If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   A federal judge has ruled that henceforth, police in NYC cannot put their hands on your crotch without a really really good reason   (nytimes.com) divider line 142
    More: Cool, Judges' Rules, federal judges, berg administration, fourth amendment, New York Police Department, New York County District Attorney, nyc  
•       •       •

4978 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Aug 2013 at 11:47 AM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



142 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-12 12:29:25 PM

dead: But the TSA continues to grope innocent people every day of the year.

/I try to enjoy the pat-down and sometimes will ask them if they want to get together after work for coffee.


I fly at least 10 times a year, and have never been frisked.

/Middle-aged white male privilege RULES
 
2013-08-12 12:30:03 PM

zarberg: I lived in Brooklyn for 5 years and never had a cop grab my crotch. I feel cheated now.


Try stuffing something large in your shorts.
 
2013-08-12 12:31:12 PM

Prof. Frink: zarberg: I lived in Brooklyn for 5 years and never had a cop grab my crotch. I feel cheated now.

Try stuffing something large in your shorts.


Or wear a hoodie and baggy pants
 
2013-08-12 12:32:16 PM

Theaetetus: TFA: Noting that the Supreme Court had long ago ruled that stop-and-frisks were constitutionally permissible under certain conditions, the judge stressed that she was "not ordering an end to the practice of stop-and-frisk."

Sorry, Subby, but no. In the future, you might want to try reading your own article.


A quick composite from Google News puts the rest of the media with Subby. But you're right.
 
2013-08-12 12:33:14 PM
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

This all seems rather straightforward to me.  The police randomly stopping innocent people and frisking them, looking for contraband, is EXACTLY the thing this was supposed to stop.
 
2013-08-12 12:33:14 PM

MBooda: Papelbon All MLB players who have not been castrated, you're on notice.
[nomaas.org image 485x426]



/he's quite a ball player!
 
2013-08-12 12:35:17 PM
"But the thing is, you don't have many suspects who are innocent of a crime. That's contradictory. If a person is innocent of a crime, then he is not a suspect."
   -Attorney General Ed Meesse.   (October 14, 1985, US News And World Report)

See, they're not stopping innocent people.  Everybody stopped is a suspect and suspects are criminals! Guilty criminals!  Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!
i20.photobucket.com
 
2013-08-12 12:38:42 PM

monoski: Prof. Frink: zarberg: I lived in Brooklyn for 5 years and never had a cop grab my crotch. I feel cheated now.

Try stuffing something large in your shorts.

Or wear a hoodie and baggy pants


Wait your choice of clothing has an effect on how you are perceived.  Amazing.
 
2013-08-12 12:39:24 PM

MBooda: Papelbon, you're on notice.
[nomaas.org image 485x426]


farm2.staticflickr.com

"Stop, right there, what you packing, slugger?"
 
2013-08-12 12:40:06 PM

Sybarite: I bet a lot of those stopped were wearing sneakers...for sneaking!


The problem with sneakers is too many secrets.
 
2013-08-12 12:40:09 PM

Petit_Merdeux: MBooda: Papelbon All MLB players who have not been castrated, you're on notice.
[nomaas.org image 485x426]


/he's quite a ball player!


So you're saying as long as he's got two balls on him, and A Rod doesn't matter.
 
2013-08-12 12:42:36 PM

Headso: zarberg: I lived in Brooklyn for 5 years and never had a cop grab my crotch. I feel cheated now.

you sound white


lol, nice.

/and probably accurate
 
2013-08-12 12:43:43 PM
And FARK THE TSA
just for good measure.
 
2013-08-12 12:44:18 PM

pudding7: Sybarite: I bet a lot of those stopped were wearing sneakers...for sneaking!

The problem with sneakers is too many secrets.


Or Cooty's Rat Semen

ishootthepictures.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-08-12 12:45:40 PM

LessO2: stuffy: They really hate it when you fake orgasm in the middle.

So does the TSA.

[media.mlive.com image 380x258]


Here's a fun idea:
1. Go to fast food restaurant.
2. Grab a bunch of single-serving mayo packages (but make sure the total volume is below 100ml or whatever the current TSA limitation is)
3. Make a pinhole in each of them.
4. Stuff them in your pants.
5. Go to the airport and hope for a vigorous patdown.
 
2013-08-12 12:45:42 PM

basemetal: Well, there goes my vacation plans.


What sucks is it could lead to crime rates returning up to levels they were before, sorry you get frisked so much, maybe if 80% of the violent crimes weren't in your neighborhood.....
 
2013-08-12 12:45:49 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Dr Dreidel: Marcus Aurelius: Dr Dreidel: Marcus Aurelius: NYC police will do whatever the hell they want until such time as their superior officers tell them to stop.  And not a moment before.

You've never heard of Judge Shira Scheindlin, have you?

// PROTIP: Do NOT piss of Judge Shira Scheindlin

You mean the judge that ruled "Stop and Frisk" unconstitutional, only to lift the ban days later, due to the "burden" it would place on the poor little police officers?

Very harsh.

Pick another one, then.

I was referring more to the way she runs her courtroom - her reputation (which I know from general news readings and from a friend who argued cases in front of her) is that she tolerates no shiat and will make you hurt for futzing around with the law.

She may well be a very tough judge, but she hasn't altered stop and frisk in any way.  If anything, her remedies will be pointed to as proof that the "problem is being addressed", when in fact her remedies will have no effect whatsoever.



I don't know...I like this remedy:

"Judge Scheindlin also ordered a number of other remedies, including a pilot program in which officers in at least five precincts across the city will wear body-worn cameras in an effort to record street encounters. "

Mandatory body cameras on police...about farking time!
 
2013-08-12 12:46:02 PM
So NYC is the liberal utopia people dream of? No guns and you get your wiener rubbed every block.
 
2013-08-12 12:46:22 PM
Let NYC devolve back into the total sh*thole it was back in the 70s and 80s when the democrats ran things. See how many f*cks are given.
 
2013-08-12 12:47:40 PM
Noting that the Supreme Court had long ago ruled that stop-and-frisks were constitutionally permissible under certain conditions, the judge stressed that she was "not ordering an end to the practice of stop-and-frisk. The purpose of the remedies addressed in this opinion is to ensure that the practice is carried out in a manner that protects the rights and liberties of all New Yorkers, while still providing much needed police protection."

Still ok to stop black men for no reason. Don't panic.
 
2013-08-12 12:49:37 PM
Well, if you keep raising suspicion they'll rise to the occasion
 
2013-08-12 12:51:10 PM

Quinzy: monoski: Prof. Frink: zarberg: I lived in Brooklyn for 5 years and never had a cop grab my crotch. I feel cheated now.

Try stuffing something large in your shorts.

Or wear a hoodie and baggy pants

Wait your choice of clothing has an effect on how you are perceived.  Amazing.


You could be sporting a Hitler mustache and a pink dress, but the 4th amendment still applies.
 
2013-08-12 12:51:13 PM
What's Sgt. Kabukiman going to do now?
www.troma.com
 
2013-08-12 12:51:35 PM

crazytrain: Let NYC devolve back into the total sh*thole it was back in the 70s and 80s when the democrats ran things. See how many f*cks are given.


You're right, stop and frisk is what turned this city around. That and soda bans.
 
2013-08-12 12:52:17 PM

RightWingWacko: In other words... it's ok to violate a persons rights as long as you violate EVERYONES's rights equally!


More that under present precedent, you do not have a right to not be stopped and frisked by a police officer if the following applies:

1) reasonable suspicion that would justify a stop based on "specific and articulable facts";

and

2) a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the person detained may be "armed and dangerous."

of course, where the heck articulable reasonable suspicion is in the 4th amendment i dont know . . . .
 
2013-08-12 12:56:35 PM

MBooda: What's Sgt. Kabukiman going to do now?
[www.troma.com image 300x260]


I'm more interested in hearing from his partner, there, Lt. Bukkakewoman.
 
2013-08-12 01:01:38 PM

Teiritzamna: RightWingWacko: In other words... it's ok to violate a persons rights as long as you violate EVERYONES's rights equally!

More that under present precedent, you do not have a right to not be stopped and frisked by a police officer if the following applies:

1) reasonable suspicion that would justify a stop based on "specific and articulable facts";

and

2) a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the person detained may be "armed and dangerous."

of course, where the heck articulable reasonable suspicion is in the 4th amendment i dont know . . . .


That's a wildly over-optimistic interpretation of the current precedent... do you really think that, in a program where 88 percent of people arent cited or arrested for anything, that cops had a reasonable and articulable suspicion that would justify a stop, let alone a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the person detained may be armed?

The reality is that the program would end if white people and people of all ages who vote in greater numbers were subject to this same unreasonable idiocy, NYC will never have a racially unbiased stop and frisk program because when you start stopping and frisking I-bankers, lawyers, and business owners, the obviously unlawful program converts from a great tool for oppression into an all-out lawsuit magnet.
 
2013-08-12 01:04:55 PM
steamingpile:

What sucks is it could lead to crime rates returning up to levels they were before

Could?  You're kidding right?
 
2013-08-12 01:05:42 PM
Most excellent and farking OBVIOUS.
 
2013-08-12 01:10:33 PM

firefly212: That's a wildly over-optimistic interpretation of the current precedent... do you really think that, in a program where 88 percent of people arent cited or arrested for anything, that cops had a reasonable and articulable suspicion that would justify a stop, let alone a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the person detained may be armed?


Actually i am just articulating the standard.  I personally think reasonable suspicion for a stop is one of the more ridiculous things to flow from the Court, especially as it is a lower standard than probable cause, which was defined by the court as a reasonable belief that certain facts were probably true.  When you have a test so mushy that it is weaker than, "i have a solid belief that these facts are true" its not a surprise that what you have created is a blank check to frisk "undesirables."

/still get rage shakes remembering my reading from Crim Pro and watching "of course a cop can frisk a guy if he is terrified that he might get shot" turn into "welp, you can stop and feel up someone pretty much whenever you want."
 
2013-08-12 01:16:42 PM

Marcus Aurelius: She may well be a very tough judge, but she hasn't altered stop and frisk in any way. If anything, her remedies will be pointed to as proof that the "problem is being addressed", when in fact her remedies will have no effect whatsoever.


She even explicitly stated that she is not ending stop and frisk. This basically was a 'feel up more white people so you don't look so racist' ruling.

mbillips: I fly at least 10 times a year, and have never been frisked.

/Middle-aged white male privilege RULES


How many times you been in the nudie booth?

/Groped almost weekly.

firefly212: do you really think that, in a program where 88 percent of people arent cited or arrested for anything,


A 12% probability that the person has something illegal on them makes a fishing expedition, not 'reasonable suspicion based up on specific and clearly articulable facts' that the person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime.

firefly212: The reality is that the program would end if white people and people of all ages who vote in greater numbers were subject to this same unreasonable idiocy,


I used to think that. But the TSA is still here.
 
2013-08-12 01:17:02 PM

freewill: Asian massage, however, remains available on almost every block of Manhattan.


Because a consensual exchange of money in the free market is the same as a cop grabbing your junk on the chance that you may have drugs?
 
2013-08-12 01:19:07 PM

nocturnal001: Because a consensual exchange of money in the free market is the same as a cop grabbing your junk on the chance that you may have drugs?


No, not the same, but if you're disappointed with this ruling, it'll just have to do.
 
Ral
2013-08-12 01:21:42 PM
Excellent.  Finally a judge is putting a stop to these baseless "stop and frisk you because I feel like it" incidents.  Terry Stops are enough of a gray area.  But we need to put an end to discarding any pretense of probable cause or reasonable suspicion.
 
2013-08-12 01:26:39 PM
In a ruling released Monday morning, three months after hearing nine weeks of testimony in a class-action lawsuit challenging the policy, Manhattan federal court judge Shira Scheindlin found that "the city acted with deliberate indifference toward the NYPD's practice of making unconstitutional stops and conducting unconstitutional frisks."


OMG, all those Tea Party activists were RIGHT!  Why didn't we listen to them before it was too late?   We're living under Shira Law now! noooooooo
 
2013-08-12 01:36:57 PM

paygun: They need to quit dicking around and just come out and plainly state that this is fine as long as they only do it to white people.


It would be legal IF they were doing it to white people TOO.

There. Simple enough?
 
2013-08-12 01:38:46 PM

freewill: nocturnal001: Because a consensual exchange of money in the free market is the same as a cop grabbing your junk on the chance that you may have drugs?

No, not the same, but if you're disappointed with this ruling, it'll just have to do.


I'm very appointed with this ruling actually.
 
2013-08-12 01:44:24 PM
WordyGrrl:  Texas State Trooper ... roadside body cavity search... female.

Yes, it looks as if they may have instructed highway patrol officers to do cavity searches of people being detained in traffic stops.  Two separate incidents from different parts of the state with the same MO: traffic stop, suspicion alleged, female officer summoned, roadside UFIA.
 
2013-08-12 01:47:52 PM

Theaetetus: firefly212: The ruling says it's unconstitutional, but can continue

The ruling says it's constitutional due to the racial profiling. Stop and frisk itself can continue, provided they address the race issue.


Which is consistent with  Terry v. Ohio the issue was not that  police were using Terry stops,   it was the basis on which they wer choosing to stop people. The Constitution requires that, at a minimum the officer have a "reasonable Suspicion" which is defined as "an objectively justifiable suspicion that is based on specific facts or circumstances and that justifies stopping and sometimes searching (as by frisking) a person thought to be involved in criminal activity "   and the Court has further clarified: "A police officer stopping a person must be able to point to specific facts or circumstances even though the level of suspicion need not rise to that of the belief that is supported by probable cause. A reasonable suspicion is more than a hunch.  "

The problem with what the NYPD has been doing is that they have been, by their own admission, conducting blanket Terry stops of anyone in a particular neighborhoip who is walking, or in the lobby of a building "without apparent purpose" etc, this is not okay under the Terry standard and this what they have to stop doing
 
2013-08-12 01:49:07 PM

remus: In before the apologists arrive, already saw some on other sites saying that they were ok with this policy because it stopped crime. Unbelievable that some people would accept this for any reason.


Do you go through the scanner or allow someone in a TSA uniform to touch you at the airport?

Same thing.
 
2013-08-12 02:00:03 PM

Dimensio: Is the city now expected to argue that "being brown" constitutes "good reason"?


They already tried that argument.  The police tried to explain why 88% of the stops were "brown people" with the excuse that the overwhelming majority of crime is committed by brown people.  The judge rightfully called them on their bullshiat.

I'm glad this violation of the Constitution has finally been stopped, though it took far too long.  Next up, the Patriot Act.
 
2013-08-12 02:05:37 PM
ZOMG! Violence is racking our communities, why don't the police do something!?!?!?

Cops: Okay.

ZOMG! Why are you occupying our communities and locking up our innocent black brothers!
 
2013-08-12 02:07:13 PM

remus: In before the apologists arrive, already saw some on other sites saying that they were ok with this policy because it stopped crime. Unbelievable that some people would accept this for any reason.


OnlyM3: "right wing" new york city groping brown people.


And the Mayor justifies it by saying that not enough non-whtie people are being searched.
 
2013-08-12 02:08:30 PM

scanman61: "Judge Scheindlin also ordered a number of other remedies, including a pilot program in which officers in at least five precincts across the city will wear body-worn cameras in an effort to record street encounters. "

Mandatory body cameras on police...about farking time!


It doesn't say how many of them will be wearing the cameras.  If it's less than 10%, it won't be long before they start calling them the "Mayberry RFD patrols".  The NYPD will break out an endless loop of cops helping old ladies across the street and stopping traffic for kittens.
 
2013-08-12 02:09:12 PM

d23: remus: In before the apologists arrive, already saw some on other sites saying that they were ok with this policy because it stopped crime. Unbelievable that some people would accept this for any reason.

The people that are "for" this are not the people being targeted by the NYPD.  The ruling says that if the racial bias is removed from the day-to-day implementation of the policy it can be continued.

Watch the same people biatch and moan (as they do with the TSA) if/when that happens.


They are already doing that in this thread, "boo hoo they're starting to search white people".
 
2013-08-12 02:09:12 PM

OgreMagi: I'm glad this violation of the Constitution has finally been stopped, though it took far too long. Next up, the Patriot Act.


You might want to read the article again.  Absolutely nothing has stopped.
 
2013-08-12 02:10:23 PM

Ral: Terry Stops are enough of a gray area.


Most people haven't read the Terry ruling and the police always misrepresent it.  What the courts said in the ruling is the police must have a compelling reason to search you and your car without a warrant.  The police lie and say the ruling gives them the authority to search as they please.

The compelling reason the ruling cites is, "Where a reasonably prudent officer is warranted in the circumstances of a given case in believing that his safety or that of others is endangered, he may make a reasonable search for weapons of the person believed by him to be armed and dangerous."

Furthermore, "The reasonableness of any particular search and seizure must be assessed in light of the particular circumstances against the standard of whether a man of reasonable caution is warranted in believing that the action taken was appropriate."

In other words, there has to be a damn good reason to search without a warrant.  Your car is fits the description of a car used for a drive by shooting that just occurred a mile from, for instance.  Not, you were going 10MPH over the speed limit and I don't like your looks.

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/392/1/case.html
 
2013-08-12 02:10:32 PM

Oh_Enough_Already: ZOMG! Violence is racking our communities, why don't the police do something!?!?!?

Cops: Okay.

ZOMG! Why are you occupying our communities and locking up our innocent black brothers!


Something tells me you haven't studies US crime rate statistics anytime in the past few years.
 
2013-08-12 02:11:34 PM

Marcus Aurelius: OgreMagi: I'm glad this violation of the Constitution has finally been stopped, though it took far too long. Next up, the Patriot Act.

You might want to read the article again.  Absolutely nothing has stopped.


It will stop soon enough.  When they remove the racial bias in the frisks and start doing it to a majority of white people, the outrage will be deafening.
 
2013-08-12 02:11:40 PM

firefly212: Also, I'm giving Thaetus the benefit of the doubt that he meant *un*constitutional and just hurriedly wrote constitutional.


That. :)
 
Displayed 50 of 142 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report