Saturday, August 30, 2014

Follow us:
Follow @NY1 on Twitter Subscribe to this news feed 

News

State AG: Convictions From Stop-And-Frisk Low

  • Text size: + -
TWC News: State AG: Convictions From Stop-And-Frisk Low
Play now

Time Warner Cable video customers:
Sign in with your TWC ID to access our video clips.

  To view our videos, you need to
enable JavaScript. Learn how.
install Adobe Flash 9 or above. Install now.

Then come back here and refresh the page.

State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is weighing in on the city police department's controversial stop-and-frisk policy with a new report that shows a very low conviction rate under the program.

Schneiderman's office looked at nearly 150,000 arrests from 2.4 million stops from 2009 to 2012.

The analysis found that about half of those arrests -- or three percent of stops -- resulted in convictions, and one tenth of one percent led to convictions for violent crimes.

It also found that just point three percent of stops led to jail sentences of more than 30 days.

The writers of the report acknowledge that they focused on a narrow question that does not address the entire stop-and-frisk debate.

The report did not attempt to measure the deterrent effect police stops might have.

According to Schneiderman, the stop-and-frisk policy has led to a sharp rise in lawsuits claiming police violated a person's civil rights.

Both Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly have credited the measure with a reduction in the city's crime rate.

New Yorkers who spoke with NY1 Thursday had mixed thoughts on the study.

For every person who thought the study shows crime is going down because of stop-and-frisk, there were two people among those surveyed in Downtown Brooklyn who felt it wasn't showing enough crime was being stopped to justify the controversial practice.

"It's not working because a lot of people have been arrested because of stop-and-frisk, and they're not finding guns on them or convicting them of any crime," said one New Yorker.

"Lives is the main issue and yes they're doing something about it, and yes I'm all for it," said another New Yorker.

In response, an NYPD spokesman called the study "flawed", adding it intentionally ignores the question of whether a stop can be an effective tool in preventing a crime before it occurs.

Meanwhile, a federal appeals court will not reinstate the judge who ruled against the city in a lawsuit over stop-and-frisk.

Last month, a three judge panel removed Judge Shira Scheindlin, saying she misapplied a ruling that allowed her to preside over the case and made public statements that raised questions about her objectivity.

Her lawyer appealed the move, saying Scheindlin was denied the right to defend herself. But the panel denied the appeal.

The judges also clarified their earlier ruling, saying there was no evidence of ethical violations or judicial misconduct on the part of Scheindlin.

Scheindlin had ruled that stop-and-frisk discriminated against minorities and appointed a monitor to oversee the policy.

The city says the panel's refusal to reinstate her was correct.

Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio has said he plans to drop the city's appeal of Scheindlin's ruling.

10.11.12.247 ClientIP: 54.166.15.127, 216.206.30.20 UserAgent: CCBot/2.0 (http://commoncrawl.org/faq/) Profile: TWCSAMLSP