NYPD is Refusing To Comply With NYC's New Surveillance Tech Laws 48
An anonymous reader shares a report: In a new report published Thursday, the New York Office of the Inspector General for the New York Police Department (OIG-NYPD) said the New York Police Department
violated the 2020 ââPublic Oversight of Surveillance Technology (POST) Act, which required the NYPD to publicly disclose surveillance technology. The POST Act was signed into law by then-New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and required the NYPD to disclose information about its current and future surveillance technologies and how it wants to use them.
In the report, the OIG-NYPD said that NYPD was not in compliance with the POST Act orders to publish Impact and Use Policies (IUPs) for existing surveillance tech 180 days after the Act was signed and new IUPs at least 90 days before the use of any new surveillance tech. The IUPs were supposed to "describe the capabilities of surveillance technology, and include any rules, processes, and guidelines that regulate access to or use of the technology, and any prohibitions or restrictions on its use, and any potential disparate impacts," according to the report. But, the OIG-NYPD said that the 36 IUPs NYPD published after the Act was signed were general and not detailed, leaving the OIG-NYPD unable to conduct an audit and assess whether NYPD's use of surveillance devices complies with its IUPs and report any suspected violations.
In the report, the OIG-NYPD said that NYPD was not in compliance with the POST Act orders to publish Impact and Use Policies (IUPs) for existing surveillance tech 180 days after the Act was signed and new IUPs at least 90 days before the use of any new surveillance tech. The IUPs were supposed to "describe the capabilities of surveillance technology, and include any rules, processes, and guidelines that regulate access to or use of the technology, and any prohibitions or restrictions on its use, and any potential disparate impacts," according to the report. But, the OIG-NYPD said that the 36 IUPs NYPD published after the Act was signed were general and not detailed, leaving the OIG-NYPD unable to conduct an audit and assess whether NYPD's use of surveillance devices complies with its IUPs and report any suspected violations.
Militarized police are a bad idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Militarized police are a bad idea (Score:4, Interesting)
Who signed that? That's where it started. WHO SIGNED IT?
created by bush, then rubricated by clinton. you're welcome.
nb: i'm guessing that you embrace the fantasy that any of the two oligarch groups that share power in the u.s. has somehow more respect for civil rights than the other. i hope your eventual awakening isn't too rude.
Re: (Score:1)
George Soros is code word for “jew” for those unaware.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup. Once again, by the strangest of all coincidences, what right wingers want just happens to harm America's interests and help Russia
Re: (Score:2)
Historically right wingers hated Soros because he was extremely wealthy, staunchly liberal, and very politically active. That made him a sort of "boogey man" for the Right.
The current right wing glorification of Russia is new and very concerning. It feels very reactionary - as in "the Left doesn't like these guys, so we should love them!" absurdity.
Re: (Score:2)
His statements and actions - his attack on Georgia, the illegal invasion of Crimea in 2014, his sponsorship of the "separatist" movement in eastern Ukraine, and now the invasion of Ukraine outright, make it clear
Ya'll know we here on the left don't own Clinton (Score:2, Insightful)
The Clinton's are on your side, not mine. They're Nixonian Republicans that ran with "D"s next to their name for convenience and to get the Dixiecrat vote that was still floating around a little in the 90s.
What was that Greek saying? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Who will watch the watchers?" Apparently they don't like being watched, which makes it even more imperative.
Re: (Score:1)
Latin, "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" from Decimus Junius Juvenalis aka Juvenal
Can someone explain? (Score:5, Insightful)
I know nothing of how US works, but how can a public institution not obey the law of their land? In particular municipal policing which is under the mayor that signed that law. I imagined disobedience of a high official would have him removed by the mayor. Also in general the administration could require a justice injunction that would be sufficient to make them act; I expect that refusal for a public servant to obey a justice decision is a crime.
Re: (Score:2)
It's pervasive throughout the culture in the U.S. ... "do as I say, not as I do."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Easy! The cops have guns and know where the mayor lives.
Re:Can someone explain? (Score:5, Insightful)
Police are basically untouchable. They have a very strong union and lots of political boot lickers. If a DA tries to prosecute crooked cops the whole force suddenly becomes babies who threaten to stop doing their jobs. When a good cop does come forward they find themselves committed to a mental hospital as punishment. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/a... [nbcnews.com] I mean look who runs the union, https://abc7news.com/amp/joann... [abc7news.com]
Re: Can someone explain? (Score:2)
New York and New York City have been dominated by big-government authoritarians for more than a century. The rank-and-file cops might not be all bad, but the leadership certainly is. It's why they (government and police) are fighting so hard against this and thumbing their noses at recent SCOTUS losses.
Re: (Score:2)
it's in the tfa. they simply failed to comply in due time and gave a silly excuse to say that they can't possibly comply, which is bullshit the city will now have to challenge and litigate, i guess.
so, the simple answer is because they can. btw, that's not exclusive from the u.s. at all, it also happens systematically in my country which is described as a nominal democracy too.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because nobody really wants to deal with the problem.
1) first it involves the police, do anything for/against/to/with the police its a political quagmire, there is so much emotion in the public around police, that its anyone's guess what side they'll take on a given incident. Basically any statement or action is a highstakes bet - it does not really cut right/left predictably either. So if you are not forced engage you don't.
2) The police and the DA are usually pretty cozy, you would see the local DOJ act,
Re: (Score:2)
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
They are the police. Who is going to make them follow the law?
It is a local law, so not enforced by the federal/state/county authorities.
The District Attorney could request court intervention (political suicide, the DA needs the Police) -which would result in a fine that the city pays itself? Not going to happen.
Essentially it is an internal matter. The Office of the Inspector General issues a report that says "Hey, you are not following procedure" and the publicity from tha
Than their leadership should be held in jail (Score:5, Insightful)
Than the NYPD leadership should be held in contempt of (State) congress until they comply
Re: (Score:2)
Well, before going federal, police from other towns/cities could be empowered to arrest them. If they won't do it, then the Governor can call in the national guard. Beyond that, there's the FBI, US Marshalls and ATF, among others since the officers could be facing federal charges at that point. Beyond that, the Army, Marines, etc. It could be argued that the armed forces are not meant to be used on American soil, but the exception to that is a breakdown in public order. A bunch of armed non-police officers
corruption? (Score:1, Troll)
Re: corruption? (Score:1, Flamebait)
The criminals already have the police playbook. They wrote it and are in charge of enforcing it.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Send in the marines (Score:2)
Are they in violation? (Score:3)
Note that they're pretending to obey the law although their inspectorate doesn't agree that they are. So it will take a court case to determine whether they are - so delaying any ACTUAL implementation. The right solution, of course, is for the council to cut funding until they do what the inspectorate says - but that's something of a nuclear option, as, of course, the Police Department will suddenly not do basic policing.
Re: Are they in violation? (Score:1)
Judging from New York's history, it'll just ignore any court decisions, do whatever the they want, and claim to be in full compliance.
Surprise! (Score:2)
Who would ever expect the police to ignore a law they found inconvenient? After all, it's their job to enforce the law.
who polices the police forces? (Score:2)
when the police don't follow the law, who polices them?
Fruits of the Poisoned Tree? (Score:4, Insightful)
It will be interesting to see how many defense lawyers start trying to get surveillance videos thrown out of evidence - and all evidence collected as a result of that surveillance.
Think - surveillance video shows a known addict meeting with someone for a suspected drug deal. NYPD follow both through video until the dealer gets in a vehicle. They use that to climb the dealers network. The buyer gets arrested for possession.
It that video is deemed to be illegal, not only does the buyer get off (no probable cause), but everything that it discovered about that dealer network becomes inadmissible too.
I'm sure that no-one in the NYPD would stoop to parallel construction, right?
Some problems with this (Score:2, Insightful)
disclose information about its current and future surveillance technologies
Some of those technologies might be covered by non disclosure agreements. Private vendors agreements: No big deal. New York law can probably carve themselves out some immunity. Federal tech: It's possible that the NYPD or OIG (or both) could be in real hot water with the DoJ/FBI, NSA, CIA, etc. Federal power supersedes state and local laws. You think Trump's perp walk will look silly? I can't wait for NYC officials to be fitted with orange jump suits.
Future technologies: Yeah. We're developing a pre-crime
Re:Some problems with this (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The apps or technology may have been in place long before the law was passed. And if the current suppliers are well established, there may be no one able to pick up the contract. Or there may be patents.
Too many PHBs and politicians think that they are omnipotent. Until some federal agency or court steps in and raps their knuckles. The NYPD may feel secure behind such partners, knowing that the politicians will lose the battle.
Re: (Score:2)
Start firing cops (Score:2)
Fire the chief immediately. Then give his replacement two weeks to follow the law. After two weeks, fire him. Keep going down the list until something gets done. Knowing New York cops, they'll catch blue flu in protest. Fire them, too.
NYPD has been keeping that city hostage for decades. It's time to crack down on the true criminal element that is terrorizing the city.
Jury Nullification (Score:2)
All cops are bastards. (Score:2)
Citizens arrest? (Score:2)
What was the budget spent on? (Score:1)
Criminals are oppressed (Score:2)
Criminals are an oppressed class. Free the criminals!