THREAD: This is a story about how police are frontline propagandists. It starts with a violent robbery at a men’s clothing store in Manhattan. It ends w/ NYPD responding, but refusing to investigate. Then lying that no one would face any consequences bc of “reform.” Read on:
A few weeks ago, a men's clothing store in Manhattan was victimized by numerous young men who, according the owners, stole $20,000 of merchandise. And worse: punched a 61 year old employee in the face. It was the second time the store had suffered similar theft recently.
The owners called NYPD both times. Both times NYPD came after the young men had left. The second time, however, one of the young men left his cell phone behind. Even apparently called it to retrieve it. The holy grail of evidence. A way for cops to catch them, right? Wrong.
Here's where the story turns from tragic to sinister. The owners called the responding cops "professional & sympathetic." But they lied to them. First, they lied they couldn't use the phone bc of "privacy laws." Despite ample justification to undercut constitutional protections.
Never in my nearly decade of public defense did the Constitution ever stop cops from acting even when the Constitution plainly prohibited their actions. Cops know their word will never be challenged & even if it is, judges will give a pass. More on this:
Opinion | How Mandatory Minimums Enable Police Misconduct - The New York Times - "They drastically limit accountability for those with the power to take away a person’s liberty."
t gets worse. NYPD didn't just lie they couldn't search for or arrest the suspects. They lied that even if caught, they'd face no consequences. Because of "bail reform" & new Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's wildly misinterpreted policy memo. Storeowners were understandably horrified.
This was the last straw for the storeowners. After being bombarded w/ years of police-planted propaganda, fear & falsehoods tying bail reform to fictional "surges," personally surviving violence, then being told by NYPD it was bc of reform, they spoke out.
NYC shopkeeper robbed twice by marauding bandits
Confronted both w/ traumatic experiences & brazen lies by the NYPD, it's understandable these storeowners would speak out, in anger & resolve, against commonsense & remarkably successful reforms in NY. Misinformation is as much a tragedy as the violent robbery. So here are facts:
The offense & actions the storeowners described is Robbery in the Second Degree. A class C violent felony. Each individual would face minimum 3.5 years in prison. Max 15. Under NY Penal Law 160.10(2)(a). Bail reform doesn't touch this case. Alvin Bragg's memo doesn't come close.
It is FALSE Manhattan DA Bragg's new policy memo forecloses prosecution of these violent felonies. Or comes close to *condoning them*. He'd prosecute this case as a violent robbery. His prosecutors would request bail. Here’s a direct link to his policy:
DANY Letterhead - Day-One-Letter-Policies-1.03.2022.pdf
So much lying out there about Bragg "condoning commercial armed robbery!" Minor changes relate only to cases involving no "genuine risk of physical harm." In this case, someone was ACTUALLY PHYSICALLY HARMED. Even just *threatening* the act would've qualify as a C-violent felony.
The carve out in Bragg’s policy is for outrageous cases that already ordinarily end in misdemeanors or dismissals like when a single person puts their finger under their shirt pretending to have a gun. If any object (even a water bottle) could cause harm, it could be charged.
Only other change in Bragg's memo re: commercial crimes relates to outrageous practice of charging someone w/ a "violent burglary" for simple theft only bc a store's connected to a building w/ residences as well. Bragg'd still charge these as non-violent felonies. Up to 4 years.
Bragg’s policy also doesn't rule out bail or incarceration for any crime. And carceral sentences would be based on a "holistic analysis of the facts" including "victim's input (particularly in cases of violence or trauma)." Which fits the storeowner's case as well.
To reiterate: In the case the storeowners described, these individuals could & would be charged w/ a C-violent robbery under Penal section 160.10, likely be caged on Rikers pretrial on unaffordable bail, & face up to between 15 years in prison. What cops called "no consequences."
The experience of the storeowners sounds harrowing & horrifying. Only made worse by the fact the NYPD both refused to help & also lied to them. Lied blatantly, as theyre doing in NYC & around the country to make people feel less safe & call to roll back criminal justice reforms.
️
on Twitter: "They're doing this from coast to coast. Twice I've interacted with Seattle police & they tell me they can't do anything because of "legislation".