[The Final Dakar]

Sensationalist title, perhaps, but a story from a former prosecutor on the hoops he had to jump through just to get arrested, and the consequences afterwards.
I Got Myself Arrested So I Could Look Inside the Justice System - Bobby Constantino - The Atlantic

But in between the important cases, I found myself spending most of my time prosecuting people of color for things we white kids did with impunity growing up in the suburbs. As our office handed down arrest records and probation terms for riding dirt bikes in the street, cutting through a neighbor’s yard, hosting loud parties, fighting, or smoking weed – shenanigans that had rarely earned my own classmates anything more than raised eyebrows and scoldings – I often wondered if there was a side of the justice system that we never saw in the suburbs. Last year, I got myself arrested in New York City and found out.

As I walked around that day, I held a chipboard graffiti stencil the size of a piece of poster board and two cans of spray paint. Simply carrying those items qualified as a class B misdemeanor pursuant to New York Penal Law 145.65. If police officers were doing their jobs, they would have no choice but to stop and question me.

I kept walking and reached a bodega near the Rockaway Avenue subway station. Suddenly, a young black man started yelling at me to get out of Brownsville, presumably concluding from my skin color and my suit that I did not belong there. Three police officers heard the commotion and came running down the stairs. They reached me and stopped.

“What’s going on?” one asked.

“Nothing,” I told them.

“What does that say?” the officer interrupted me, incredulously, as the other two gathered around. I held the stencil up for them to read.

“What are you, some kind of asshole?” he asked.

I stood quietly, wondering whether they would arrest me or write a summons. The officers grumbled a few choice curse words and then ran down the stairs in pursuit of the young man. Though I was the one clearly breaking a law, they went after him.

I walked up to the east entrance of City Hall and tagged the words “N.Y.P.D. Get Your Hands Off Me” on a gatepost in red paint. The surveillance video shows me doing this, 20 feet from the police officer manning the gate. I moved closer, within 10 feet of him, and tagged it again. I could see him inside watching video monitors that corresponded to the different cameras.

As I moved the can back and forth, a police officer in an Interceptor go-cart saw me, slammed on his brakes, and pulled up to the curb behind me. I looked over my shoulder, made eye contact with him, and resumed. As I waited for him to jump out, grab me, or Tase me, he sped away and hung a left, leaving me standing there alone. I’ve watched the video a dozen times and it’s still hard to believe.

I woke up the next morning and Fox News was reporting that unknown suspects had vandalized City Hall. I went back to the entrance and handed the guard my driver’s license and a letter explaining what I’d done. Several police officers were speaking in hushed tones near the gates, which had been washed clean. I was expecting them to recognize me from eyewitness descriptions and the still shots taken from the surveillance cameras and immediately take me into custody. Instead, the guard politely handed me back my license, explained that I didn’t have an appointment, and turned me away.

In the end I was found guilty of nine criminal charges. The prosecutor asked for 15 days of community service as punishment. My attorney requested time served. The judge—in an unusual move that showed how much the case bothered him—went over the prosecutor's head and ordered three years of probation, a $1000 fine, a $250 surcharge, a $50 surcharge, 30 days of community service, and a special condition allowing police and probation officers to enter and search my residence anytime without a warrant.

At my group probation orientation, the officer handed each of us a packet and explained that we are not allowed to travel, work, or visit outside New York City.

“Wait, what?” I blurted out. “This is true even for nonviolent misdemeanors?”

“Yes, for everyone. You have to get permission.”

After the orientation, I went straight to my probation officer and requested permission to spend Christmas with my family in Massachusetts. I listened in disbelief as she denied my request—I’d worked with probation departments in several states, and I knew that regular family contact has been shown to reduce recidivism. My probation officer also refused to let me go home for Easter and birthdays. After six or seven of these refusals, I complained to a supervisor, citing New York’s evidence-based practices manual, and was assigned to a new probation officer.

[osiris]

Hmmm, not sure. What I get out of this is that if you act like an asshole and flaunt the law in the face of the law, the law will kick your stupid sorry white ass because you deserve it. But that's just the first reaction. I gotta run to a meeting.

[Shaddim]

As our office handed down arrest records and probation terms for riding dirt bikes in the street, cutting through a neighbor’s yard, hosting loud parties, fighting, or smoking weed – shenanigans that had rarely earned my own classmates anything more than raised eyebrows and scoldings

What a load of horsehockey. We arrest white folks for those things, and they're prosecuted, even on first offense. The trespassing thing is generally a catch and release the first time, with a healthy dose of "I'll bite off your nose if you give me any lip", unless signs are posted and/or there is evidence of destruction or vandalism.

I do like that the judge threw the book at him, I'd do the same if that chucklehead showed up in my court and wasted my valuable time with his bullshit. Personally, I would have given him 90 days walking on the road crew as well, it's a kind of "house arrest" popular around here. You show up for road crew work Mon-Sat at 6am, rain or shine, and work until they tell you to go home (usually until 3 or 4pm), picking up trash, scraping up roadkill, filling potholes, etc.. Healthy convicts who don't show up go to the clink for the remainder of their sentence (you're required to show a doctor's excuse for missing a day, and you have to make up all missed days), and they only make $3 /hour.

The problem is obvious, they coddle their criminals up there.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

I had an idea for a punishment. HS level algebra and physics problems worksheets. Lots of them. So may it would make you're eyes bleed. Especially if they're repeat offenders. I don't know about you but I got sick an tired of doing them when it was just a few as homework.

[OAW]

I think the key takeaway here is this guy had to practically bend over backwards to even get arrested for clearly illegal behavior. Then when he was convicted he still almost got off with a slap on the wrist. It was only the judge that put the smack down on him. Selective enforcement is a long-standing issue and readily apparent to anyone even remotely paying attention.

OAW

[Shaddim]

I'm betting he would have been busted ASAP if he'd been wearing saggy pants and a hoodie.

[Snow-i]

Could it be the fact that he was a former prosecutor and therefore a lawyer gave the PD pause to arrest him? I mean he's essentially one of their own.

He deserves it for pulling such a stupid stunt. He put himself and others at risk for nothing other then anecdotal evidence with no meaningful correlation for the cause he claims to support.

When's he get the book deal?

[reader50]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

He put himself and others at risk for nothing other then anecdotal evidence with no meaningful correlation for the cause he claims to support.

How did he place others at risk? Or himself for that matter, other than legal risk? Unless you are implying the police will go berserk upon sight of tagging.

[subego]

It's frivolously using up limited resources.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by reader50 

How did he place others at risk? Or himself for that matter, other than legal risk? Unless you are implying the police will go berserk upon sight of tagging.

Attention whoring and keeping the cops distracted from doing more important things.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

The problem is obvious, they coddle their criminals up there.

Is it? From what I remember hearing from you, you've talked with Sheriffs about laws you guys may not agree with not being enforced. So it strikes me as more idealogical than coddling.

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Could it be the fact that he was a former prosecutor and therefore a lawyer gave the PD pause to arrest him? I mean he's essentially one of their own.

There is no way the cops at the bodega or the guard who caught him in the act knew that.

Originally Posted by subego 

It's frivolously using up limited resources.

I think that's why the judge threw the book at him, but is that justified?

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I'm betting he would have been busted ASAP if he'd been wearing saggy pants and a hoodie.

That brings me to something I've been rolling around in my head for a year or two. It's stated that justice is supposed to be blind, but is that what we really want? I don't think it is.

[osiris]

Upon deeper reflection: Minorities need to buy suits. That will skew the stats.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

There is no way the cops at the bodega or the guard who caught him in the act knew that.

Dakar, are you kidding me? They took his ID and ran it. The dude was obviously out of place in a suit in the hood. What would your first thoughts be upon seeing that?

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Dakar, are you kidding me? They took his ID and ran it.

Perhaps you are kidding me. In the two instances I reference, I see no mention of him having his ID ran.

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

The dude was obviously out of place in a suit in the hood. What would your first thoughts be upon seeing that?

He looks out of place?

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Is it? From what I remember hearing from you, you've talked with Sheriffs about laws you guys may not agree with not being enforced. So it strikes me as more idealogical than coddling.

Not really, though they have tried to cut people some slack on simple possession of pot, it ties up dept resources to keep busting the same morons over and over again. Lately, if someone is found to have <1 gram of weed on them, it's destroyed on the spot (dumped in the mud) and the "perp" is told to move on, provided they aren't driving while impaired or otherwise involved in a separate offence.

There is no way the cops at the bodega or the guard who caught him in the act knew that.

Cops often have to go to court (it's a PitA), and when they do they encounter the people who work for the DA's office. One thing I've noticed about most police in general is that they're very good at remembering faces, plus they had his name, so it wouldn't take much for them to put 2+2 together. "Doesn't this guy in the suit work for the DA? Maybe he's involved in something official? Do I really want to **** with him?"

I think that's why the judge threw the book at him, but is that justified?

Sure is. Though the parole officer seemed to have a personal beef, so maybe they have a history that he hasn't divulged? As with most things, there's a lot more to this story than he's volunteered, and that's pretty typical of anyone with a major agenda.

That brings me to something I've been rolling around in my head for a year or two. It's stated that justice is supposed to be blind, but is that what we really want? I don't think it is.

Police are peace officers, they try to keep order and clean-up messes after they happen, but it isn't their (our) job to dispense justice.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Perhaps you are kidding me. In the two instances I reference, I see no mention of him having his ID ran.

A prime example of the phenomenon I speak on at times. The denial of the obvious runs so deep that some would rather literally manufacture a scenario that was never mentioned in the article than acknowledge that race is clearly a factor here.

OAW

[subego]

I'm not going to deny racism, but I'm not going to support the methodology of the author.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Cops often have to go to court (it's a PitA), and when they do they encounter the people who work for the DA's office. One thing I've noticed about most police in general is that they're very good at remembering faces, plus they had his name, so it wouldn't take much for them to put 2+2 together. "Doesn't this guy in the suit work for the DA? Maybe he's involved in something official? Do I really want to **** with him?"

Ok, either I missed something or you guys connected something that isn't there. The guy is a former prosecutor from MA. Does it say anywhere that he worked as a DA in NY?

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Sure is.

This is what I'm referring to when I ask should justice be blind. Should he be judged on his intent or his "waste" of city resources?

Originally Posted by subego 

I'm not going to deny racism, but I'm not going to support the methodology of the author.

And of course, this and shaddim's and osiris' comments follows into a philosophical discussion of whether committing a crime with intent to demonstrate flaws in the system is worse/better/equal to committing the crime for selfish purposes.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV 

I had an idea for a punishment. HS level algebra and physics problems worksheets. Lots of them. So may it would make you're eyes bleed. Especially if they're repeat offenders. I don't know about you but I got sick an tired of doing them when it was just a few as homework.

Cruel and unusual punishment.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Cruel and unusual punishment.

They can't rule that because they'd be opening up schools and teachers across the country to lawsuits.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV 

They can't rule that because they'd be opening up schools and teachers across the country to lawsuits.

It was tongue and cheek, but I think there's a difference between homework to learn and homework to punish.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by OAW 

A prime example of the phenomenon I speak on at times. The denial of the obvious runs so deep that some would rather literally manufacture a scenario that was never mentioned in the article than acknowledge that race is clearly a factor here.

OAW

First, the part I highlighted is annoying, isn't it? It's something I pointed out that you were doing in the Zimmerman thread.

Second, I don't believe it's race, I believe it's income bracket. If it were a black man all dressed up in a suit they'd likely act the same way.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Ok, either I missed something or you guys connected something that isn't there. The guy is a former prosecutor from MA. Does it say anywhere that he worked as a DA in NY?

That was my bad, For some reason I thought he'd been a part of the NYC DA's office. Still, if you dress up and act like you should be there you'll always attract less negative attention.

This is what I'm referring to when I ask should justice be blind. Should he be judged on his intent or his "waste" of city resources?

That's left to the judge's discretion and obviously he wanted to lower the boom, possibly to keep others from "testing" the system themselves.

And of course, this and shaddim's and osiris' comments follows into a philosophical discussion of whether committing a crime with intent to demonstrate flaws in the system is worse/better/equal to committing the crime for selfish purposes.

Who says this guy wasn't being selfish? He's gotten some mileage out of this, it seems, plus maybe he was enjoying the attention while he was doing it?

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

First, the part I highlighted is annoying, isn't it? It's something I pointed out that you were doing in the Zimmerman thread.

So says the guy promoting a "purple drank" scenario being bandied about sites like stormfront.org and "birther central" wnd.com. But let's not retread old ground shall we?

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Second, I don't believe it's race, I believe it's income bracket. If it were a black man all dressed up in a suit they'd likely act the same way.

Dude. It's 2013 and a black guy in a suit STILL has a harder time catching a taxi in NYC than a white dude in a hoodie. Which blows your theory clean out of the water. I mean jeez ... just look at any publicly available documentary of Stop and Frisk practices in NYC. Then just LISTEN to the stories being told by black men across the socio-economic spectrum. Afterwards, it's up to you. Either all those black guys are suffering from some sort of mass hallucination ... or maybe, just maybe ... race does have something to do with it after all. IJS that it won't cause your d*ck to fall off or some other type of calamity to befall you simply by acknowledging the obvious.

OAW

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by OAW 

So says the guy promoting a "purple drank" scenario being bandied about sites like stormfront.org and "birther central" wnd.com. But let's not retread old ground shall we?

One has little to do with the other, but keep telling yourself that. The media and activists kept talking about Martin's "tea", when it wasn't tea at all. The kids around here Robotrip with fruit punch and Skittles too, trying to deny that it was a possibility in that case, which is what you were doing, was absurd.

Dude. It's 2013 and a black guy in a suit STILL has a harder time catching a taxi in NYC than a white dude in a hoodie. Which blows your theory clean out of the water. I mean jeez ... just look at any publicly available documentary of Stop and Frisk practices in NYC. Then just LISTEN to the stories being told by black men across the socio-economic spectrum. Afterwards, it's up to you. Either all those black guys are suffering from some sort of mass hallucination ... or maybe, just maybe ... race does have something to do with it after all. IJS that it won't cause your d*ck to fall off or some other type of calamity to befall you simply by acknowledging the obvious.

OAW

Let's go with that for a moment, for argument's sake let's say it is racial. (I don't buy that junk about the white guy in the hoodie having an easier time getting a cab, because I had a rough time getting one in NYC at night when I was wearing jeans, a t-shirt, and a dark jacket, but whatever.) What does that say, especially when less than 15% of cabbies in NYC are white? Who's doing the discriminating? Furthermore, if a person is nearly 8 times more likely to be murdered by a black man, and you see evidence of that in the news, day-in and day-out, how do you believe that affects a person's perceptions? Do you believe it would affect yours if you were a cab driver?

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by OAW 

A prime example of the phenomenon I speak on at times. The denial of the obvious runs so deep that some would rather literally manufacture a scenario that was never mentioned in the article than acknowledge that race is clearly a factor here.

OAW

Maybe you should read the article before making ignorant comments and hateful accusations. The only one inventing shit here is you - since apparently reading the article before making accusations is too much to ask.

You obviously didn't read the quoted part, much less the full article, so take your hate-mongering and shove it, OAW. Who's in denial, again?

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Perhaps you are kidding me. In the two instances I reference, I see no mention of him having his ID ran.

So you think the cops just took it, stuck it up their butts and handed it back? Come on man, you should know better. Anytime a cop takes your ID it's so he can run it through the system to check for warrants, probation status, priors, and other pertinent information about one's record.

He looks out of place?

I'm sorry, Dakar, but yes. Being outside in the middle of the night, alone, without an apparent destination, with a full suit wandering around is not something you really see a lot anywhere, much less the inner city. I'm not surprised the cops weren't on the lookout for such behavior as there's really not a strong connection to any crime in such a scenario.

Here's one for you, why is there no mention of whether the cops were black, white, or other? Probably doesn't support the narrative here. The narrative that's based on nothing but a manufactured anecdote of a former prosecutor's attempt at a book deal and a cushy retirement (and yes, that's my opinion).

If you can show me some empirical evidence that demonstrate's extreme racial bias by the police department, i'm right there with you. This is just hate mongering. What's infuriating is the number of good people he's trying to throw under the bus with this clickbait bullshit. (And don't get me wrong, police overstepping their authority boils my blood more then any other topic, but lets save our outrage for instances where wrongdoing at least has some real evidence.


I also find it odd that he points the the judge overriding the prosecutor's sentencing recommendation as some kind of outrage. He's a former prosecutor of course they're going to try to take it easy on him. Bravo to the judge for being intolerant of this bullshit.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Maybe you should read the article before making ignorant comments and hateful accusations. The only one inventing shit here is you - since apparently reading the article before making accusations is too much to ask.

You obviously didn't read the quoted part, much less the full article, so take your hate-mongering and shove it, OAW. Who's in denial, again?

Funny. Dakar challenged your assertion FIRST but you replied to me. Here's the deal. Dakar said there was nothing in the article about the cops running the guy's ID. If you have evidence to the contrary and can provide a citation to back it up then you might have some semblance of a point. Until then ...

OAW

[OAW]

I wonder why I even involve myself in these silly conversations sometimes. It's like you purposely IGNORE everything that comes before that provides CONTEXT and latch onto some extraneous BS to try to manufacture some other narrative. From the article ...

I went home and blogged about the incident, publicizing what I’d done and posting pictures, before returning to the guard tower the next day, and the next, to hand over my license and letter. Each time, the guards saw a young professional in a suit, not the suspect they had in mind, and each time they handed me back my license and turned me away. On my fifth day of trying, a reporter from Courthouse News Service tagged along. At first skeptical, he watched in disbelief as the officer took my license, made a phone call, and sent me on my way.

So even after 5 days of trying this dude STILL couldn't get arrested. Despite dozens of cops being EYEWITNESSES to him committing a crime ... and being caught on VIDEO. But hey ... he had on a suit and had a clean record so that explains all that huh?

OAW

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by OAW 

I wonder why I even involve myself in these silly conversations sometimes. It's like you purposely IGNORE everything that comes before that provides CONTEXT and latch onto so extraneous BS to try to manufacture some other narrative. From the article ...

I just have a problem with you accusing me of being a racist in "denial of the obvious," when it's clear you didn't read the whole thing. Otherwise, you would have seen what I was talking about and if necessary, asked me politely to clarify. You know, a normal, courteous discussion. I know you're capable of that since I've seen it on other issues that aren't as emotionally close to you - I'm not sure you're interested in that kind of debate. I think you just enjoy hate-mongering on issues you feel strongly about.

So even after 5 days of trying this dude STILL couldn't get arrested. Despite dozens of cops being EYEWITNESSES to him committing a crime ... and being caught on VIDEO. But hey ... he had on a suit and had a clean record so that explains all that huh?

OAW

Well obviously by process of elimination it must be rampant racism right? Or, that's what you hope for at least.

There is not one shred of even a preponderance of empirical evidence of wrongdoing or racial bias. The cops have been doing their jobs for far longer then you have. You weren't there, we have one side of the story which was setup to be a trap for exactly that kind of evidence. There's no actual evidence, plenty of bias, and a great narrative that seems to touch a nerve with the more gullible of our audience. Yet, somehow, it has to be rampant racism. There's no other explanation or room for any other viewpoint, is there OAW?

Maybe if you hadn't come off as such a supreme dickwad by accusing me of being a racist in denial "of the obvious", we could have a constructive conversation. Oh well.

[Snow-i]

Dakar, you were right about one thing. This dude didn't get any white privilege from the judge.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

I just have a problem with you accusing me of being a racist in "denial of the obvious," when it's clear you didn't read the whole thing. Otherwise, you would have seen what I was talking about and if necessary, asked me politely to clarify. You know, a normal, courteous discussion. I know you're capable of that since I've seen it on other issues that aren't as emotionally close to you - I'm not sure you're interested in that kind of debate. I think you just enjoy hate-mongering on issues you feel strongly about.

And where exactly did I accuse you of being a "racist"? I'll wait ....

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Now I did say you were in "denial" about what was going on in the situation. And I stand by that comment. The problem that you and a whole lot of other people have is that you can't seem to comprehend the fact that "denial about racism" is NOT the same thing as being a "racist".

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

There is not one shred of even a preponderance of empirical evidence of wrongdoing or racial bias. The cops have been doing their jobs for far longer then you have. You weren't there, we have one side of the story which was setup to be a trap for exactly that kind of evidence. There's no actual evidence, plenty of bias, and a great narrative that seems to touch a nerve with the more gullible of our audience. Yet, somehow, it has to be rampant racism. There's no other explanation or room for any other viewpoint, is there OAW?

Maybe if you hadn't come off as such a supreme dickwad by accusing me of being a racist in denial "of the obvious", we could have a constructive conversation. Oh well.

Let me put it to you this way. I've never been arrested a day in my life ... let alone done any jail time. Never been involved in drugs, crime, etc. Top schools. Upper middle class. Could probably buy the average cop 3 or 4 times over. In other words ... I'm about as "upstanding citizen" as they come. And if you believe for one second that my black ass could walk up to ANY COP in the midst of committing a crime ... even one as petty as graffiti .... and walk MULTIPLE TIMES just because I was rocking a business suit and had a clean record then I will be charitable in the spirit of the holidays and say that you are being considerably uhhh .... "optimistic".

To reiterate, I did not call you a racist. My apologies if that's what you got out of what I said. But the reality that I'm speaking to ... and that I've previously stated on various occasions ... is that there are millions of well-intentioned people who are by no stretch of the imagination "racist" in the classic "KKK", "skinhead", "white supremacist" sense of the term who are "supremely uncomfortable" with the topic of race and retreat into "denial" in order to not deal with it. We (not necessarily you in particular but the board in general) just had this conversation in a thread I started recently where I was making this very point about there being a difference between being "racist" and harboring "subconscious racial bias". Because for me the phenomenon this guy is describing is no different than the one we saw in that thread where the white guy was in the midst of stealing a bike and it took quite some time before anyone confronted him. Yet the black guy dressed the same way doing the exact same thing was challenged immediately. But nonetheless, there were those who tried to argue the minutiae of their clothing. How the black guy had his baseball cap cocked a half inch more to the side and THAT was the real reason why he was confronted and the white guy wasn't. The simple, obvious answer just couldn't be it ... not in this "post-racial" society of ours. Yeah I'm kinda sorta exaggerating ... but not really. This phenomenon that I'm talking about is the same thing at play when hiring managers are 5-6 times more likely to schedule an interview when the job applicant's name is Megan or David than when it's Aisha or Jamal. Even when the resumes are otherwise IDENTICAL.

So the question becomes ... is the issue what I said? Or is the issue your defensiveness about what I said?

OAW

PS: You know what I'm waiting on? The day when a reporter from a major news organization does one of these bias tests and the results come out some other way. Because whether it's this situation, the bike stealing scenario, job applicants, apartment seekers, home buyers, etc ... the results ALWAYS seem to show the presence of bias, despite the fact that none of the people profiled are prone to burning a cross in a black person's yard. At some point one has to see the forest and quit focusing on the individual tree. Because otherwise one will never see the pattern over time that's at play. That's why I see things the way I do. Because for such tests to always shake out the way they do time and time again is either evidence of pervasive BIAS in our society .... or a series of unfortunate COINCIDENCES. And I'm sorry ... but the math just doesn't favor the latter explanation.

[ebuddy]

Do we know what color the officers at the scene were? What color were the guards that turned the perp away when trying to throw himself at their mercy the following day? What color was the sentencing judge? Remember the "stolen bicycle" exposé and how black people regarded the potential white perp?

Yes racism exists, but so do a host of other "isms" that are conflated with racism. The narrative cannot be devoid of what are essentially innate senses among mankind. *The Lesson here: I would not recommend that any of our resident white folks try this experiment without sporting that "executive" look and to my black friends; if you'd like to commit a crime, your odds of avoiding the judicial system may increase exponentially by wearing contemporary-styled eyeware, suit, tie, and sensible shoes.

Next...

[ebuddy]

Personal anecdote:

I've noticed something when I travel and often joke with my wife about it. As a 42 year old male, my prospects have been hampered by male pattern balding and rather than fight my DNA by attempting to shape the few hairs left standing, I have opted for a much more sensible solution involving a Braun shaver. Almost without fail, Nike ball cap on at checkpoint- no frisk. Bald as the day I was born? Frisked every time.

[OAW]

^^^

Well my friend, that is one other thing we have in common. My hair stopped cooperating with me years ago so now I just shave it all off and act like I meant to do that!

As to your point, with respect to "white privilege" it does not matter what race the cops or the judge are. As you noted in the other thread with the bike, even minorities exhibit behavior at times that reinforces white privilege. Given how culturally ingrained it is that's to be expected quite frankly. The issue here seems to be that some people seem to think that if a scenario isn't 110% explained by race and race alone ... then race must have played no part in it whatsoever. But the real world doesn't work that way.

OAW

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Who says this guy wasn't being selfish? He's gotten some mileage out of this, it seems, plus maybe he was enjoying the attention while he was doing it?

Yeah, yeah, and giving money to charity is selfish and if it makes you feel good. Your comment doesn't address my point – should he be treated differently in the eyes of the law?

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

So you think the cops just took it, stuck it up their butts and handed it back? Come on man, you should know better. Anytime a cop takes your ID it's so he can run it through the system to check for warrants, probation status, priors, and other pertinent information about one's record.

You haven't cited where it says the cops ran his ID in those two instances quoted.

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

I'm sorry, Dakar, but yes. Being outside in the middle of the night, alone, without an apparent destination, with a full suit wandering around is not something you really see a lot anywhere, much less the inner city. I'm not surprised the cops weren't on the lookout for such behavior as there's really not a strong connection to any crime in such a scenario.

I was saying, I'd think he'd look at of place.

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Here's one for you, why is there no mention of whether the cops were black, white, or other? Probably doesn't support the narrative here.

You're making the mistaken assumption that black cops can't be racist against their own kind. One of the problems that is highlighted about cops is they are cops first and people second (see: code of silence).

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

If you can show me some empirical evidence that demonstrate's extreme racial bias by the police department, i'm right there with you. This is just hate mongering.

Hate mongering? It's anecdotal evidence, and probably a flawed test, but at the very least it calls attention to what some people perceive to be a problem. The worst thing that could be done here is to ignore the question, rather than have people dig deeper and find out what the truth may be – there is or isn't discrimination.

BTW, I think the stop & frisk numbers demonstrate extreme racial bias by the police department. This just an possible extension of that racial discrimination.

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I also find it odd that he points the the judge overriding the prosecutor's sentencing recommendation as some kind of outrage. He's a former prosecutor of course they're going to try to take it easy on him. Bravo to the judge for being intolerant of this bullshit.

How is this worse than regular vandalism? At worst isn't this just civil disobedience?

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Dakar, you were right about one thing. This dude didn't get any white privilege from the judge.

My point isn't that he didn't get white privilege, it's that he had it revoked. Unless you think it's perfectly reasonable for someone to have a special condition allowing police and probation officers to enter and search my residence anytime without a warrant for graffiti.

Originally Posted by OAW 

My hair stopped cooperating with me years ago so now I just shave it all off and act like I meant to do that!

Black privilege is being able to shave your head and no one assumes you're covering up for your bald ass.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Second, I don't believe it's race, I believe it's income bracket. If it were a black man all dressed up in a suit they'd likely act the same way.

First of all, you can be rich without wearing a suit and vice versa. Second, shit like this has been cropping up from time to time.

The suit says he was then “paraded” through the store like a criminal as the officers led him to a holding cell upstairs.

“They kept telling me, ‘Your card is fake. You’re going to jail,’” Brown said.

He said he “implored” them to check his ID — and a Macy’s employee did, going through the several pieces of identification he had on him one at a time.

“I had all sorts of forms of ID,” Brown said, but the officers maintained his card was “fake.”

The officers told him the ID “was false and that he could not afford to make such an expensive purchase,” the suit says.

[pooka]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Dude. It's 2013 and a black guy in a suit STILL has a harder time catching a taxi in NYC than a white dude in a hoodie. Which blows your theory clean out of the water.
OAW

I dunno. I don't think it's that's simple. From what reddit tells me, if there was a stereotype of black guys in suits always giving big tips (heh) I'm pretty sure this "stat" would change. Persians are dicks and all, but $20 is $20.

[andi*pandi]

Even if they ran his ID, pretty sure all it would come up with is address and known offenses. Your job history isn't linked into your drivers license, as a rule, and especially in the field of law.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Yeah, yeah, and giving money to charity is selfish and if it makes you feel good. Your comment doesn't address my point – should he be treated differently in the eyes of the law?

How is this worse than regular vandalism? At worst isn't this just civil disobedience?

Because intent changes things. He was out to also defame the justice system itself, and judges tend to be a prickly bunch when they believe you're out to make a mockery of the law. Is that right? Maybe, maybe not, but in light of what the guy was trying to pull it makes me less sympathetic of his plight. He took his chances and he rolled snake-eyes, if you can't do the time, don't commit the crime.

Intent. Sometimes, most of the time, my donations are anonymous, or I don't put on a production for making them. "Yeah, that's my name, no I don't want anything named after me, just help more kids." Other times I do, because it's part of a plan to increase the net the charity receives. "I'll match everyone's donations tonight, dollar for dollar, and double it if it reaches $100k." I like pulling stuff like that at Boys' and Girls' Clubs events, it helps people find their wallets. However, I don't crow over specific donations just to crow, because that cheapens the gift and my intent. The way this guy delivered his "results" cheapened what he was trying to do, he sold what good work he may have tried to put into the project, but that's his choice.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

First of all, you can be rich without wearing a suit and vice versa. Second, shit like this has been cropping up from time to time.

Indeed, I know. I personally hate suits and won't wear one unless under duress. Isolated cases aside, it really is about social class, not specifically race. (Though I'm still shocked over the homicide numbers I posted earlier, I didn't think they were that high.)

[OAW]

@Shaddim

I'm not blowing off your post to me earlier. Just been a bit under the weather the last few days and not working in my laptop. And as we all know posting on an iPhone is painful at best. I'll respond when I'm back in the saddle at the office.

OAW

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by OAW 

^^^

Well my friend, that is one other thing we have in common. My hair stopped cooperating with me years ago so now I just shave it all off and act like I meant to do that!

Exactly! I thank God after each shave that I was blessed with an evenly-shaped, round head. It's a timeless style.

As to your point, with respect to "white privilege" it does not matter what race the cops or the judge are. As you noted in the other thread with the bike, even minorities exhibit behavior at times that reinforces white privilege. Given how culturally ingrained it is that's to be expected quite frankly.

I can't entirely agree with this and believe the races of those involved are equally important to the race of the subject in the exposé. Again, I think racism is too often conflated with other isms. As you know, it is commonly understood that racism stems from a form of ignorance and that ignorance is generally founded on a lack of exposure to those of differing races, willfully or otherwise. If the black community shows a similar distrust of people of color, it cannot be summed up neatly in the narrative of social conditioning as a byproduct of racism because the black community does not similarly lack awareness of or exposure to the black community. Rather, people may be responding to something ingrained not from colonial America, but within human DNA and a common sense rooted in survival instinct.

For example, you can say this "white privilege" is apparent in the incarceration rates only by ignoring the socio-economic factors that facilitate criminality; broken homes. While broken homes are a growing phenomena that transcends race, it is far more prevalent among the black community and is too often given the short-shrift in favor of the far more sensationalist and intellectually lazy, RACISM!® tag.

In short, this man knew damn well if he'd been sagging with a crocked ball cap, he'd have been bagged up quick. So... he wore a suit. The lesson is, wear a suit. I think that's something that might elevate us all.

The issue here seems to be that some people seem to think that if a scenario isn't 110% explained by race and race alone ... then race must have played no part in it whatsoever. But the real world doesn't work that way.

OAW

Unfortunately, I think the far greater issue here is the convenience of distraction and the immense profitability in perpetuating societal ill through divisive rhetoric and defeatism.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by OAW 

And where exactly did I accuse you of being a "racist"? I'll wait ....

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Now I did say you were in "denial" about what was going on in the situation. And I stand by that comment. The problem that you and a whole lot of other people have is that you can't seem to comprehend the fact that "denial about racism" is NOT the same thing as being a "racist".

Fair enough. I still take extreme issue with your assertion that I'm "in denial"

I just like to see sound evidence of a transgression before I break out my pitchfork. This, isn't that. We don't even have the names of the officers or any evidence aside from his narrative to support the assertion that these events are indicative of pervasive racism.

Let me put it to you this way. I've never been arrested a day in my life ... let alone done any jail time. Never been involved in drugs, crime, etc. Top schools. Upper middle class. Could probably buy the average cop 3 or 4 times over. In other words ... I'm about as "upstanding citizen" as they come.

That's wonderful OAW. I would classify myself as such and I can tell you that I have been arrested on some horseshit and treated unbelievably poorly in custody. The charges were dropped a few weeks later - and I have developed a healthy distrust of the police as a result.

And if you believe for one second that my black ass could walk up to ANY COP in the midst of committing a crime ... even one as petty as graffiti .... and walk MULTIPLE TIMES just because I was rocking a business suit and had a clean record then I will be charitable in the spirit of the holidays and say that you are being considerably uhhh .... "optimistic".

I was a tall white guy in a button down shirt and I was arrested for blocking the sidewalk while trying to leave the area (I was walking on it, and have the video to prove it).

I'm white OAW, and I garauntee you my white ass can't walk up to any cops, commit a crime and get away with it, suit or not. Shit, I didn't even have to commit a crime to get arrested.

To reiterate, I did not call you a racist. My apologies if that's what you got out of what I said. But the reality that I'm speaking to ... and that I've previously stated on various occasions ... is that there are millions of well-intentioned people who are by no stretch of the imagination "racist" in the classic "KKK", "skinhead", "white supremacist" sense of the term who are "supremely uncomfortable" with the topic of race and retreat into "denial" in order to not deal with it. We (not necessarily you in particular but the board in general) just had this conversation in a thread I started recently where I was making this very point about there being a difference between being "racist" and harboring "subconscious racial bias". Because for me the phenomenon this guy is describing is no different than the one we saw in that thread where the white guy was in the midst of stealing a bike and it took quite some time before anyone confronted him. Yet the black guy dressed the same way doing the exact same thing was challenged immediately. But nonetheless, there were those who tried to argue the minutiae of their clothing. How the black guy had his baseball cap cocked a half inch more to the side and THAT was the real reason why he was confronted and the white guy wasn't. The simple, obvious answer just couldn't be it ... not in this "post-racial" society of ours. Yeah I'm kinda sorta exaggerating ... but not really. This phenomenon that I'm talking about is the same thing at play when hiring managers are 5-6 times more likely to schedule an interview when the job applicant's name is Megan or David than when it's Aisha or Jamal. Even when the resumes are otherwise IDENTICAL.

Thanks for clarifying. I agree with you that discrimination is still a huge problem in this country. I believe racism still exists, even institutionally. However, the accusation is so heavy that I reserve my accusations for racism to a high standard of evidence, which I just don't see in this story. We don't have any verification of his story, any corroborating testimony, an account of the cops perspective, anything other then his theory about why he wasn't arrested right off the bat.

When was the last time you saw a dude in a suit doing graffiti on anything?

So the question becomes ... is the issue what I said? Or is the issue your defensiveness about what I said?

I think the issue is that we are far apart on what we need to see in order to say "See, look! Racism!." To me, it is not a light accusation and I don't feel that this story cannot be reasonably be explained by other explanations that aren't racism as we define it. Especially when we don't have any real evidence or even the other side of the story. I'm sorry, I just don't believe everything I read especially when the author stands to gain from my outrage.

PS: You know what I'm waiting on? The day when a reporter from a major news organization does one of these bias tests and the results come out some other way. Because whether it's this situation, the bike stealing scenario, job applicants, apartment seekers, home buyers, etc ... the results ALWAYS seem to show the presence of bias,

Humans are naturally biased in a multitude of ways. In order to properly address these biases in our authorities, we must first understand them fully. I'm not sure we can do that if we are always looking through a filter of "Is this racist or not?" as the stories that have an answer of "no" will never make the news. A reporter from a major news organization won't report on such a test because there's nothing newsworthy to report. Can you imagine a headline reading "Cop not racist"?

despite the fact that none of the people profiled are prone to burning a cross in a black person's yard. At some point one has to see the forest and quit focusing on the individual tree. Because otherwise one will never see the pattern over time that's at play. That's why I see things the way I do. Because for such tests to always shake out the way they do time and time again is either evidence of pervasive BIAS in our society .... or a series of unfortunate COINCIDENCES. And I'm sorry ... but the math just doesn't favor the latter explanation.

i just think the biases your seeing can more easily be explained by observer-expectation bias then a grand, pervasive, institutional racial bias. Am I saying that bias doesn't exist in our country? Heavens no, but lets make sure we don't cheapen the accusation by applying it when other factors and or causes cannot be ruled out. Such an accusation can wreck people's lives, and begin to lose their gravity when applied so dubiously.

For instance, (and this is not you), there are a sizable portion of people that think Republicans are inherently racist. I find this absurd and insulting, when good old fashion greed by a politician is a more reasonable explanation (and IMO, more accurate). This greed applies equally to both sides and manifests in a number of ways. It's human nature - but that doesn't stop a large, ignorant bunch from essentially calling me a racist for my fiscal conservative and constitutional libertarian leaning views that align more with Republicans than Democrats.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Because intent changes things. He was out to also defame the justice system itself, and judges tend to be a prickly bunch when they believe you're out to make a mockery of the law. Is that right? Maybe, maybe not, but in light of what the guy was trying to pull it makes me less sympathetic of his plight. He took his chances and he rolled snake-eyes, if you can't do the time, don't commit the crime.

His intent was to demonstrate inequality in the system. The system pretends its above that and that's why he got the book thrown at them – yeah he made a mockery of them, but because the system is a mockery.

Now, I don't get from the guy that he has any real problem with the punishment doled out (as in, he can handle it) but nothing in the sentencing reads as being about justice rather than retaliatory and personal (never mind the parole officers). In my mind, they've almost martyred him – depending how common this punishment is for similar offenses.

[andi*pandi]

Anybody here done graffiti and gotten away with it?

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Let's go with that for a moment, for argument's sake let's say it is racial. (I don't buy that junk about the white guy in the hoodie having an easier time getting a cab, because I had a rough time getting one in NYC at night when I was wearing jeans, a t-shirt, and a dark jacket, but whatever.) What does that say, especially when less than 15% of cabbies in NYC are white? Who's doing the discriminating? Furthermore, if a person is nearly 8 times more likely to be murdered by a black man, and you see evidence of that in the news, day-in and day-out, how do you believe that affects a person's perceptions? Do you believe it would affect yours if you were a cab driver?

See that's the thing with statistics. They shape the narrative depending upon which ones you highlight and which ones you omit. It's rare that people cite ALL the relevant statistics to give a comprehensive view of the issue being discussed. For instance, the citation your provided above simply does NOT say what you said. Just so we are clear ....

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Furthermore, if a person is nearly 8 times more likely to be murdered by a black man and you see evidence of that in the news, day-in and day-out, how do you believe that affects a person's perceptions?

.... when what it actually said was ....

The offending rate for blacks was almost 8 times higher than whites, and the victim rate 6 times higher. Most murders were intraracial, with 84% of white homicide victims murdered by whites, and 93% of black victims murdered by blacks

So what this REALLY means is that ....

If you are a white you are 5.25 times more likely to be murdered by someone white than someone non-white.

----- and ------

If you are a black you are 13.29 times more likely to be murdered by someone black than someone non-black.

----- but ------

There were 14,581 murders in 2012 in the US where racial data on the offender was collected.

----- out of ------

A country with a population of 313.9 million.

----- which means ------

The chances of any given individual being murdered is 0.00472348%. A rarity by any reasonable definition.

And this illustrates the problem I have with those who latch onto one stat that definitely shows a disproportional murder RATE in the black community ... complete devoid of the overall context of the ACTUAL NUMBER of murders ... and then try to intimate that some average black guy one might encounter on the street is a potential murderer. African-Americans comprise approximately 13% of the population. About 38.9 million people. And of those 5,531 committed a murder in 2012. Or 0.01421851%.

Now I know .... I know. The "perception" one might get from the local news (and institution owned and controlled by white people) is that an encounter with a black male is a murder waiting to happen. But the reality shows clearly that the chances of that being true is considerably less than a tenth of a percent. In other words, if one just walked up to a black guy at random there is a 99.9+% chance that he is NOT a murderer. So if you (and I mean that in the generic sense) are a white dude who wonders if the average black guy you encounter while out and about are potential murderers then you are, quite frankly, an idiot. Especially since in the off-chance that he was a murderer someone who looks like him would have a lot more to worry about than you.

OAW

[Shaddim]

I wasn't talking about blacks murdering whites (where did that come from?), obviously, since so few cabbies in NYC are white (only 1 in 12).

[subego]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

Anybody here done graffiti and gotten away with it?

How are you defining "done"? In front of a cop?

[OAW]

@Shaddim,

Even still the latter part of my point remains. The ACTUAL NUMBER of murders committed by black males in comparison to their population numbers doesn't warrant BLANKET SUSPICION. And upon further reflection, the percentage I calculated I that final point was off a bit because I made the comparison against the overall black population. It should be against the overall black MALE population. I don't have that number handy but figure it's half of that. So even if you double that figure you are still looking at 99.9+% of black males are NOT murderers. And that applies REGARDLESS of the cabbie' ethnic background.

My purpose here is to rebut that "8 times more likely to be murdered by someone black" statement you made. As well as to address the misused statistic about the disproportionate black murder rate in general.

OAW