NYC and Police Harassment (Update)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, the detectives saw me speaking with the gang members. From what I've been told, it's best to say as little as possible when the police stop you in the hood I work in, so I did just that.
Click to expand...

Who would tell you as a social worker not to talk to the police? I have an idea and it involves a major city in Sweden


Politness is a subjective opinion that could only be judged from the officers at the scene at the time. The original poster never inferrd that he was less then cordial with the officers, only that he did not state his occupation until asked.
Less then polite is therefore imaginary.
Click to expand...


In my world not answering questions or being evasive is very impolite and makes me (a) irritated and (b) even more inquisitive.

Disclaimer----you don't have to talk to the Police, but, unless you have a reason not to I would cooperate as much as is reasonable. In this case a little polite conversation would've avoided all of this.

Was this your first encounter with the Police in this area----if so, shame on you. If I were to work with gang banging thugs I would touch base with the local precinct's Tact or Gang team on a informal basis.
 
In my world not answering questions or being evasive is very impolite and makes me (a) irritated and (b) even more inquisitive.
Click to expand...

In my world as well and I agree with you 100%.
The OP never mentioned either not answering question or being evasive. Both of which would lead most anyone to believe that one had something to hide, whether they do or are just being impolite.
What the OP stated was that he did not say much.
While you choose to read that as he did not answer questions, I read that as he did not offer anything additional or above what was asked.

Officer "Did you know the fuzzy dice obstruct your view and are illegal?"
OP "No I did not officer but I am a social worker."

Doesn't seem right to me...

Officer "I see you have an NRA sticker on your car, do you have a firearm with you now?"
OP "Why would I be hangin with tha Banga's and have asticka on the cah to attrack attention, yo? Would I be packin? Oh and I am a social worker officer, can you cut me some slack?"

Again, to me, does not fit.

Maybe the officer in question was a little overzealous, and the OP was in the right and did not deserve the situation he was put in. There are good eggs and bad eggs in every basket. If every LEO was as honest and above board as you and I would like to think they should be, Serpico would never have been a movie.

I will raise my glass to all those that do their jobs well and not to those who don't. We all depend on good cops being on the street.
 
I take your point.

However, when I am fishing for RS some of the questions I ask are "Where are you going" and "what are you doing" So that is the path to walk down.

"Officer, I am so and so and these are my social work clients, here is my card and I want to know if my clients are giving you any problems."

But, if you think you are in an adversarial relationship with the Police, which I hear is is common in Sweden then that will color your experiences
 
However, when I am fishing for RS some of the questions I ask are "Where are you going" and "what are you doing" So that is the path to walk down.
Click to expand...
So when you're FISHING for RS and someone is a a little slow to answer your FISHING questions you then have, in your mind, reasonable suspicion?

By the way, doesn't it have to be reasonable suspicion of a specific crime? Or do you consider RS to also mean reasonably suspicious in a generalized sense?
Quote:
If you are an outsider i.e. a social worker making an PERIODIC visit you SHOULD be on your best behavior with the denizens of the milieu of both sides of the law. IIRC this started when the OP was stopped because he was not professionally dressed and was a little disrespectful to the Coppers.
Click to expand...

. . . which was never established in this thread. Nor was there any indication the OP refused to answer questions. Is there anything at all, wagonman, that's too thin for you to set the hook of reasonable suspicion while you're fishing?

Unbelievable. And this is probable cause on which planet?
Click to expand...

No PC. But, more than enough reasonable suspicion.
Click to expand...

. . . of WHAT?

BTW, this discussion is a little academic because the hanging dice, it seems, was not only RS, but PC for a stop, right?
 
BTW, this discussion is a little academic because the hanging dice, it seems, was not only RS, but PC for a stop, right?
Click to expand...
Maybe these officers were on the lookout for a roaming craps game that targeted arthritic players?
:D
 
So when you're FISHING for RS and someone is a a little slow to answer your FISHING questions you then have, in your mind, reasonable suspicion?

By the way, doesn't it have to be reasonable suspicion of a specific crime? Or do you consider RS to also mean reasonably suspicious in a generalized sense?
Click to expand...


Yes I do. If in my opinion he is being evasive or slow I have the right to further question him for a reasonable amount of time. "Subject gave general answers to specific questions. R/O verified his background via computer check , subject released"

I don't really have to fish. RS is much greater in latitude than PC.

I misspoke in an earlier post.I don't fish for RS I use RS to fish for PC.

Plus there are spots I can just go and question everyone in sight due to gang activity.

Maybe these officers were on the lookout for a roaming craps game that targeted arthritic players?
Click to expand...

possibly
 
Last edited:
I agree with Wagonman, I don't think this would have gone half as far as it did if bubsy would have stated immediately that he was a social worker and speaking to clients. The encounter probably would have ended there, and nobody is getting their rights shredded and trampled by talking to the police. Common sense.

I ask bubsy again, would you handle the situation the same way again? Knowing what you know now, would you have done something else?
 
I agree with wagonman as well.

I agree with profiling. I agree with asking for questions to find reasonable cause. There are parents out there that will never kiss there child goodnight again due to cops not being inquisitive enough or being to politically correct.
 
Plus there are spots I can just go and question everyone in sight due to gang activity.
Click to expand...
I believe you can ask any question of anyone, at any time, regardless of whether there is gang activity. And anyone can refuse to answer any questions at any time. I'm curious about this part:

If in my opinion he is being evasive or slow I have the right to further question him for a reasonable amount of time.
Click to expand...
What are the guidelines and limitations as to what is a reasonable amount of time?

What does the law say about RS, as it pertains to your opinion, and what distinguishes actual RS, if anything, from what is merely your opinion, or are they one and the same, in your view?

Being detained creates specific legal status status for the detainee, does it not? If it's legality rests only upon your opinion, I'm just curious what an example would be of an unlawful detention?
 
Last edited:
<---- Retired police. From the same neighborhood this incident took place. Ex wife happens to be a social worker in NYC. ( she was a liberal too... until she got mugged)

My question is this... Why do gang bangers need a social worker?
 
I believe you can ask any question of anyone, at any time, regardless of whether there is gang activity
Click to expand...

Yes, I meant to say that there are areas I can arrest you for being there after I give you an order to disperse.

What are the guidelines and limitations as to what is a reasonable amount of time?
Click to expand...

There aren't, but there had better be a reason for over a few minutes.

What does the law say about RS, as it pertains to your opinion, and what distinguishes actual RS, if anything, from what is merely your opinion, or are they one and the same, in your view?
Click to expand...

I have to be able to articulate what was suspicious. Not real hard especially where I work.

"A/O while patrolling a known gang hotspot, stopped above offender, a known gang member, for FI, a protective patdown was performed and above inventoried weapon was recovered"
 
Last edited:
"There are parents out there that will never kiss there child goodnight again due to cops not being inquisitive enough or being to politically correct."


Oh boy, like it was the cops fault?? How bout the parents fault for not taking better care of their kids?
 
There are parents out there that will never kiss there child goodnight again due to cops not being inquisitive enough or being to politically correct."


Oh boy, like it was the cops fault?? How bout the parents fault for not taking better care of their kids
Click to expand...

I don't see that as a slam on us. I see that as an understanding of the frustration felt by Police of the wave upon wave of PC and second guessing we endure.
 
I don't see that as a slam on us. I see that as an understanding of the frustration felt by Police of the wave upon wave of PC and second guessing we endure.
Click to expand...
Maybe this is just restating the obvious, but i think the problem lies in the fact that what one person considers "PC & second guessing" might be considered "speaking up in defense of civil liberties and their Fourth Amendment rights" by another citizen. Not everybody agrees on what those liberties & rights are, exactly; it is my understanding that our court systems have entertained many spirited discussions over the limitations on the Fourth's protections and the limitations faced by our LEO's.

If everyone wore a real-time monitoring device (maybe with a built-in taser) connected to some kind government monitoring agency staffed with trained observers 24/7/365, this society would probably be much safer from street crime, but i don't think it would be a happy society nor one that i would want to be a part of personally.

Should an officer be able to randomly pat down anyone encountered on their route? I think that might be a bit too invasive for MY taste, but others, particularly LEO's exposed to the violence of street crime on a daily basis, might disagree. Maybe people wouldn't get so upset at this gray/disputed area of the law if it were put to a popular vote by state or city rather than being decided/interpreted to its limit by the judicial system. I don't see that as a likely outcome, though, so our LEO's will have to struggle through their frustrations along with the citizens who are frustrated by what they see as either a police force hamstrung by needless PC bickering or those citizens who are frustrated by what they may see as a misinterpretation of the Fourth Amendment or an overstepping of traditional bounds by a police force ultimately employed by them. Such is life.
 
I don't see that as a slam on us. I see that as an understanding of the frustration felt by Police of the wave upon wave of PC and second guessing we endure.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was meant as Kudos for all the good cops.
It has got to be tough to be firm and inquisitive, without being "gestapo" or overly aggressive. It has also got to be tough to not beat the snot out of some scum that desperatly needs it after he or they has had your adrenal glands working overtime.
Again, My hat is off to all the good cops. Unfortunatly, all the good cops have to deal with a rep that is garnished from bad cops. Nobody remembers the heros only the headlines over cops with dui's or police brutality.
 
Should an officer be able to randomly pat down anyone encountered on their route? I think that might be a bit too invasive for MY taste
Click to expand...

I would hope everyones taste. No one advocates random street stops, I just think that being a good Cop involves a little latitude.

Again, My hat is off to all the good cops. Unfortunatly, all the good cops have to deal with a rep that is garnished from bad cops. Nobody remembers the heros only the headlines over cops with dui's or police brutality
Click to expand...

I totally agree. Bad cops make my job that much harder.

I am going to the wake tonight of a hero who gave his life answering society's call.
 
Sorry about your friend/coworker.


I would hope everyones taste. No one advocates random street stops, I just think that being a good Cop involves a little latitude.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that part about "no one" is entirely correct, hopefully nobody with a future in law enforcement or government though. That latitude is where people get in trouble, sometimes regardless of intent or fault, IMO.
 
I believe there must be a level of trust between the police, and the citizenry protected by the police. In order to be effective, and in defference to officer safety. Society should alow individual officers some lattitude, and discretion in their normal every day duties. IMO based on my own experiences, and observations.... Most abuse is systemic, rather than individual.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top