD.

On information and belief, on March 3, 2012, MPD was aware that its officers were conducting warrantless searches of female citizens’ phones and sharing the photos they stole; yet, it took no action to stop and correct its officers.

Whether or not Argote and her lawyer, Latif Doman, will be able to prove those claims remains to be seen. It will also be interesting to see why Richardson doesn’t work with the MPD anymore–whether it has anything to do with these allegations, or other misconduct, or whether he left voluntarily. As of yet, the MPD does not appear to have commented on the lawsuit.

When I first heard about the admittedly very similar California case, I was outraged, and I reacted similarly when I heard about this one. If what Argote alleges is true, she has every right to sue for an unfair search and violation of privacy. Being pulled over doesn’t mean that you lose all rights. Hopefully, MPD is about to learn that first hand.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post D.C. Cop Accused of Stealing Nude Photos After Woman Pulled Over appeared first on Law Street.

The internet has a remarkable way of showing you the worst that humanity has to offer, most notably so in the form of user generated comments. When you ask someone their opinion on something and replace a pen and paper with a keyboard and computer screen, the results may shock you. People truly get nasty. Former Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling became blatantly aware of this fact after sending this tweet congratulating his 17-year-old daughter on her college acceptance.

Congrats to Gabby Schilling who will pitch for the Salve Regina Seahawks next year!!

— Curt Schilling (@gehrig38) February 25, 2015

Who could have predicted that this one little congratulatory tweet would unleash an internet storm of tweets full of gross profanity, referencing rape and bloody underwear (possibly a reference to when Schilling played a game with an injured ankle, and had a “bloody sock” at the end)? The whole mess now has Schilling rushing to his daughter’s defense and taking legal action.

I’m going to spare our readers by not embedding a ton of the offensive tweets into this post, but most of them went something like this:

@WhatsLIAMdoing @Cubb_E@beth_lee@richiereiss This tweet? Or the one on the left you favorited? pic.twitter.com/Qwh9TmOrMH

— Curt Schilling (@gehrig38) March 2, 2015

Shocked, Schilling took to his “38 pitches” blog to confront his daughter’s cyberbullies. He speaks about being in sports his entire life, knowing “guys will be guys,” but points out that he never spoke with his friends about women in this way. After doing some online digging of his own, Schilling then proceeded to share information about specific bullies in his post writing:

The Sports Guru”? Ya he’s a DJ named Adam Nagel (DJ is a bit strong since he’s on the air for 1 hour a week) on Brookdale Student Radio at Brookdale Community College. How do you think that place feels about this stud representing their school? You don’t think this isn’t going to be a nice compilation that will show up every single time this idiot is googled the rest of his life? What happens when a potential woman he’s after googles and reads this?

The other clown? He’s VP of the Theta Xi fraternity at Montclair State University. I gotta believe if Theta Xi is cool with a VP of one of their chapters acting like this I’d prefer to have no one I know in it.

According to USA Today, Nagel has since been summarily suspended by his college and will be scheduled for a conduct hearing for further disciplinary action. “The other clown” is Sean MacDonald, who has since been fired from his part time ticket sales jobs for the New York Yankees.

Schilling concluded the post in a the kind of frantic rant you’d expect from any father protecting his daughter. He then took to Twitter responding to many cyberbullies with some choice words and tweets about “friends in the special forces.”

According to Schilling, so far nine trolls have faced consequences. As a result, many of the offensive tweets have been deleted, but that hasn’t stopped more from popping up in their place. Schilling appears to be going after the truly persistent.

According to CBS, Schilling says some of the tweets were more than just offensive–they were against the law. He says he’s seeking legal recourse, he’s been speaking with the FBI and local police, and is currently discussing the possibility of filing criminal charges. This man’s personal vendetta to hunt down each one of these cyberbullies is a warning to anyone thinking about posting hateful comments on social media, and more importantly proof that you should never mess with a man and his daughter.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Curt Schilling Seeking Legal Action Against Daughter’s Cyberbullies appeared first on Law Street.

If he looks like a cop, talks like cop, and acts like a cop, he’s probably a cop right? Well, sort of. A growing trend shows civilians are forming private police forces of one to patrol our streets. Armed with a gun and a badge, they can write citations and make arrests. The kicker? The whole thing is completely legal.

According to the Washington Post, Virginia state records indicate the number of private police or “special conservators of the peace” (SCOPs) has doubled in Virginia over the last 10 years to number about 750, and consistent growth can been seen all over the nation.

But how is it that these “SCOPs” have any authority?

Well, a provision of state law allows private citizens to petition the court to become SCOPs. An individual petitions the court to be commissioned with the help of a sponsorship from an employer. After undergoing background checks, alcohol and drug tests, and completing required training hours, a circuit court judge will rule on the petition and designate their jurisdiction(s). If approved, a civilian can become a one man police force instantly. The majority of these private police officers are hired to patrol corporate campuses, work for neighborhood associations, or perform code enforcement for counties or cities.

The Virginia legislature just passed a bill that increased SCOPs’ required training hours from 40 to 130, but that is still drastically lower than the amount required of municipal officers–usually ranging from 580 to 1,200 hours. While SCOPs include some former cops, they also include some police academy rejects, which is cause for concern. The increase in training hours can be seen as a push from Virginia lawmakers to improve the legitimacy of these officers amidst complaints that they’re significantly under-trained and unregulated. According to the Post, Virginia isn’t the only state to have its issues with these private police:

In 2012, more than 20 residents of the Cherry Hill neighborhood of Baltimore filed a $25 million lawsuit against a Cleveland security company, claiming its guards had abused residents and violated their civil rights by stopping them illegally and making false arrests. Two of the three guards named in the suit were ‘special police,’ a designation similar to SCOPs in Virginia.

The exact duties, responsibilities and geographic limitations of these SCOPs vary depending on what was deemed appropriate by the court for the individual. Without a clear understanding of the duties that these pseudo cops are certified to perform, it can be hard for civilians to understand their rights when dealing with them.

That new Virginia bill sponsored by Senator Thomas Norment Jr is looking to up those requirements for the SCOPs, and it will probably be signed by Governor Terry McAuliffe. But Norment thinks more needs to be done, like making sure that SCOPs can’t call themselves cops. Taking away that title may end up taking away some of these officers legitimacy, but making the distinction that they’re “kinda cops” rather than real officers may be necessary.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Special Conservators of the Peace: Private Police Forces of One appeared first on Law Street.

In light of recent high profile police killings such as those of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri last August, Eric Garner in Staten Island, and 12-year-old Tamir Rice in Cleveland, Ohio, a national discussion has developed about the force used by police officers against American citizens. In the most recent development in that discussion, President Obama called for all police shootings to be reported to the federal government so that kind of information is readily available and transparent.

This call comes after Obama’s December 2014 recommendation to establish the “Task Force on 21st Century Policing.” According to the White House,

The task force will examine how to strengthen public trust and foster strong relationships between local law enforcement and the communities that they protect, while also promoting effective crime reduction.

The task force will engage with federal, state, tribal, and local officials; technical advisors; young leaders; and nongovernmental organizations to provide a transparent process to engage with the public.

The task force is chaired by Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey and Laurie Robinson, a criminology professor at George Mason University who was formerly an Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ office of Justice Programs.

That task force has now come back to the President with its recommendations–the suggestion that police forces be required to report their shootings is just one of them. This comes after multiple high profile officials had made similar statements about the necessity of recording the incidences of police shootings. Attorney General Eric Holder expressed a similar sentiment in mid January when he stated in a speech,

I’ve heard from a number of people who have called on policymakers to ensure better record-keeping on injuries and deaths that occur at the hands of police. I’ve also spoken with law enforcement leaders — including the leadership of the Fraternal Order of Police — who have urged elected officials to consider strategies for collecting better data on officer fatalities. Today, my response to these legitimate concerns is simple: We need to do both.

FBI head James Comey made similar statements in a speech at Georgetown University a few weeks ago when he stated, “It’s ridiculous that I can’t tell you how many people were shot by the police in this country last week, last year, the last decade – it’s ridiculous.”

There isn’t any information yet about how the reporting of police shootings and force will be handled–whether it will go through the FBI or some other agency is yet to be seen.

This recommendation from the task force comes as that conversation about police shootings continues in the U.S. Last night, a video of a Los Angeles Police Department officer fatally shooting a homeless man went viral.

Here’s the video, although fair warning–it’s pretty brutal and graphic:

Officers claim that it was a struggle over one of the cop’s guns, and it very well may have been, but either way it’s a disturbing video in which deadly force is used very quickly. The conversation about police shootings in the United States is very far from over–a database may be able to be used to help make that conversation even more productive.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Task Force Calls for Police Shootings to be Reported to Federal Government appeared first on Law Street.

News of a secret detention facility in Chicago broke this week and it’s sparking horror and outrage across the country.

This “black site,” revealed by the Guardian, is a nightmare image straight out of a post-apocalyptic movie. People are “arrested” and taken to this site, which is inside a warehouse in Chicago’s Homan Square. Then they are subjected to inhumane treatment. They aren’t afforded the rights that the U.S. Constitution promises all of us. For example, lawyers claim they aren’t able to visit their clients at the site, and beatings and other forms of violence occur. In some ways most disturbingly, it’s all off the books. People who are taken to the Homan Square site aren’t entered into the Chicago PD system, or have any records of their detainment. As Anthony Hill, a criminal defense lawyer put it, “They just disappear, until they show up at a district for charging or are just released back out on the street.”

Read more: Chicago Still Dangerous Despite Absence From Crime Rankings

The facility at Homan Square is being dubbed a “black site” as a nod to the CIA detention facilities in the Middle East, although others have called them “shadow sites.”

The Chicago Police Department is, of course, trying to play Public Relations catch up. It’s claiming that nothing untoward has happened at Homan square, providing a statement that included:

CPD [Chicago police department] abides by all laws, rules and guidelines pertaining to any interviews of suspects or witnesses, at Homan Square or any other CPD facility. If lawyers have a client detained at Homan Square, just like any other facility, they are allowed to speak to and visit them. It also houses CPD’s Evidence Recovered Property Section, where the public is able to claim inventoried property…There are always records of anyone who is arrested by CPD, and this is not any different at Homan Square.

These revelations come at an interesting time–the United States has been engaged in a discussion over the power of our police forces for a while now. Reports of increased militarization, racial profiling, and human rights abuses are finally seeing the light of day and mainstream news coverage. From Ferguson, Missouri, to New York, New York, people this Fall stood up in protest against police treatment of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, and others. This information out of Chicago seems to be just the latest in a long, terrifying list. It’s horrible, reprehensible, and heartbreaking, but it’s by no means unsurprising.

Reading the Guardian piece, complete with the many, many horrifying examples of what purportedly happens at this detention center, reminded me of a powerful speech by FBI Director James Comey just a few weeks ago. He talked a lot about innate racial biases in law enforcement, particularly in light of those events I mentioned above. Although his speech was by no means faultless, there were many honest truths to which Comey seemingly spoke. At one point, he said:

A mental shortcut becomes almost irresistible and maybe even rational by some lights. The two young black men on one side of the street look like so many others the officer has locked up. Two young white men on the other side of the street — even in the same clothes — do not. The officer does not make the same association about the two white guys, whether that officer is white or black. And that drives different behavior. The officer turns toward one side of the street and not the other. We need to come to grips with the fact that this behavior complicates the relationship between police and the communities they serve.

While there’s no indication exactly what race those interred at Homan Square are–there are certainly claims that many of the people brought there are low-income, and black, Hispanic, or members of other minority populations. It’s sad, in light of Comey’s speech and the events of this summer, how easy this becomes to imagine. Chicago’s police force taking those who lack resources, subjecting them to inhumane treatment, and not worrying about the consequences. It’s easy to silence a voice when that voice is nowhere near a microphone. While it’s yet to be seen what will be borne out of these revelations, I wouldn’t be surprised if more “black sites” exist in other cities. There’s a big problem here–and this is just one more piece of the puzzle.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Chicago “Black Site” Allegations Yet Another Example of Police Brutality appeared first on Law Street.

It’s really, really cold out. I’m a New Englander who grew up with lots of snow and ice every winter, and I pride myself on my ability to stand up to even the most frigid temperatures. That being said, here in D.C. it was in the single digits when I walked to work this morning, and I’m really not okay with that. Luckily, a Kentucky town by the name of Harlan City thinks it has tracked down the culprit. It’s not climate change though, or a polar vortex. It’s Queen Elsa from the recent Disney blockbuster “Frozen.” In fact, Harlan City Police are so sure that she’s the one to blame that they’ve issued a “warrant” for her arrest. They’re taking the concept of a “cold spell” quite literally.

Anna is worried.

For those of you who somehow escaped 2013 without seeing the movie, it’s a story about two sisters from a fictional kingdom called Arendelle, most likely located somewhere in Northern Europe. The older sister, Elsa, has a variety of cold-related powers, including being able to inflict a deep freeze on her entire kingdom when she gets a little overwhelmed. Although everything ends up alright in the movie, the people of Arendelle certainly have an chilly few days while Elsa’s sister Anna works to reverse the cold snap.

The newest “Frozen” news came from Harlan City Police’s Facebook page, where they posted an “arrest warrant” for Queen Elsa of Arendelle. They described the “suspect” as follows:

Suspect is a blonde female last seen wearing a long blue dress and is known to burst into song ‘Let it Go!’ As you can see by the weather she is very dangerous. Do not attempt to apprehend her alone.

Harlan is a tiny city, with less than 2000 people. Apparently the police are right, too, it’s been getting very cold there; it was in the single digits yesterday.

The police are taking all the attention over their post in good stride. After the original post announcing the arrest warrant pretty much went viral, the department posted a follow up on its Facebook page, saying:

Wow. We were just having a little fun and didn’t expect this! It has been fun and we had to have a little fun after this week’s weather. But as a reminder, do take the precautions you need to keep you, your friends, family, neighbors and pets safe during the snow queen’s mad spell.

Frozen” was a huge phenomenon, and the hubbub still hasn’t died down. Actually, I’m sure some parents would totally support Elsa getting arrested just so they wouldn’t have to hear the song “Let it Go” ever again. Like this guy, for example, who is clearly pretty tired of the film:

Either way, this was definitely all in good fun, and a cute way for Harlan City Police Department to remind everyone to bundle up this winter. In the meantime:

Stay warm, everyone!

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Kentucky Town Issues Arrest Warrant for Elsa from “Frozen” appeared first on Law Street.

I have some advice to anyone who happens to read this: if you are going to hit yourself in the face and then blame it on the cops, make sure there are no recordings of it. This is good advice both because leaving behind video evidence will land you in a lot of trouble, and also because if there is a video of you hitting yourself in the face, you will be the source of much ridicule.

Unfortunately for Aleksander Tomaszewski, he did not get my advice in time. Which is why he was recently found guilty of attempted coercion and initiating a false report.

Courtesy of Giphy.

Let’s go back some. Tomaszewski was brought in to the Lane County Sheriff’s Office for questioning on an unrelated case. He apparently was not there willingly, and so he wanted to get away as soon as possible and never have to go back. (Side note: I assume he was afraid of questioning because he knew the first question was likely to be about the spelling of his name, which is probably a question people with a last name like Tomaszewski get asked a lot. I, for one, can see how that would get annoying quickly, and so I definitely do not blame him for doing everything in his power to avoid hearing the question again.)

Just as he sat pondering how he would make his escape, the officers left him alone in his cell. That is when a brilliant idea struck (pun most definitely intended). Taking his only chance at once again seeing the outside world, Mr. Tomaszewski repeatedly hit himself in the face until he had a couple of black eyes.

Courtesy of Giphy.

He then did what any battery victim would do: he signed an assault complaint … against the detectives. It was the perfect crime. For sure, there was no way that it could go wrong. Wait! There was one way … (pssst, in case you have not yet figured out what I am getting at here, this is the part of the story where Tomaszewski could have used my helpful advice from earlier). That’s right: the reason I can say, without pesky qualifiers like allegedly, that this man hit himself, repeatedly, is that it was all caught on film. No wonder people always say there is too much violence on television these days: you can’t even hit yourself until you are black and blue and blame it on your interrogators without it being broadcasted to the whole world anymore.

Courtesy of Cheezburger.

After he realized he had been caught, Mr. ugh, do I really have to type out his name again Tomaszewski fessed up and admitted that he thought that filing an assault complaint against the cops would be his get-out-of-jail-free card. If only he had done this back before cameras were invented…

After pleading guilty to the coercion and false claim charges, he was sentenced to 20 days for each crime, given a $600 fine, and put on a three-year probation. It is too late for you to follow my advice to destroy all video evidence, Mr. Tomaszewski, but I have some words that I hope will be of comfort to you: this is all technology’s fault, not yours, so there is no need to beat yourself up about it. Oh, wait…I guess my words of comfort come too late, as well.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Worst Way to Get Out of Jail? Punch Yourself in the Face and Blame Cops appeared first on Law Street.

It looks like a toy, resembling a large ping pong ball, but this bright orange device is actually the newest “less lethal” ammunition option for police in pressure situations. Developed by a company out of California called Alternative Ballistics, The Alternative is marketed as an easily accessible attachment for police officers to use that doesn’t actually penetrate its target, only stalls it.

This week, five Ferguson, Missouri police officers will begin to train using the device, with the department planning to introduce it to its entire force of 55 officers.

Ferguson police first in U.S. to test new ‘less-lethal’ bullet called “the Alternative” http://t.co/e27NlZ9mmm

— Kirsten Danis (@kirstendanis) February 4, 2015

This “less lethal” option would allow police in situations where lethal force is already presumably justified to cause their target serious pain with less internal injury. In seconds the device can be mounted on the top of the gun without any obstruction to the sight of its operator. According to the company’s website:

Once the weapon is fired, the bullet embeds itself inside the projectile with no chance of escaping, simultaneously transferring the bullet’s energy, propelling it directly at the target. Once the bullet is fired from the gun into the projectile they permanently become one unit. The docking unit will automatically eject from the weapon and the firearm returns to its normal function before it cycles in a new round.

Since the gun returns to its normal functionality after the one-time round is released, officers can still use their weapons for lethal force if necessary.

You can watch a video of The Alternative in action below.

The main point of The Alternative is that it gives its user a choice. A choice that may have come in handy in the controversial shooting of Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager who was fatally shot by a white police officer. Brown is just one of several victims who has thrust American police procedures under a microscope.This is likely the reason why the Ferguson Police Department is the first in the U.S. to test the $45-per-unit device.

According to the Washington Post, Al Eickhoff, assistant chief of the Ferguson police, had begun researching less lethal options about a month after Brown’s fatal shooting by now-former Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson on August 9, 2014.

But is this a viable option? Those seconds it takes for an officer to pull the device out from a side holster and place it on the barrel of a gun could be life threatening. Steve Ijames, a former Springfield, Missouri police major and training expert thinks that may be the case, telling the Post:

I am all about less lethal. What bothers me is we will allow an officer to face immediate deadly jeopardy with a less-lethal round. Deadly force is the most likely thing to repel deadly force.

The Alternative is hardly the only non-lethal option on the market. Officers have an arsenal of weapons such as tasers, bean bag-loaded shotguns, pepper-filled pellets, rubber-coated bullets, and stun grenades from which to choose. But if this ping pong-looking pellet takes off, it could end up being a favorite.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Ferguson Police Testing “Less Lethal” Bullet Alternative appeared first on Law Street.

It’s the weekend, which means it’s time to look back once again on all the weird things that people did last week. This week’s weird arrests even went international–check out the story from Hong Kong!

[SlideDeck2 id=32171 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

A recent slowdown by New York Police Department officers has ignited a debate over what the role of police officers should be and to what extent policing should focus on minor crimes.

According to the New York Post,

There were just 1,191 parking summonses handed out between Dec. 29 and Jan. 4 — down nearly 93 percent from the same period last year, when 16,008 of the dreaded orange envelopes were slapped on windshields

The NYPD slowdown involved a nearly complete abandonment of enforcement for low-level crimes like parking tickets and public order offenses. While slowdowns can have many different causes, it appears that the recent one in New York is a result of the rising tension between police officers and Mayor Bill de Blasio.

The New York Post also reported that the slowdown will cost the city roughly $10 million per week in lost ticket revenue. Doug Turetsky, of New York’s Independent Budget Office, put that number in context by comparing it to the city’s $77 billion annual budget; however, if losses continued over a long period of time the effects would be notable.

The Associated Press further noted that only one arrest was made and zero tickets were issued for low-level offenses on New Years Eve, a day when roughly one million people flock to the city. Despite this dramatic decrease in enforcement, there was actually a modest decrease in the number of reported serious crimes over a two-week period when compared to the same time span one year earlier.

Recent activity suggests that the NYPD slowdown is coming to an end and may have even stopped completely. Commissioner Bratton threatened to take away sick days and vacation time until ticket and arrest numbers returned to normal levels. While the slowdown may be over, it renewed the debate over the underlying policing theory present in many American cities.

Broken Windows Policing

Although the NYPD slowdown can have important implications for the NYPD and New York City, it has also called the Broken Windows style of policing into question. Behind the Broken Windows theory is the idea that disorder leads to both fear and more crime. The theory was first established by professors George L. Kelling and George Q. Wilson in an article they wrote back in 1982. They argued that the proactive enforcement of laws pertaining to lower level and often very visible crimes, like breaking windows, will restore order to public places and prevent additional crimes.

Put in their words:

The unchecked panhandler is, in effect, the first broken window. Muggers and robbers, whether opportunistic or professional, believe they reduce their chances of being caught or even identified if they operate on streets where potential victims are already intimidated by prevailing conditions. If the neighborhood cannot keep a bothersome panhandler from annoying passersby, the thief may reason, it is even less likely to call the police to identify a potential mugger or to interfere if the mugging actually takes place.

New York City was actually a primary testing ground for the Broken Windows style of policing. The strategy came to New York in 1993 under the tenure of Commissioner Bill Bratton, first  appointed by Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Bratton later returned to New York to once again act as Commissioner under de Blasio in 2014. Broken Windows is frequently attributed to the city’s dramatic decline in crime during the 1990s.

Kelling stands with his theory in light of the recent debate. In an interview with the New York Daily News he argued that while it is unlikely that one week-long slowdown will have a meaningful impact on crime numbers, he did caution about long-term effects. Kelling continued to argue that maintaining order will meaningfully constrain the crime levels in the city, but also acknowledged that the maintenance of order is not intended to punish people. Kelling argued that the underlying principle of Broken Windows remains strong, but policing methods may still be updated to fit the present circumstances.

New York’s Crime Decline

Between 1990 and 2012 New York City’s violent crime rate per 100,000 people has decreased by nearly 75 percent and the total number of murders went from 2,245 in 1990 to 335 in 2013. While most cities in the United States experienced significant decreases in their violent crime rates since the 1990s as well, New York has far outpaced the national average and has continued that downward trend in recent years.

Before you ask, there was also a decrease in the actual number of broken windows over the past several years (and yes, there is data on that).

Although it is impossible to determine whether or not Broken Windows policing caused this decrease–many factors typically impact a city’s crime level–it is likely that policing played a role. Despite this correlation, many are calling for the end to Broken Windows as a modern policing philosophy. It has long been criticized for its effects on minorities, which tend to be the target of many ‘order-related’ arrests, but the recent death of the unarmed Eric Gardner at the hands of the NYPD has sparked further protest.

The Policing Debate

While it is unfair to claim that Broken Windows policing caused the death of Eric Gardner, such a policing strategy will increase the number of times minorities are stopped by the police. Arresting people for committing crimes like selling loose cigarettes, the act which precipitated Gardner’s encounter with police officers, will simply increase the likelihood that altercations occur in the future.

Supporters of Broken Windows argue that it is not the underlying theory that causes tragedies like Gardner’s death, but rather it is the training and tactics that officers employ that lead to abuse. As a result, people call for police reforms that would improve tactics and training; however, evidence may also suggest that police reform may not adequately address problem. Last summer the NYPD ended its controversial stop-and-frisk policy due to complaints that it disproportionately violated the rights of the poor and minority populations, yet problems persist.

Despite the removal of stop-and-frisk as an important policing tactic, situations Gardner’s encounter with the police still occur and continue to disproportionately affect minorities. The Broken Windows theory sought to reduce public fear by bringing order to public places; however, it has also helped create a different kind of fear among minority populations, which is developing into increasingly more hostile attitudes toward the police. In a series of polls asking people whether or not they believe the police treat blacks and whites equally, a significant gap between white and black perception emerges. The most recent poll suggests that a majority (52 percent) of white respondents have a “great deal of confidence” that both races are treated equally; among black respondents that number dipped to just 12 percent.

Distrust and fear toward the police has led to hostile interactions between minority populations and law enforcement officers. Supporters of the Broken Windows theory of policing may be right when they argue that enforcing order can reduce crime rates and fear among the general public; however, attention must also be paid to the additional implications that aggressive policing of low-level crimes may have.

What is the role of Broken Windows policing when many of the broken windows have been fixed? Crime in New York City has experienced massive declines over the last two-and-a-half decades, and according to its crime statistics is now a pretty safe city relative to its population size. Creating order may serve an important role in reducing crime, but when crime has already decreased by such an extent should it be enforced as aggressively as it was in the 1990s?

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post NYPD Slowdown Ignites Debate Over Broken Windows Policing appeared first on Law Street.

It may have been the first full week of 2015, but that doesn’t mean that our criminals are any more normal than they were in 2014. Read on to see the top five weirdest, funniest, and downright bizarre arrests of this week.

[SlideDeck2 id=31723 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

While it may be a new year, it doesn’t mean that the arrests are getting any more normal. Ready for the first weird arrests of the week of 2015? Click through below.

[SlideDeck2 id=30909 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Well 2014 has come to a close. It was…well it was a year. A weird, occasionally amusing, mostly f’ed-up year. And now that the year has come to a close, we thought we’d give you one more dose of WTF. Without further ado, here’s a timeline of the biggest WTF moments of 2014.

February: Dexter Copycat

In February, a 19-year-old woman who’d clearly been watching way too much Dexter admitted to killing somewhere between 22-100 people, we’re still not really sure.

Nevermind the fact that that would be an incredibly impressive resume for a 19-year-old serial killer, the entire story was weird and didn’t add up, and definitely a total WTF moment. Read the full story here. 

April: Cliven Bundy 

In April, conservatives found a new cause celebre in the hands of poorly-vetted Cliven Bundy. Bundy’s beef with the government was pretty simple–he didn’t think he should have to get a permit to allow his cattle to graze on Federal land. However, the entire thing led to an insane standoff between Bundy, his friends, and some federal agents. He became the poster boy for the small-time farmer standing up to the oppressive government…and then he said a whole bunch of racist shit, including that black people may have been better off as slaves and all of his former friends ran very, very far away.

Read the full story here and here.

May: Donald Sterling

Speaking generally of racism, one of the most WTF situations was definitely the whole Donald Sterling controversy. He is, of course, the flaming asshole former-owner of the Clippers. An audio recording features Sterling asking his then-girlfriend things like “It bothers me a lot that you want to broadcast that you’re associating with black people. Do you have to?” Oh Donald Sterling, the fact that racists like you still exist and make a lot of money is a giant WTF is my book.

Read the full story here.

June: Slenderman Stabbing

In June, two preteen girls were arrested for stabbing their friend 19 times. They claimed that they were forced to do so by “Slenderman,” an internet character/urban myth. As soon as the horrific incident occurred, a lot of people wondered whether or not these girls were suffering from mental illness, could actually go to trial, and what exactly caused them to become so obsessed with “Slenderman.” As of now, they have been declared competent to stand trial. But there’s no doubt that the entire thing was incredibly creepy and very much WTF. Read the full story here.

July: Inappropriate Evidence

In the slow, hot, days of July, one story really made us scratch our heads. In Manassas, Virginia, a teenage boy was accused of sending a sexually explicit video, starring himself, to his girlfriend. But there wasn’t really any identifying information in the video, so the police tried to figure out whether or not it was a video of the young man. The only way they could think to do so was to take him into a hospital, induce an erection, and play a game of spot-the-differences with the erect penis in the video and the 17-year-old in their police station.

Read the full story here.

August: Homophobes…I Mean Homophones

In August, we saw the story of an employee at Norman Global Language Centre, Tim Torkildson, who was fired for writing a blog post on homophones. Homophones, being, of course, words that sound alike but having different meanings. Homophones, however, does contain the prefix “homo” and the Norman Global Language Center worried that it could be linked to gay sex. Never mind the horribly bigoted and ridiculous reasoning there, that’s shitty logic all around. Read the full story here.

September: Urban Outfitters and Kent State

Urban Outfitters–your go-to destination for a flower hair crown and general Coachella-inspired fast fashion–made headlines in September when it attempted to sell this sweatshirt:

Urban Outfitters criticized over blood-red-stained Kent State sweatshirt http://t.co/s1k9oMDLZV #Ebay #Atlanta pic.twitter.com/pYYXVcUTk3

— The Social Mailman (@SocialMailman) September 18, 2014

Yup, that’s what you think it is. A Kent State sweatshirt, spattered with blood stains. Whether Urban Outfitters wanted to generate some controversy–and publicity–or the people who greenlit this genuinely have their heads so far up their asses they’ve lost their eyesight, I’m not sure. Either way, it was certainly a major WTF moment. Read the full story here and here.

October: California Highway Patrol

In October, a few California Highway Patrol officers were caught playing an incredibly sick game. They were stealing nude photos off of suspects’ phones while the phones were being held in evidence, and then sharing them among themselves. Oh, and then they’d text offensive sexist and lewd things to each other about said photos. Great job guys.

Read the full story here.

November: No Feeding the Homeless

In November, some attempts at good deeds ended up going horribly wrong. Two pastors and a 90-year-old man got in trouble with the law for feeding the homeless in Florida. They were all cited for violating a Fort Lauderdale ordinance, which apparently forbids anyone from feeding homeless people. While I guess it could be considered some sort of public health problem, that seems a harsh law for those trying to be a good Samaritan. Read the full story here.

It’s truly been a WTF kind of year–here’s to 2015 being better.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Top WTF Moments of 2014 appeared first on Law Street.

Happy New Year! Welcome to 2015, everyone. It is the time of year that we all make some resolutions that we have no intention of actually keeping. And to help you decide just want you want to resolve to do this coming year, I am going to tell you some of mine. And if you want to avoid the old standards such as losing weight or being a better person, I suggest you take my lead on these.

So, without further ado, here are my 2015 New Year’s resolutions:

1. Don’t be stupid.

When John Doe (since this guy’s name was unreported, I will have to go with the old John Doe pseudonym) was receiving a parking ticket, I guess he got really excited. Who could blame him? Parking tickets are great, right? Anyway, I say this because as he was receiving the ticket, he apparently grabbed it from the officer’s hands really quickly. Too quickly.

Snatching a ticket from an officer is a really stupid thing to do. How do I know this? Well, as Doe was being pushed up against the wall and handcuffed, he asked just what it was he had done to lead to this arrest, and he was told he was being arrested “for being stupid.”

Courtesy of Giphy.

And since I do not want to be arrested, my first New Year’s resolution is to avoid being stupid. Though I fully admit that this is easier said than done.

2. Don’t threaten to kill dinosaurs.

Violence is never the answer. Let’s just be clear about that up front. Which is why writing stories about shooting dinosaurs is just plain wrong. Alex Stone learned this the hard way.

Sixteen-year-old Stone was supposed to write a little bit about himself and a status in the style of a Facebook page. So when the teacher saw that on the page he threatened to shoot his neighbor’s pet dinosaur, she had no choice but to take the threat seriously. After all, this was a nonfiction report, so there was no way this kid could have been making up his desire to kill that dinosaur. And killing pets in youth is the first sign of becoming a sociopath, correct? This was not something to take lightly.

Courtesy of Giphy.

After reading the essay, the teacher immediately reported the incident to the office where the kid was both suspended for a week and arrested for disorderly conduct (though to be fair, the police claim the arrest had nothing to do with the threat to the dinosaur’s life).

Stone is suing. I suppose he just isn’t an animal lover. PETA would not be pleased. And in the manner of many sociopaths, Stone’s mother could not see anything wrong with her son’s conduct. She was quoted as saying something silly along the lines of “we don’t have dinosaurs anymore.”

This story has really opened my eyes to the dinosaur awareness movement. In result, I pledge to not threaten dinosaurs even once in the year 2015.

3. Don’t point bananas at police officers.

Nathan Channing is a funny guy. Or at least he says he is. I’m inclined to think he is right because when I heard his story I did laugh. So basically a cop was driving down the road when Channing decided to take a yellow object out of his pocket, point it in the air, and then point it at the officer. The cop, in fear for his life, called for backup. The backup cop, thinking he was about to be shot, started to pull out his own, non-banana, gun when Channing finally yelled out, “it’s a banana.”

Courtesy of Giphy.

Channing said that he did this because he thought it would be funny and good as a YouTube video. The only problem, other than the whole making police officers think that you have a gun pointed at them, is that Channing did not think to record this future YouTube video. I assume he thought it was going to be acted out later documentary-style a la Drunk History. He claims the reason it wasn’t taped was because this was just the test run; however, he does admit that he now realizes his joke probably wasn’t a really good one.

In honor of Channing’s lately-developed wisdom, I now resolve to not point bananas, or any other gun-looking item, at any law enforcement member.

So there you have it, a complete list of resolutions that I encourage you all to follow. Of course, I’ll probably be doing all of these come mid-January. Especially the dinosaur one. Who can ever keep these resolutions anyway?

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post New Year’s Resolution: Don’t Get Arrested appeared first on Law Street.

On Saturday, December 20, Ismaaiyl Brinsley shot and killed two NYPD officers in their patrol car, then proceeded to commit suicide with the same gun on the platform of a nearby subway station. The officers, Wenjian Liu, 32, and Rafael Ramos, 40, were shot in the head and upper body by Brinsley’s semiautomatic handgun. Although this shooting occurred outside of recent protests in the city, which have been almost completely nonviolent, tensions between the NYPD, protesters, local communities, and politicians continue to grow.

Brinsley boarded a bus from Baltimore to New York on Saturday morning with the intention to kill police officers, an intention that he expressed on social media that morning.  He posted a picture of a silver handgun on Instagram with the caption, “I’m Putting Wings On Pigs Today. They Take 1 Of Ours…Let’s Take 2 of Theirs.” He also referenced the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner in the same post.

After arriving in Manhattan, he made his way to Brooklyn where he ambushed Liu and Ramos.  In a press conference with Mayor de Blasio, Police Commissioner Bill Bratton responded to the murders saying, “quite simply they were assassinated.”

Earlier that morning Brinsley got into a fight with his ex-girlfriend, Shaneka Nicole Thompson, in Baltimore. The argument ended after Brinsley shot Thompson in the stomach, stole her phone, and fled the scene according to Baltimore County Police. As of Sunday, Thomson was in critical, but stable, condition in a local Baltimore hospital. A friend of Thompson’s notified Baltimore police later that day after seeing Brinsley’s Instagram photo, and an alert was sent to the NYPD shortly before the Brinsley killed Liu and Ramos.

Acting Alone

It is important to realize that Brinsley was not a participant in recent protests in New York, and his actions do not represent a departure from the peaceful methods employed up to this point. Instead, Brinsley was a man with a long history of arrests and a record of mental issues. He was arrested 19 times for various minor offenses, many of which included firearms, the Washington Post reported. In 2011, he received a two-year sentence in a Georgia prison for felony gun possession, though his actual release date is difficult to determine.

According to relatives, Ismaaiyl Brinsley was on medication for a brief period and he admitted to being under the care of a psychiatrist or in a mental institution during a court hearing. His family further noted that he likely had some undiagnosed mental issues and according to his sister, he was “an emotionally troubled kid. He needed help and didn’t get it.” The police have identified an increasingly aggressive social media history, which became particularly antigovernment and antipolice in recent weeks. Relatives also told authorities that Brinsley attempted to hang himself a year ago.

Tensions Mount

The murders of Officers Liu and Ramos have intensified the debate between protesters, the police, and city officials. The president of the NYPD’s largest union, Patrick Lynch, said that the murders are the result of the recent protests and Mayor de Blasio’s response. According to Lynch, “there is blood on many hands, from those that incited violence under the guise of protest to try to tear down what police officers did every day.”

Supporters of the police argue that since Eric Garner decision, Mayor de Blasio has not sufficiently assisted police officers. From meeting with protest groups to taking a hard line against police misconduct and brutality, many disagree with the mayor’s treatment of the police. In fact, a group of officers publicly turned their backs on the mayor before a press conference on Saturday night.

Whether or not you agree with the protesters or the police, arguing that recent nonviolent protests caused the deaths of two police officers is completely off base. The evidence revealed so far indicates that the shooter acted alone. Brinsley, who had a long arrest record and a troubled history, was not compelled to kill two police officers by peaceful activism. While recent events may have created tension between police officers and communities, connecting them to an unwarranted act of violence is simply unjustified.

Instead, we should see the recent shooting for what it is–the act of a man with a long criminal history and mental health problems. Arguing that Brinsley shot two police officers because of protests fails to explain why he also shot his ex-girlfriend that same morning. Brinsley was clearly a troubled man, and while that does not come close to justifying his actions, it does indicate that what he did does not extend beyond himself. Recent protests may have brought the issue to public consciousness as they intended to do–they represent one response to a set of events. Other reactions, specifically violent ones, represent an unrelated and unjustified response.

Recent protests in New York raise opposition to a legitimate issue–police violence–and attempt to open up a dialogue with the police and local officials. Both supporters and critics alike should at least acknowledge the movement’s nonviolent nature. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but conflating violence with recent protests will only serve to make matters worse. Civil rights leaders have already denounced the killings. While some may disagree with their decision not to heed Mayor de Blasio’s call to pause demonstrations until after the officers’ funerals, the fact is that this shooting was an unrelated event.

The deaths of officers Liu and Ramos truly are tragedies. Regardless of context, any act of such unwarranted violence can never be condoned. Americans should be able to mourn their deaths as well as the death of Eric Garner at the same time without feeling any tension between the two. Being opposed to police misconduct is not the same as being antipolice, and supporting the police does not mean you should ignore their mistakes.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post NYPD Deaths Escalate Tensions in New York appeared first on Law Street.

It’s Christmas time. And that means it is the best time of the year to go shopping. No crowded stores, no long lines, no fighting over a pair of on-sale shoes that I want to buy someone–definitely not myself, though, all my Christmas shopping is for my loved ones–with a lady who also wants to buy those shoes for someone–definitely not herself. Oh wait! That doesn’t sound like any Christmas shopping that I have ever done. Mine sounds more like this story (which took place in January 2011 not at Christmas, but which stills sounds like something that would happen at Christmas).

Frank Maio saw what my sisters would tell you was Princess Parking out in front of a Deerfield Beach shoe store. (Princess Parking, as defined by Urban Dictionary, is “just like rock star parking or prime parking; when one finds the perfect parking spot, right next to or in front of the entrance to wherever he or she is going.”) But when he went to claim the spot, something horrible occurred: Clausel Pierre pulled into the spot first!

Now, we all have experienced and/or caused this event. When it happens to me, I yell things I am not proud of yelling and fume about it for hours while plotting a revenge that I have absolutely no intention of actually enacting as big as I talk. So imagine how much I cheered when I heard what Maio did to handle this situation.

Courtesy of Giphy.

He asked Pierre to move. Tough, right? I wouldn’t have the guts to confront the guy at all; however, that actually was not the end of it. Pierre said no. I mean, he claimed something along the lines of it wasn’t reserved and he got there first and blah blah blah a whole lot of stuff that might have been true but certainly did not get Maio the royal parking spot he felt he deserved. So then he had to go a step farther.

Did I happen to mention that Maio was an off-duty cop who was at the shoe store to do some moonlighting as a security guard? Well, that is exactly what was happening here. And believe me, this cop was not afraid to use his power for his own gain. Park in the spot he wanted? Well, do not think he would be too mature to arrest you for that. Don’t believe me? Ask Pierre. Because yes, he was arrested for parking in the spot this police officer wanted.

Pierre was so confused that he was being arrested, that he called 911. You can listen to a recording of the call below. According to Pierre, the officer not only arrested him, he roughed him up a bit too.

Pierre has been fighting the charges against him (including battery against law enforcement and resisting arrest) for two years and finally he had some success! The charges were dropped (since apparently a judge realized that Maio’s statements over the last couple of years were conflicting); however, Pierre was not throwing a party over his victory. He said he’d been hurt and he wanted payback. So he recently initiated a lawsuit.

Courtesy of Giphy.

Will he win? I don’t know. But I do know that this whole thing has taught me a lesson: when someone takes a spot I think belongs to me, it might seem like a good idea to fight for it, after all, it is the principal of the thing, but if I am still fighting for it years later, it might have been an even better idea to just park a couple of spots down. Oh. And if I ever become a cop, I am going to do my best not to arrest people on trumped up charges no matter how tempting it might be to arrest the person who got in front of me at the grocery store with 500 million items when I only had like two and then wouldn’t let me cut–but I am digressing, because really, abuse of power only comes back to sue you in the long run.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Off-Duty Cop Arrests Man for Taking Parking Spot appeared first on Law Street.

This week’s weird arrests of the week is one of my favorite yet, with a celebrity appearance, an Instagram celebrity appearance, and a magician’s great near-arrest. Read on to learn about the weirdest arrest stories to surface over the last week.

[SlideDeck2 id=30065 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.