August 9, 2007 — Vol. 42, No. 52
Send this page to a friend!

Help


NYPD: Street “stop-and-frisks” down in recent months

NEW YORK — The number of people stopped and searched by police on city streets fell by more than 12 percent during the second quarter of this year, compared to the same period last year, police said. The numbers mark the New York Police Department’s (NYPD) latest report on a law enforcement technique that has drawn scrutiny from civil rights advocates.

Officers conducted 113,945 “stop-and-frisks” from April through June, about 15,000 fewer than in the same months in 2006, the NYPD said last Friday.

Police say the stops are intended to snare potential suspects, and Assistant Chief Michael Collins said a rising number of arrests resulted from such stops in the second quarter of this year: 6 percent, up from 4 percent in the same period the year before. Summonses increased from 6 percent to 8 percent, he said.

The NYPD has faced questions of racial profiling in stop-and-frisks, as a majority of people stopped in recent years have been black. That remained true in the second quarter of 2007, when 53 percent of those stopped were black, 32 percent Hispanic and 12 percent white.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, about 25 percent of the city’s population is black, 28 percent is Hispanic and 44 percent is white. But police say the suspects described to them — and, therefore, the people officers stop — don’t mirror the population’s demographics. In the second quarter, 67 percent of suspects were described as black by victims and witnesses, Collins said.

The NYPD announced earlier this year that it had hired the Rand Corp. research group to examine the department’s history of stop-and-frisks for evidence of racial bias. The move came amid concerns over statistics showing officers searched more than half a million pedestrians last year, a fivefold increase since 2002.

The department said more vigorous enforcement was partly responsible for the rise, but better recordkeeping may have played a bigger role.

The New York Civil Liberties Union asked the department last month to turn over records documenting hundreds of thousands of stop-and-frisks over the past few years.

Commission probes discrimination claims at Los Angeles Fire Department

LOS ANGELES — Federal authorities have opened on investigation into allegations of racism and discrimination at the city’s Fire Department, officials said last Friday.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) inquiry was confirmed in a statement released by the office of Interim Fire Chief Douglas L. Barry.

“The Los Angeles Fire Department takes all workplace environment issues seriously,” the statement said. “It has been and remains our goal to create a positive workplace that supports all our members.”

Anna Park, head regional attorney for the EEOC, which enforces federal anti-discrimination laws, said she was prevented from discussing ongoing probes.

But if an investigation found evidence of racism or discrimination, the commission could force the city to pay victims of harassment, implement training and document the effects of such changes.

If city officials refused to cooperate or failed to comply with EEOC mandates, Park said, the case would be forwarded to the U.S. Justice Department for possible legal action.

Allegations of racial and sexual discrimination have plagued the 3,900-member department for over a decade and contributed to the resignation of two fire chiefs.

In recent months, three firefighters have won awards totaling $11 million after suing the city for harassment, discrimination and retaliation.

A black firefighter, Tennie Pierce, also has filed suit against the city claiming he was the victim of racial harassment when his colleagues laced his spaghetti with dog food in 2004. Firefighters called it a prank.

Later, photos of Pierce hazing other firefighters sparked a controversy that led to the retirement in December of Barry’s predecessor, former Chief William Bamattre. Pierce’s suit is scheduled for trial in September.

City auditors have faulted department officials for allegedly allowing hostile work environments.

The city is searching for a permanent fire chief to help deal with the department’s workplace issues and lawsuits.

More than half of Emancipation Proclamation viewing slots taken on first day

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — More than 5,800 reservations were made last Wednesday to view the Emancipation Proclamation when it is on exhibit next month at the Clinton Center, according to a spokesman for the center.

That’s more than half the viewing slots expected to be available when the document goes on exhibit for four days beginning Sept. 22.

On Aug. 1, the presidential center began taking reservations to view the 144-year-old document, on loan from the National Archives, when it is displayed Sept. 22-25. President Abraham Lincoln issued the proclamation Jan. 1, 1863, freeing the slaves amid the Civil War.

The document will be the centerpiece of an exhibit called “The Long Struggle,” showing how presidential decisions influenced the civil rights movement.

Jordan Johnson, spokesman for the Clinton Center, said a final decision hadn’t been made on how many reservations would be taken, but that the number would be about 10,000. The number is limited by the capacity of the Clinton Center, Johnson said.

The cost to view the exhibit is included in the regular price of admission to the Clinton Center. Reservations can be made by calling 501-244-2856.

The viewing coincides with the 50th anniversary of the desegregation of Little Rock Central High School, a landmark event in the civil rights struggle.


Associated Press text, photo and/pr graphic material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritte for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP Materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computerexcept for personal and non-commercial use. The AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.

Back to Top