COMPILATION AND COMMENTARY
BY LUCY WARNER
JUNE 2, 2020
I HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO GOVERNOR ANDREW CUOMO OF
NEW YORK FOR THE DURATION OF THIS CORONA-19 PANDEMIC BECAUSE HE SPEAKS SLOWLY,
CLEARLY AND INTELLIGENTLY. HE DOES NOT BLUSTER OR DODGE ISSUES. HE IS A LEADER.
I DON’T LIKE TWO THINGS THAT I KNOW NOW ABOUT HIM WHICH MIGHT STAND IN HIS PATH
IF HE WERE TO RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY OF THE UNITED STATES, BUT OTHERWISE I’M
PRETTY IMPRESSED WITH HIM.
HE, BY THE WAY, IS OPENLY ENCOURAGING THE PASSING OF
A MEASURE TO OVERTURN THE LAW BANNING THE RELEASE OF POLICE PERSONNEL RECORDS IN
CASES OF ABUSE OF POWER OR WORSE. THE OFFICER IN THIS RECENT MURDER HAS,
ACCORDING TO THE PRESS, 17 PRIOR COMPLAINTS AGAINST HIM AND WAS ONLY
CHARGED AND DISCIPLINED ON TWO OF THEM. THAT IS COMPLICITY FROM THOSE IN
SUPERVISION ABOVE HIM; AND SAD TO SAY, IT ISN’T AN UNUSUAL SITUATION.
WHAT I DON'T LIKE ABOUT CUOMO IS A RUMORED MONETARY SCANDAL,
SOMETHING THAT I DON’T THINK SHOULD BE CONDONED THOUGH I DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS, AND JUST RECENTLY THERE WAS HIS SIGNING
OF A BUDGET INCLUDING A CLAUSE PURPOSED TO PREVENT SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS, ENTREPRENEUR ANDREW YANG, AND REPRESENTATIVE TULSI
GABBARD FROM ACCRUING DELEGATES TO THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION BY THE MEANS OF
LEAVING THEIR NAMES ON THE BALLOT ON ALL STATES FOR THE PRIMARY ELECTION AND THEN ACTUALLY CANCELLING THE NEW YORK PRIMARY ENTIRELY. THAT
IS A POLITICAL MOVE RATHER THAN MERELY A PRACTICAL ONE, SINCE AN ALL-MAIL
ELECTION IS LEGAL AND COULD BE USED TO PREVENT THE SPREAD OF COVID-19 – HIS
EXCUSE FOR DROPPING THE PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS FROM THE BALLOT IN NEW YORK.
DURING TODAY’S PRESS BRIEFING HE IS ADDRESSING THE
CITY VIOLENCE THAT IS AFFECTING SO MANY MUNICIPALITIES ACROSS THE NATION DUE TO
THE KILLING, AGAIN, OF A BLACK NON-VIOLENT MAN FOR ANOTHER SUSPECTED CRIME,
WHICH WAS FILMED BY SEVERAL DIFFERENT BYSTANDERS AND THEN RELEASED TO THE
PUBLIC. THE ACTION OF THE POLICE OFFICER WAS IN FLAGRANT DISREGARD OF ALL LOGIC
AND EVEN POLICE TRAINING. HE KILLED THE MAN BY PLACING HIM ON HIS STOMACH, A
POSITION THAT MAKES BREATHING DIFFICULT, AND PUTTING HIS KNEE ON THE MAN’S
NECK. THAT METHOD OF SUBDUING A SUSPECT, LIKE THE CHOKEHOLD, GOES AGAINST
MANAGEMENT RULES. WHETHER IT IS A CRIME OR NOT USUALLY DOESN’T COME UP BECAUSE
OFFICERS ARE RARELY CHARGED FOR MURDER. IN THIS CASE A CHARGE OF THIRD DEGREE
MURDER WAS BROUGHT AGAINST THE POLICEMAN, WHICH TO THE FAMILY IS TOO LITTLE.
THEY, UNDERSTANDABLY, WANT FIRST DEGREE MURDER TO BE APPLIED.
DURING HIS TALK THIS MORNING GOVERNOR CUOMO
MENTIONED THE NY LAW THAT FORBIDS THE OPENING OF POLICE PERSONNEL RECORDS TO
THE PUBLIC, WHICH IS IMPORTANT IN THIS CASE. THE STATE LAW WHICH APPLIES IS COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS 50A, AND IS THE SUBJECT OF
SEVERAL NEWS ARTICLES. I AM CURIOUS ABOUT OTHER STATES AROUND THE COUNTRY,
SINCE THIS PROBLEM IS SHOWING UP IN POLICE DEPARTMENTS IN SO MANY PLACES. I
HAVE PLACED SEVERAL ARTICLES HERE THAT DEAL WITH THE UNJUST KILLINGS.
THANK GOODNESS THERE IS A MORE WIDESPREAD PUBLIC
CONCERN SINCE THE SHOOTING OF MICHAEL BROWN IN ST. LOUIS, AND THEN ANOTHER
SIMILAR KILLING THERE JUST TWO WEEKS LATER. POLICE CLAIM THAT MAN, ALSO BLACK, THREATENED THEM
WITH A STEAK KNIFE AFTER COMING WITHIN THREE OR FOUR FEET OF THE OFFICERS.
VIDEO FOOTAGE PUT THE LIE TO THEIR STORY, WHICH HAPPENED JUST A FEW WEEKS LATER
THAN BROWN’S DEATH. FOR THAT INSTANCE, GO TO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUtwCHNDto4 .
A GOODLY PORTION OF THE PUBLIC IS HIGHLY CONCERNED CURRENTLY TO EXAMINE THE
RULES THAT SHIELD KILLERS WHO HAPPEN TO BE VERY CONVENIENTLY EMPLOYED ON THE
POLICE FORCE. WE ARE NOT JUST A GROUP OF LEFT-WING RADICALS, AT LEAST ON THIS
ISSUE, BUT CARING AND HONEST CITIZENS. I CAN ONLY HOPE THAT THE OCCURRENCES WILL
REMAIN SUFFICIENTLY A MATTER OF CONCERN TO THE POPULATION IN GENERAL TO CAUSE A
REPEAL OF THOSE LAWS ACROSS AMERICA.
GO TO: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/29/derek-chauvin-police-officer-charged-george-floyd , FOR BACKGROUND ON THIS IMPORTANT SUBJECT. THAT IS
THE RECENT CASE WHICH HAS BEEN FEATURED HEAVILY IN THE NEWS, AS IT SHOULD BE.
St. Louis police shooting video
leaves many shocked
832,383 views • Aug 21, 2014
UPS 3.5K DOWNS
1K
FOX 5 DC
63.6K subscribers
New cell phone video shows the moments police shot
and killed a black man in St. Louis, 10 days after Michael Brown was gunned
down nearby. Police are defending their use of deadly force, but the video has
left many stunned.
Kajieme Powell, a 25 year-old man, was killed by
St. Louis Metro Police officers on Tuesday. Police were called by a store owner
after he was suspected of shoplifting and by a woman who claimed Powell was acting
erratically and armed with a knife.
The video captures the incident on tape. Powell can
be seen approaching the two officers and yelling for them to shoot him, with
his hands at his side. Both officers fired their weapons and can be seen handcuffing
Powell's body after it feel to the ground.
Full story:
http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/26339519...
Category News
& Politics
Police Law
Guide to Law Enforcement Personnel
Not date or writer given; Assumed to be currently
valid as of June 2, 2020
Police Laws are those laws dealing with the
regulation and code of conduct of law enforcement officials. These laws answer
the question of "who polices the police?" by providing guidelines by
which officers must conduct themselves and mechanisms by which law enforcement
agencies can monitor their own, such as internal affairs divisions, oversight
by state attorney generals, and so forth. Many of these laws deal with issues
such as the use of excessive force by police officers, police misconduct,
giving suspects their Miranda rights, corruption, interrogation practices, and
police brutality.
Who are Considered to be "Police" Under
the Law?
Police forces are usually considered to be
non-military organizations that operate under the authority of the government.
Their only task is to police domestic issues, not fight foreign powers
overseas, which is a military function. While in the common vernacular
"police" usually refer to officers of a city police department, from
a broader legal standpoint "police" can often refer to any person or
organization involved in law enforcement. This can include an organization
authorized to operate under federal, state, or local laws. Examples of various
law enforcement agencies that exercise police powers on behalf of the
government include sheriffs, state troopers, city police, U.S. marshals, FBI
agents, and many more.
The Role of Police in Society
The main role of police in any civilized nation is
to preserve order. As such, their whole reason for being is to enforce criminal
laws, reduce civil disorder, and protect people and property. To accomplish
this goal, police are granted certain unique powers that other citizens do not
have, like the legitimate use force in preventing crime and the power to impose
fines for criminal behavior.
Regulation of Police
Of course, having been granted these privileges, it
is important for society to closely monitor those who exercise these powers.
Temptation to engage in the same activities that the police are supposed to
prevent is very real and requires this body of law in order to prevent
individuals from contributing to the problems of society rather than policing
them. Police laws often mirror constitutional and human rights laws, in that
these are often the areas police are likely to stray. For example, an officer
who has become frustrated with the criminal justice system is prevented by
police laws from beating confessions out of suspects, just as that suspect has
a human right against such treatment.
For more information about the laws affecting the
police, please click on the links below or check out our Law Firms page where
you will find lawyers in your area who can answer your questions.
Copyright HG.org
About HG.org and HGExperts.com
Know Your Rights!
HG.org - Overview
HG.org was one of the very first online law and
government information sites. It was founded in January of 1995. The objective
of HG.org is to make law, government and related professional information
easily and freely accessible to the legal profession, businesses, and
consumers.
HG.org's leadership in this arena, for 21 years,
has positioned it as one of the most trafficked legal sites on the Internet.
Visitors come to the site seeking law-related assistance and information.
There are thousands of articles, hundreds of
specific law pages, information on 150 legal networks, 2,000 law schools in 130
countries, employment listings, 4,000+ videos, legal events and links to
governments and agencies worldwide. All the information is easily found by
searching through HG.org and online.
. . . .
THIS RUNDOWN ON THE VARIOUS STATES AND THEIR
PARTICULAR LAWS SHOWS ONLY TWELVE STATES IN WHICH THE PERSONNEL AND DISCIPLINARY
RECORDS OF THE POLICE ARE CONSIDERED TO BE A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD, AND
THEREFORE OPEN TO REVIEW. IT HAS JUST OCCURRED TO ME THAT A NATIONAL LAW WHICH
SPECIFICALLY KNOCKS DOWN THE LENIENT STATE LAWS WOULD VERY LIKELY, ESPECIALLY
WHEN COUPLED WITH A COMPLETE BAN ON MILITARY STYLE WEAPONS, WOULD STOP MOST OF
THE COP KILLINGS COMPLETELY. THE FAILURE TO APPLY REAL DISCIPLINE OF AN APPROPRIATE TYPE AND DEGREE IS THE MAIN REASON WHY IT CONTINUES TO GO ON.
THE REASON WHY I JUST PUT POLICE BRUTALITY IN THE SAME CATEGORY WITH
SPREE KILLINGS WITH AN AUTOMATIC RIFLE IS BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME THEY ARE VERY SIMILAR, IN THAT BOTH
REFLECT A LACK OF CONSCIENCE, AND BOTH ARE PROTECTED BY THE POWER STRUCTURE IN
THIS COUNTRY. ADD TO IT CRIME AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN, FROM DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE TO RAPE, AND OUR COUNTRY WOULD BEGIN TO APPROXIMATE THE UTOPIA THAT SOME PROCLAIM
US TO BE. ASSUMING WE CAN’T GET ALL OF THOSE THINGS DONE, THOUGH, BRINGING
SUNLIGHT ON THIS PARTICULAR INJUSTICE WOULD BRING ABOUT MORE FREQUENT CHARGES AND
CONVICTIONS WHICH CAN “CLEAN UP OUR CITY STREETS” FROM THE INSIDE OUT. WE NEED
TO STOP LEGALIZING DEADLY CRIME.
If a police officer in your
community has a history of misconduct, can you find out about it? It depends
where you live.
WNYC spoke to attorneys and experts in all 50
states and reviewed relevant statutes and court cases to get a national picture
of a local issue. We found that a police officer's disciplinary history is
effectively confidential in almost half of US states.
In some of these states, the law explicitly exempts
these records from public view. In others, records are secret in practice
because police departments routinely withhold them under vague legal standards
or in spite of court precedents.
More on this investigation: The Hard Truth About
Cops Who Lie • When a Cop's Right to Privacy Undermines Our Right to a Fair
Trial • New York Leads in Shielding Police Misconduct • Reporter Robert Lewis
Discusses National Implications on The Takeaway
Records are CONFIDENTIAL in 23 states. [LW. GO TO
THE WEBSITE FOR A GRAPH SHOWING WHICH STATES THESE ARE.]
In these states, and the District of Columbia, a
police officer's disciplinary history is mostly unavailable through public
records requests.
In some cases, all public employee personnel files
are exempt from disclosure. In others, police departments withhold records
under a general privacy exemption.
Laws in New York, California, and Delaware
specifically make law enforcement officers' personnel records confidential.
Records have LIMITED availability in 15 states. [WEBSITE]
In these states, police disciplinary records are
available to the public in some situations.
In some of these states, only records of severe
discipline, like a suspension or termination, are public while the rest is
confidential. In others, responses vary by department because of evolving court
precedents or ambiguity in the law.
Records are PUBLIC in 12 states. [WEBSITE]
In these states, police disciplinary records are
generally available to the public.
Many of these states still make records of
unsubstantiated complaints or active investigations confidential.
Details by state [WEBSITE. LINKS.]
NEW YORKERS ARE MOVING TO CHANGE THEIR LAWS ON
POLICING.
TUESDAY, JUNE 2, 2020, REPORTING FOR NEW
YORKERS
FILED UNDER: NYPD, BROOKLYN, PUBLIC SAFETY
Lawmakers Moving to Yank Covers Off
Secret Police Disciplinary Records
BY JOSEFA VELASQUEZ, GREG B. SMITH, AND YOAV
GONEN
MAY 31, 2020, 10:47PM EDT
PHOTOGRAPH -- An NYPD officer keeps watch over
protesters outside the Barclays Center in Brooklyn on May 29. Ben
Fractenberg/THE CITY
State lawmakers in New York are inching closer to
repealing a law shielding police disciplinary records, several people familiar
with the matter told THE CITY.
On Monday, Democrats in the State Senate and
Assembly plan to hold a video conference meeting of their members to discuss
the protests sparked by the death of George Floyd, a black Minnesota man killed
by a white police officer who kneeled on his neck.
The discussions are expected to focus on protests
and response from law enforcement — and in particular a longstanding state law,
known as 50-a, that shields police personnel records from public view,
legislative sources said.
Reversing past mayors’ practice, the administration
of Mayor Bill de Blasio has interpreted 50-a as prohibiting disclosure of the
results of disciplinary hearings against individual officers.
According to one legislative source who was not
authorized to publicly speak on the matter, an informal poll of Democratic
members of the Senate showed enough support to approve the repeal of the law,
with at least 32 votes in favor of the measure.
That’s even though some of the 40 Democrats in the
Senate represent relatively conservative areas outside of New York City where
large numbers of police officers live.
Discussions over repealing 50-a — which shields the
personnel records of police officers, firefighters and corrections officers —
came to a head this weekend, as protests over Floyd’s death have turned violent
in New York City and around the nation.
Disturbing Images
Videos posted to Twitter showed a
police officer shoving a young woman to the ground in Brooklyn Friday. Other
videos taken during protests on Saturday documented a pair of NYPD SUVs
accelerating into a crowd on Flatbush Avenue in Brooklyn, and a police officer
ripping the mask off a protestor whose hands were raised and pepper spraying
him.
Two state legislators, Sen. Zellnor
Myrie (D-Brooklyn) and Assemblywoman Diana Richardson (D-Brooklyn), who are
black, were also pepper sprayed by law enforcement Friday. Myrie was
subsequently handcuffed.
Senator Zellnor Y. Myrie 米维
@zellnor4ny
Pain.
View image on TwitterView image on Twitter
41.8K
2:42 PM - May 30, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
8,919 people are talking about this
“I’ve seen those videos and those videos are truly
disturbing. Some of the videos frankly are inexplicable to me,” Gov. Andrew
Cuomo said Sunday.
At a news conference Saturday morning, Cuomo
stopped just short of endorsing a full claw back of the 1976 law,
instead throwing his support behind efforts to reform it.
“I would sign a bill today that reforms 50-a,” Cuomo
said.
“I would sign it today. So the Legislature can now
convene by Zoom, or however they do it, pass the bill, and I will sign it today. I can’t be
clearer or more direct than that.”
Calls to repeal or rewrite the law
intensified during the long years leading up to the 2019 administrative trial
of NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo in connection with the 2014 chokehold death of
Eric Garner. Pantaleo was found guilty and fired, in a rare
disclosure of a trial’s outcome.
PHOTOGRAPH -- Hundreds of protesters packed into
the plaza at the Barclays Center after police-involved killing of George Floyd
in Minneapolis, May 29. Ben Fractenberg/THE CITY
Police unions are pushing back, pointing to the
current conflicts in the streets.
“Last night, we saw violent criminals targeting
New York City police officers with bricks, brass knuckles and Molotov
cocktails, for no reason other than the uniform we wear,” said Police
Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch in a statement Sunday. “It
is inconceivable that Governor Cuomo would want to arm those extremists with
confidential police personnel records, so that they bring their weapons to our
front doors.”
City’s Narrow Interpretation
Assembly member Danny O’Donnell (D-Manhattan), who
first introduced a bill to repeal 50-a in 2015, said getting rid of the
prohibition is a “pendulum [that] swings both ways” — unleashing records that
could show an officer under scrutiny has a spotless past record.
“I think the most important thing going forward
would be to try and increase trust between police forces and the people they
police,” he told THE CITY, something he suggested 50-a repeal could help
advance.
De Blasio also offered support for the repeal
Sunday, but said a new law ought to “protect the personal information – the
home address, the type of information about an individual police officer that
is about their safety and security.”
O’Donnell said home addresses would
not be released — calling the mayor’s remark “not a realistic thing.”
De Blasio has repeatedly called on Albany lawmakers
to revisit 50-a — even as his own administration advanced a newly narrow
interpretation of the law.
Legislative sources in Albany say de Blasio and his
staff haven’t made a concerted effort to repeal the law.
Civil Rights Law 50-a specifically bars the release
of “all personnel records used to evaluate performance” of police officers
without the express written permission of the officer or without an order from
a judge.
PHOTOGRAPH -- NYPD officers followed protesters as
they marched along Atlantic Avenue, May 31, 2020. Ben Fractenberg/THE CITY
When the law was first proposed, the police union
claimed the release of personnel information would subject its members to
harassment and threats. Even at the time, critics questioned whether it would
be used to hide misconduct.
For years, the NYPD informally allowed the press to
review bare-bones records of substantiated disciplinary findings against cops.
But in 2016 the de Blasio administration put a stop to that after police
department lawyers decided this practice violated 50-a.
The public and press erupted at this reversal,
asserting that this sudden opacity would prevent the public from seeing whether
specific officers accused of misconduct had a history of bad behavior. The New
York Civil Liberties Union sued to force the NYPD to resume releasing
information on substantiated cases, but lost in court.
The only remedy was to change the law in Albany.
De Blasio’s Mixed Messages
De Blasio has repeatedly promised to push for unspecified
50-a reforms. In January 2019, a panel of law enforcement experts enlisted by
then-NYPD Commissioner Jimmy O’Neill said that the existing “lack of
transparency impedes the Department’s efforts to show the public that it
holds officers accountable for their conduct.”
“The end result is a system that is understandably
perceived by the public and others as gesturing towards some transparency, but
ultimately remaining largely closed to any external scrutiny,” the panel
wrote.
A month later, O’Neill said he would be speaking
with legislators about crafting reforms. Since then, according to an Albany
lobbyist involved in the discussions, the NYPD and de Blasio have made little
to no effort to make that happen.
“The administration said they would be seeking reforms
and then it was radio silence,” the lobbyist said. “The NYPD said they’d been
up in Albany on this, but I have not had a single conversation with a
legislator saying they’ve been approached by the NYPD or anyone in the de
Blasio administration.”
In October, a police official testified at a Senate
hearing that the NYPD continued to oppose a total repeal of 50-a, asserting
that only substantiated findings regarding “serious police misconduct” should
be subject to public disclosure.
“Minor misconduct, such as uniform infraction or
lateness, should continue to maintain their 50-a protections,” testified Oleg
Chernyavsky, assistant deputy commissioner for legal matters at the NYPD.
Total repeal “would extinguish an officer’s voice
in a process centered on disclosure of their own personnel records and provide
defense counsel access to records irrelevant to the case before the court.”
De Blasio made no mention of 50-a in his annual
testimony on the state’s budget in Albany in February 2020 or in January 2017,
according to transcripts of his prepared remarks.
He included calls to reform the law in his
testimony in 2018 and 2019, transcripts show.
Olivia Lapeyrolerie, a de Blasio spokesperson,
defended his efforts to overhaul 50-a.
“The mayor has been vocal about his calls for
reform for the past three years — whether if it was while testifying up in
Albany or in his innumerable conversations with state legislators,” she said.
NEXT UP IN BROOKLYN
NYC Shows Anger, Solidarity as Protests Consume
Weekend
Cries of Justice for George Floyd Reach and Roil
New York
NYC Public Libraries Mull Grab-and-Go Book
Pickup Service
Texas Firm Reaps Millions Booking COVID Hotel Rooms
for NYC
Parents Seeking Return of Children First Must Forge
Connections on Screens
How Families Pay a High Price When Loved Ones Die
of COVID-19
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
How Some New Yorkers With Mental Illness are Coping
During the Pandemic
Coronavirus Courts Tell Those
Arrested: Can’t Make Bail? Sit in Jail
National Park Service Pledges to Reopen Floyd
Bennett Field to Gardeners
NYC Blacks and Hispanics Dying of COVID-19 at Twice
the Rate of Whites, Asians
GOT A TIP?
We’re here to listen. Email tips@thecity.nyc or
visit our tips
THIS ARTICLE IS FROM 2019 RATHER THAN A FEW MONTHS
AGO, BUT IT HELPS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS BEHIND THE PROTECTION OF NEW YORK POLICE
OFFICERS WHO BREAK THE LAWS OF HUMANITY.
COURTS AND LAW
BROOKLYN
BORO
The law that shields police records,
explained
Everything you need to know about 50-a and the
campaign to repeal it
April 23, 2019 Jake Bittle
PHOTOGRAPH – POLICE OFFICERS IN DRESS UNIFORM AT A
MEETING Photo/Bebeto Matthews
After years of pressure from activists and
government officials, New York’s state legislature this year may finally
repeal a law that shields police misconduct records from public view.
The law, known as 50-a, started to
receive greater scrutiny since around 2014, when high-profile incidents of
police violence forced criminal justice reform into the national conversation. The NYPD has
repeatedly cited 50-a in its refusal to disclose the disciplinary history of
Daniel Pantaleo, the officer who choked Eric Garner to death on Staten
Island.
After years of pressure from activists and
government officials, New York’s state legislature this year may finally repeal
a law that shields police misconduct records from public view.
The law, known as 50-a, started to receive greater
scrutiny since around 2014, when high-profile incidents of police violence
forced criminal justice reform into the national conversation. The NYPD has
repeatedly cited 50-a in its refusal to disclose the disciplinary history of
Daniel Pantaleo, the officer who choked Eric Garner to death on Staten Island.
Now that the State Senate has come under Democratic
control, lawmakers have their best chance in years to revise the provision or
eliminate it altogether. Criminal justice activists and legal groups have long
supported repealing the law, as have the families of New Yorkers who have been
killed by the police.
As reform bills gain steam in the legislature,
here’s what you need to know about the campaign to change 50-a.
What is 50-a?
50-a is a section of the New York Civil Rights Law
that deems the “personnel records” of police officers, firefighters and
corrections officers “confidential and not subject to inspection or review”
without the officer’s permission. It was passed in the 1970s both to protect
the personal information of officers who testified in court and to prevent
“harassment” by criminal defense attorneys.
But legal organizations and activists argue that
the law as written is too vague. In practice, they say, state courts have set a
broad precedent that allows the police to conceal nearly all police records
from public view, exempting officers from transparency standards applied to other
public officials.
Who wants it repealed?
A coalition of activists and
progressive politicians has pursued 50-a reform in earnest since 2014,
with more state legislators and city councilmembers announcing their support
each year. Bills to repeal 50-a have been championed by police reform
organizations, including New York Communities for Change and Make the Road New
York, and legal organizations including the New York City Bar Association,
Legal Aid and the New York Civil Liberties Union.
Mayor Bill de Blasio has also
signaled his support for repealing the law. NYPD Commissioner James O’Neill
said at the same time that he believed “making information about disciplinary
proceedings public will help us build trust with the community.”
O’Neill later created an independent
panel to study whether the law should be repealed. That panel, comprised
of two former prosecutors and a former judge, released a report this February
that found “almost a complete lack of transparency and public accountability”
around NYPD discipline. In the wake of the report, O’Neill conceded that “the
law must change.”
Why do they want it repealed?
Over the past five years, criminal justice
activists have focused not only on acts of violence by individual police
officers but also on the willingness of department leadership to forgive,
ignore or even cover up officer misconduct.
In the case of Eric Garner’s death, for example,
the NYPD cited 50-a in refusing to release Pantaleo’s disciplinary history.
Pantaleo’s internal NYPD trial began only last year and is ongoing, but a
leaked version of his complaint history showed he had several substantiated
complaints for abusive stops and searches.
A similar debate over public access to misconduct
records is unfolding in California, where police unions sued to block a Senate
bill that would have made such records public. But beyond the national debates
over police accountability, lawyers and activists also contend that New York’s
50-a in particular is egregiously strict.
Appellate court decisions over the past decade have
expanded the 50-a shield to cover records of on-duty police misconduct, such as
an officer assaulting a civilian during a traffic stop. Originally, the law
only protected records of off-duty misconduct, such as an officer selling
prescription pain pills while off the clock. These rulings have made it more
difficult for defense lawyers to bring such records into the litigation process
through discovery.
Only two other states in the country have statutes
that exempt police officers from public records law.
Who doesn’t want it repealed?
Unsurprisingly, groups representing police and
correctional officers have been the loudest voices opposing the repeal of 50-a.
These organizations argue that repealing the law outright would endanger police
officers by making their personal information too accessible.
The Police Benevolent Association, which represents
rank-and-file police officers, has been the most vocal defender of 50-a.
Earlier this year the PBA said that moves to repeal the law were “designed to
once again demonize police officers, seemingly for political gain,” and that
legislators who support it “ignored both the serious risks to police officer
safety and the reputational harm of publishing false allegations.”
The New York City Correction Officers Benevolent
Association also filed a suit in 2015 that used an expansive interpretation of
50-a to argue that jail guard records should be hidden from public view. (Last
year a judge ruled the records must remain public.)
Despite O’Neill’s concessions, the NYPD has stopped
short of accepting a full repeal of the law; instead, as its deputy
commissioner Benjamin Tucker argued to the City Council last year, the statute
should be amended to allow for the release of only those records that hold
“significant public interest.”
Will it get repealed?
Unclear. After the Democrats took control of the
State Senate this January, progressives were optimistic that long-stalled bills
relating to issues such as immigration, abortion and transgender rights would
finally pass. At least for the first few months, much of that legislation
panned out. But now, after spending months working out the details of the state
budget, some senators doubt that they’ll have time to hammer out the details
before the current legislative session ends on June 19. (Gov. Andrew Cuomo did
not include the issue on his list of legislative priorities this year, and in
the past he has said the decision should be left to the NYPD.)
The City Council is currently debating a set of
bills that would require the NYPD to release some aggregate misconduct data,
but the only politicians who have the power to eliminate the 50-a exemption are
state legislators. Lawmakers have introduced multiple bills this session in the
State Senate and State Assembly to change the law, but the bills in both
chambers are stalled in committee.
The success or failure of 50-a reform may hinge on
the debate between amending the statute and wiping it from the state code
altogether. One bill introduced in the Senate by the Bronx’s Sen. Jamaal Bailey
and in the Assembly by Manhattan’s Assembly member Danny O’Donnell would repeal
50-a outright. State lawmakers said last week that they had made progress
toward passing the bill. Another bill, introduced by Brooklyn Sen. Kevin
Parker, would narrow the 50-a exemption to cover only records relating to
officer performance evaluations and promotions, while a third bill would keep
the law as-is but add a provision allowing civilian review boards to seek the
release of specific records.
Most advocates have rallied around an outright
repeal, but it remains unclear how pressure from the police unions, which
donated more than $1.3 million to state legislators last year, may influence
which version of the bill ends up passing.
Jake Bittle is a reporter and researcher who lives
in Flatbush. You can find him on Twitter.
Update (April 24) — This article has been updated
to reflect the correct name of the Police Benevolent Association. It is no
longer called the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association.
THIS IS THE TEXT OF THE NEW YORK 50-A LAW.
The New York State Senate
The Laws Of New York Consolidated
Laws Civil Rights Article 5: Right Of Privacy
SECTION 50
Right Of Privacy
Section 50-A
Personnel records of police
officers, firefighters and correction officers
Civil Rights (CVR)
Personnel records of police officers, firefighters
and correction officers.
1. All
personnel records used to evaluate performance toward continued employment or
promotion, under the control of any police agency or department of the state or
any political subdivision thereof including authorities or agencies maintaining
police forces of individuals defined as police officers in section 1.20 of the
criminal procedure law and such personnel records under the control of a
sheriff's department or a department of correction of individuals employed as
correction officers and such personnel records under the control of a paid fire
department or force of individuals employed as firefighters or firefighter/ paramedics
and such personnel records under the control of the department of corrections
and community supervision for individuals defined as peace officers pursuant to
subdivisions twenty-three and twenty-three-a of section 2.10 of the criminal
procedure law and such personnel records under the control of a probation
department for individuals defined as peace officers pursuant to subdivision
twenty-four of section 2.10 of the criminal procedure law shall be considered
confidential and not subject to inspection or review without the express
written consent of such police officer, firefighter, firefighter/paramedic,
correction officer or peace officer within the department of corrections and
community supervision or probation department except as may be mandated by
lawful court order.
2. Prior to
issuing such court order the judge must review all such requests and give
interested parties the opportunity to be heard. No such order shall issue
without a clear showing of facts sufficient to warrant the judge to request
records for review.
3. If,
after such hearing, the judge concludes there is a sufficient basis he shall
sign an order requiring that the personnel records in question be sealed and
sent directly to him. He shall then review the file and make a determination as
to whether the records are relevant and material in the action before him. Upon
such a finding the court shall make those parts of the record found to be
relevant and material available to the persons so requesting.
4. The
provisions of this section shall not apply to any district attorney or his
assistants, the attorney general or his deputies or assistants, a county
attorney or his deputies or assistants, a corporation counsel or his deputies
or assistants, a town attorney or his deputies or assistants, a village
attorney or his deputies or assistants, a grand jury, or any agency of
government which requires the records described in subdivision one, in the
furtherance of their official functions.
****
**** **** ****
No comments:
Post a Comment