24h購物| | PChome| 登入
2013-03-23 14:36:22| 人氣1,280| 回應0 | 上一篇 | 下一篇

Walking While Black in New York

推薦 0 收藏 0 轉貼0 訂閱站台




美國的民權團體控告紐約市警局(NYPD),以種族身分當成臨檢攔停的標準,濫用權力,違反憲法增修條文第四條「合理搜索扣押」之規定。
NYPD當然全力否認。但在審判過程中,證據越來越多。包括一些勇於揭弊的警員拿著錄音紀錄出來作證,長官如何下令多多臨檢年輕黑人,還有每月臨檢與逮捕之「配額」。
這種案子(一個集體訴訟的民事案件),如果在我國,要怎麼告上法庭啊?大法官雖說對臨檢可以訴訟,但我們的司法程序(包括行政訴訟法),根本沒有辦法起訴與救濟啊。


The New York Times
March 22, 2013

Walking While Black in New York

The New York City Police Department has a long history of violating constitutional rights by stopping, questioning or frisking people on the streets without legal justification. The city has steadfastly denied that the detentions — made under its increasingly unpopular stop-and-frisk program — have been based on race.

But that claim is being challenged in Floyd v. the City of New York, a federal class-action trial in Manhattan, where witnesses including police officers are arguing that the department does, in fact, use race as the basis for stopping and frisking hundreds of thousands of citizens a year.

This week, the court heard a troubling recording secretly made last month by Officer Pedro Serrano, of the 40th Precinct, in the South Bronx. Mr. Serrano is one of a handful of officers who began tape-recording conversations with their colleagues or superiors to document what they saw as wrongdoing.

In the recording, Deputy Inspector Christopher McCormack is heard urging Mr. Serrano to stop, question and, if necessary, frisk “the right people at the right time, the right location.” When Mr. Serrano asked for clarification about who the “right people” were, the inspector replied: “The problem was, what, male blacks.” He continued, “And I told you at roll call, and I have no problem telling you this, male blacks 14 to 20, 21.”

On its face, this would seem to violate the Fourth Amendment, which protects citizens against unlawful search and seizure. Police officers can legally stop and detain a person only when they have a reasonable suspicion that the person is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime.

The trial court also heard this week from Officer Adhyl Polanco of the 41st Precinct, who had taped proceedings in his station house. Mr. Polanco testified that officers were subject to a quota system, which required them to write more summonses, make more arrests and create stop-and-frisk encounters. He said that his superiors wanted “20 summons and one arrest per month.” The plaintiffs argue that a quota system put officers under pressure to make unconstitutional stops.

The trial is expected to last six weeks. But the testimony has already pointed to disturbing conduct by the police command and a profound indifference to the constitutional rights of the city’s citizens.

台長: 布魯斯
人氣(1,280) | 回應(0)| 推薦 (0)| 收藏 (0)| 轉寄
全站分類: 社會萬象(時事、政論、公益、八卦、社會、宗教、超自然) | 個人分類: 一般的反歧視 |
此分類下一篇:A Sea Change in Less Than 50 Years as Gay Rights
此分類上一篇:Wedding Bells (Linda Greenhouse)
TOP
詳全文