Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 — Good Morning, Stay Safe
- - - - -
Federal Suit Claims Police Distort Marijuana Searches to Create Misdemeanors
By RAY RIVERA — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Times'
One man was walking home with groceries. Another was on a break from his job at a meat market. A third was walking down the street listening to headphones.
That is when the men say police officers confronted them, sometimes violently, searched their clothing and discovered small amounts of marijuana, according to a federal civil rights lawsuit that is expected to be filed on Thursday in United States District Court for the Southern District, in Manhattan.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of five Bronx men, contends that New York City police officers routinely stop black and Latino men without cause and then charge them with low-level misdemeanors when their pockets are emptied and small amounts of marijuana are found.
In each of the cases, the amount of marijuana found on the men would have amounted to little more than noncriminal violations punishable by a fine of up to $100 for first-time offenders. But the lawsuit contends that the charging officers falsely claimed the marijuana was in public view, making it a low-level misdemeanor under Section 221.10 of the New York Penal Code, which allows for sentences of up to three months in jail.
Critics of the Police Department say the practice, which they call manufactured misdemeanors, is widespread. The arrests are often the outgrowth of the department's stop-and-frisk program, which is being challenged in federal court for, among other things, disproportionately targeting black and Hispanic men.
The lawsuit names the city, the department and several officers and supervisors as defendants. It was filed by the Bronx Defenders, which represents low-income defendants, and the law firm of Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady L.L.P. A similar lawsuit filed by the Legal Aid Society is pending in state court in Manhattan.
A spokeswoman for the city's Law Department declined to comment on Wednesday, saying the city had not yet been served with the lawsuit.
The Police Department charged more than 50,000 people with marijuana misdemeanors in 2011. More than 84 percent were black or Hispanic, a disparity that is even more pronounced in the Bronx.
In an effort to limit these arrests, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo has made decriminalizing small amounts of marijuana in open view one of his top goals this legislative session. The Legislature failed to act on a similar measure last year, despite support from Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and the police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly.
Though state law calls for misdemeanor cases to be tried within 60 days, the time limits are seldom met, the lawsuit contends. People arrested in the Bronx have it even worse; a recent series of articles in The New York Times revealed a dysfunctional justice system plagued by long delays that often make it all but impossible for people charged with misdemeanors to ever reach trial. Two of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Francisco Zapata and Danilo Melendez, were featured in one of the articles. They endured long delays and made frequent court appearances waiting for trial before the charges against them were finally dropped.
_______________________________________________________________________
Civil Service: Detectives Endowment Association gets court victory against city in salary dispute
DEA challenged a Board of Collective Bargaining ruling on the union's complaint that detectives were unfairly paid less than police officers
By Reuven Blau — Tuesday, April 30th, 2013 'The New York Daily News'
More than 700 detectives may get thousands of dollars in retroactive pay, thanks to a court decision that found the city failed to boost the starting salary for entry-level detectives to above the pay for cops.
In 2011, the Detectives Endowment Association filed a complaint with the city's Board of Collective Bargaining, trying to force the panel to arbitrate a grievance regarding the pay dispute.
The union contended that there was an unfair salary discrepancy between police officers and the 735 detectives who were promoted after Aug. 1, 2004 but before March 31, 2006.
Over that period, the newly promoted detectives earned $60,840, while the base pay for police officers was raised to $62,269. That difference was due to a 2004 arbitration award issued to the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association while the DEA remained working under an expired contract.
But the BCB tossed the case, concluding the matter was not a mandatory subject of collective bargaining.
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Geoffrey Wright slammed that decision in a landmark ruling.
"The Collective Bargaining Board's decision is arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion," Wright said in a scathing 15-page decision issued April 8.
City lawyers unsuccessfully argued that the DEA had no power to force the administration to arbitrate the dispute and that detectives were properly paid based on the contract in place.
Each of the affected detectives stands to earn approximately $11,000, according to DEA estimates. That will cost the city an estimated $8 million.
But the matter is far from settled.
Wright ordered the case back to the BCB, a decision city lawyers are likely to appeal.
Still, DEA President Michael Palladino hailed the ruling, noting that state courts typically defer to the local labor board.
"Winning the right to fight is half the battle," he said.
A city attorney handling the case noted that it was "nearly identical" to a suit brought by the Sergeants Benevolent Association (SBA) which was tossed.
"We are evaluating all our legal options with respect to this decision," added city lawyer John Schowengerdt.
_______________________________________________________________________
NYPD's Stop, Question, and Frisk Search
Bar Association dings police on stop-frisk
By Erik Engquist — Wednesday, May 1st, 2013; 4:41 p.m. 'Crain's New York Business' / New York, NY
A day after Mayor Michael Bloomberg stepped up his defense of stop-and-frisk, the city Bar Association called Wednesday for reform of the police tactic, saying it is generating ill will toward law enforcement and having "destructive social consequences."
The legal group, however, does not appear to be taking on stop-and-frisk as a major cause, as some advocacy groups have done. The bar's assessment was buried on the 24th page of a 95-page report on policy recommendations for the next mayor.
Still, it adds to the growing chorus of calls for changes to the Police Department's tactic of stopping, questioning and frisking people it suspects of criminal activity—and who it believes might carry firearms if not for the risk of being patted down. A disproportionate number of New Yorkers stopped and frisked have been young black men, although stop-and-frisk supporters say that is justified based on crime rates in that demographic and in certain black neighborhoods.
The bar association skirts around the issue of race, focusing instead of constitutionality. "Our concern...is finding ways to ensure that all street encounters are conducted in accordance with the law," its report states. It does not elaborate on its statement about destructive social consequences except to say that stop-and-frisk is "having negative impacts on many communities" and resulting in "ill will...toward the police and law enforcement." The Bloomberg administration says the impact on communities is positive, in that it reduces crime.
The bar association's white paper expresses concern that police officers, particularly new ones, are not being trained well or frequently enough to master the complex legalities associated with street encounters and warrantless searches. A judge has already found that the training video shown to officers misstates the law concerning Terry stops, which are justified if law enforcement has a "reasonable suspicion" that a person has committed a crime.
The legal group points out that performance measures may spur officers to make unjustified stops, and that the absence of reprimands for such stops increases their likelihood. "Meeting or exceeding the NYPD's performance goals is extremely important to any police officer's career, yet there do not appear to be any consequences for those whose stops are found to be unconstitutional or whose arrests cannot stand up in court," the report states.
It adds that the department doesn't follow up with officers whose stop-and-frisk arrests result in a high number of cases being dismissed or not prosecuted. Officers should be judged on the effectiveness, not the quantity, of their stops, but that does not appear to be happening, according to the bar association.
The Police Department has acknowledged a need to improve its stop-and-frisk program, but has rejected the idea of wholesale change or independent oversight. Mr. Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly maintain that it has been a key reason for low crime rates—a claim that is impossible to definitively verify or disprove. Opponents say crime rates fell precipitously before the number of street stops ballooned. The mayor points to the fact that just 2% of stops result in the recovery of a gun demonstrate that it is working; critics say it proves the opposite.
_______________________________________________________________________
Kelly, "Blacks Under-Stopped"
Commissioner Kelly says almost 75% of violent crime committed by African-Americans
'The percentage of people who are stopped is 53% African-American,' Kelly told 'Nightline.' So really, he said, they are being understopped.
By Shane Dixon Kavanaugh — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Daily News'
Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly credited the controversial stop-and-frisk tactic for helping to push New York's crime rate to record lows.
In a television interview, New York's top cop defended his department's use of the crimefighting tool and blasted critics who say it targets a disproportionate number of blacks and Latinos.
"The stark reality is that crime happens in communities of color," Kelly told "Nightline" co-anchor Bill Weir Wednesday.
"About 70% to 75% of the people described as committing violent crimes — assault, robbery, shootings, grand larceny — are described as being African-American.
"The percentage of people who are stopped is 53% African-American," he continued. "So really, African-Americans are being understopped in relation to the percentage of people being described as being the perpetrators of violent crime."
The commissioner also countered allegations by a Brooklyn teenager that aggressive "proactive policing" like stop-and-frisk creates divisions between communities and police.
"When things like this happen, there's no trust," said Kasim Walters, 17, of Flatbush.
"We are trying to save his life," Kelly responded. "And we are trying to save the life of other young people who are disproportionately victimized."
The "Nightline" segment also touched on the fatal shooting of Brooklyn teen Kimani Gray by police in March and featured comments by City Councilman Jumaane Williams (D-Brooklyn), a stop-and-frisk critic.
The city Health Department reported this week that gun deaths in the city dropped nearly a third from 2000 to 2011.
Kelly's comments come during a lengthy federal trial on stop-and-frisk and a day after Mayor Bloomberg hammered his potential successors for criticizing the NYPD tactic.
City Controller John Liu has described stop-and-frisk as racial profiling and called for its end, while other mayoral wanna-bes have said it needs to be reformed.
City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, two other Democratic contenders, have also been vocal in their support for a bill that would create an inspector general to oversee the NYPD.
The federal class-action lawsuit filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights against stop-and-frisk has entered its seventh week of trial.
The trial is expected to conclude May 16.
_______________________________________________________________________
Ray Kelly: By the department's count, African-Americans are being 'Understopped'
By Azi Paybarah — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'Capital New York' — Wednesday, May 1st, 2013; 'The '
In an interview on ABC's Nightline last night, NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly elaborated on a point Mayor Michael Bloomberg made in a speech this week, about the racial breakdown of stop-and-frisks conducted by city police officers.
Bloomberg said NYPD critics are unfairly compare the number of black and Latino men stopped to the number of black and Latino men in the general population, whereas they should be comparing the numbers of stops to the descriptions of suspects.
Kelly, in his interview, said that if you use that methodology, "African-Americans are being understopped."
A year ago, Kelly went even further, telling reporters people in "communities of color" actually "want more" stop-and-frisks.
That kind of rhetoric will effectively require a response from City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who is the only Democratic mayoral candidate who wants Kelly to stay on as commissioner and also wants the department to make fewer stops.
Yesterday, after she took credit for a recent reduction in the number of stop-and-frisks, Quinn avoided answering a reporter's question yesterday about whether she would continue that reduction as mayor.
_______________________________________________________________________
Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Times' 'Letters to the Editor'
Bloomberg and Police Stops
To the Editor:
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg is wrong to attack The New York Times, the Democratic candidates for mayor and others because of their positions on stop and frisk ("Critics of Police Would Make New Yorkers Less Safe, Bloomberg Says," news article, May 1).
During Mr. Bloomberg's 11-plus years in office, the New York Police Department has engaged in millions of frisks but has turned up a tiny number of guns. In 2011, of the 380,000 frisks conducted, the police found 780 guns, a hit rate of less than one-quarter of 1 percent. And this same, vanishingly small rate of success has been true for many years.
If the police officers had fact-based reasons to believe that people were "armed and dangerous," how could they be wrong almost 100 percent of the time? The answer is that they are most likely frisking illegally — without legally sufficient basis. And they are doing it nearly exclusively to black and Latino youths.
The police are not finding guns. What they find as a result of frisks, if anything, is small amounts of marijuana. And marijuana was not a cause of the death of Alphonza Bryant, a 17-year-old who was wrongly shot to death last week in the Bronx.
The mayor undermines his other work to reduce gun violence when he engages in such demagogy and pretends against all the evidence that his stop-and-frisk program has something to do with reducing such violence.
NORMAN SIEGEL
IRA GLASSER
New York, May 1, 2013
The writers are former executive directors of the New York Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union, respectively.
_______________________________________________________________________
Christine to Bloomberg: Frisk you!
Defies Mike & pushes NYPD inspector bill
By SALLY GOLDENBERG — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Post'
Mayor Bloomberg's impassioned speech in defense of stop-and-frisk this week wasn't enough to persuade City Council Speaker Christine Quinn to back off from her support of a bill to create an inspector general to oversee the NYPD.
Quinn insisted yesterday that she is forging ahead with legislation that would impose an IG on the cops, and she will allow the council to take up a second bill aimed at racial profiling, even though she doesn't support that measure.
The mayoral candidate also boasted of her efforts to slash the number of stop-and-frisks conducted by cops, which peaked at 684,000 in 2011 and dropped to 525,000 last year.
"The [nearly] 700,000 number, which was at our height, it has gone down because of the intervention of my office and the council," Quinn said. "That's a number that is too high and clearly shows that many of those stops could not have been happening in a constitutionally sound way."
Quinn defended her stance on stop-and-frisk a day after Bloomberg lashed out at politicians, civil-liberties groups and even The New York Times for undermining a policing strategy that he says saves lives.
She refused to say whether stop-and-frisks would continue to decline if she were elected mayor, saying only, "When I'm mayor, stops will happen in a constitutionally sound way."
Although she thinks stop-and-frisk is a problem, Quinn — in the face of a push-back from Bloomberg — announced last week that she does not support a separate bill to allow those who claim racial profiling to sue in state court.
Critics claim stop-and-frisk allows cops to profile suspects.
She will, however, make a rare move and allow that bill to get a council vote without her support — something she has never before permitted in her seven-year tenure as speaker.
Earlier yesterday, Public Advocate Bill de Blasio — one of fellow Democrat Quinn's mayoral rivals — attacked Bloomberg's defense of stop-and-frisk.
"This is fear-mongering. It's really inappropriate of the mayor to not address these issues seriously," de Blasio said on a radio program. And he slammed Quinn as "Bloomberg lite" on policing issues.
De Blasio supports both council measures.
Meanwhile, Deputy Mayor Howard Wolfson yesterday tweeted about a night of mayhem in Chicago as evidence that safety in large cities can't be taken for granted.
"As you read coverage of Bloomberg crime speech consider this Chicago news: shootings across city kill 3, injure 17," he wrote.
_______________________________________________________________________
City Council Speaker Christine Quinn takes heat after bragging about her role in reducing stop-and-frisk
Critics say her remarks disparaged the value of community groups and protests in the police procedure's decline, but Quinn said she was merely defending her record.
By Jennifer Fermino — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Daily News'
City Council Speaker Christine Quinn is taking credit for reducing the number of NYPD stop and frisks last year — a bit of campaign chest-thumping that raised eyebrows among critics of the tactic.
"Let's be clear," Quinn said Wednesday in response to charges from a campaign opponent who accused of her being too cozy with the Mayor Bloomberg and the NYPD.
"My office, myself and the City Council — we are the only ones who have actually gotten reform of stop, question and frisk."
The mayoral candidate was taking heat from Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, who trashed her as "Bloomberg light" for her relationship with the mayor and his support of the controversial stop-and-frisk police tactic.
Quinn responded that she held Council hearings on the tactic, which critics say unfairly targets minorities. She also pointed to a letter she wrote to Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly in February 2012 that urged the department to create a system to identify officers who were overusing the tactic.
The department adopted those changes a few months later, which led to a 22% drop in the number of people stopped and frisked last year.
But advocates who have been fighting the practice for more than a decade said Quinn was claiming credit for other people's work.
"That's a bit unrealistic," said Baher Azmy, legal director of the Center Constitutional Rights, which has been suing to end the practice.
"Whatever changes that will happen to stop and frisk are a function of 13 years of litigation and 13 years of community mobilization and not a magic wand from the City Council."
Councilwoman Melissa Mark-Viverito (D-Manhattan), a longtime stop-and-frisk critic, said community protests were the driving force behind changes.
"I think a comment like [Quinn's] reduces the level of engagement from the grass roots," she said.
Quinn's camp insisted that the speaker wasn't implying that community groups had not contributed. She was just responding to attacks on her record.
"We believe everyone's work on this helped," said spokesman Jamie McShane.
Paul Browne — a spokesman for Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, whom Quinn has vowed to keep on as commissioner if she's elected — also buttressed Quinn's claim.
"The changes that she talked about today followed an exchange of ideas and correspondence between the police commissioner and the speaker," Browne said.
_______________________________________________________________________
Jury Selection for the Murder of 75 Precinct Hero Peter Figoski
Figoski jury white slight nixed
By JOSH SAUL — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Post'
The defense attorney for a Brooklyn man accused in the fatal shooting of NYPD Detective Peter Figoski challenged every white person in the jury pool yesterday — earning a rebuke from the judge, who cited the lawyer's "chutzpah" and put two white people on the jury.
Prosecutors objected after attorney Howard Baker challenged all seven white people out of the 30-person jury pool for the trial of Kevin Santos.
Santos, 32, faces felony-murder charges for his alleged role in the 2011 shooting death of Figoski.
Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Alan Marrus ordered Baker to explain his challenges. Baker gave nonracial reasons for the challenges, but Marrus overruled two of them, and those two people joined the jury.
"It was so blatant, I couldn't believe you had the chutzpah to do it," Marrus told Baker.
_______________________________________________________________________
Two cops try to get on Figoski murder case jury, but are promptly bounced
Lawyer for accused also reject whites from panel. Judge finally gets frustrated and puts on a Yankee fan.
By Joanna Molloy — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Daily News'
Two NYPD officers were bounced from the jury in the Officer Peter Figoski murder case Wednesday — along with every prospective white juror.
Arpan Das, a 29-year-old rookie, and Joanne Nieves, a 15-year vet, were both given their walking papers by lawyers for defendant Kevin Santos.
Only five jurors were chosen in a contentious day in which prosecutors accused Santos' lawyer of trying to keep whites from the panel.
But the lawyer, Harold Baker, countered he had valid reasons for rejecting all the potential Caucasian jurors, including Juror #15, "who is an inspector."
"He's a pest control inspector!" argued prosecutor Kenneth Taub. "He hunts cockroaches!"
Baker also tried to block another white juror because the Yankee jacket-wearing man "wouldn't look me in the eye, and he had his arms folded across his chest."
But Judge Alan Marris had enough and put the Yankee fan on the jury.
Santos is charged with being part of the crew that tried to rob a drug dealer on Dec. 12, 2011, then shot Figoski when he arrived on the scene.
Lamont Pride, the actual gunman, was convicted earlier this year in a case that frustrated cops because Pride was acquitted of the top count.
Outside the courtroom Wednesday, Nieves was asked if she thought she'd had a chance of being selected.
"No way," she said.
_______________________________________________________________________
Fatal MVA Involving 41 Precinct P.O. Edward McClain
Dirt-biker in tragedy is $lapped
By DOUGLAS MONTERO — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Post'
The Bronx man who was riding a dirt bike when a police cruiser plowed into him last August, killing his friend, was found guilty yesterday of reckless driving and fined $80.
Adalberto Gonzalez, 26, originally faced the more serious charges of reckless endangerment and resisting arrest. But those were dropped after a video of the crash that killed his pal Eddie Fernandez, 28, in Hunts Point was made public in March.
Gonzalez decided to fight the remaining, minor charges of operating a motorcycle without a license and reckless driving.
The video shows cops first knocking him off a stationary dirt bike before he runs and hops on the back of his pal's bike, which was then rammed from behind by the police cruiser.
Bronx Criminal Court Judge Robert Seewald fined him because the video shows him riding on the sidewalk at a slow rate of speed.
_______________________________________________________________________
"Close to Home" Program Putting Skells in Your Neighborhood
Close to Home juvenile reform program creating 'threat to public safety': judge
'Close to Home' initiative that allows nonviolent youthful offenders to move from upstate detention facilities to group homes in the city has resulted in many criminals
By Oren Yaniv , Barry Paddock AND Larry McShane — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Daily News'
A ballyhooed program to turn young lives around instead turned dozens of underage criminals loose on city streets over a scary six-month stretch.
Repeated failures in the "Close to Home" initiative allowed the nonviolent youthful offenders to bolt from group homes where security is almost nil, court documents show.
"The problems identified in this decision should be addressed promptly before tragedy befalls a juvenile or an innocent citizen," wrote Queens Family Court Judge John Hunt about the missing youths.
Low-level offenders in the program are moved from upstate prisons to group homes and other facilities in the city with the goal of keeping them closer to relatives and services, and reducing recidivism.
But it's been difficult to keep up with many of the kids. In early March, 50 of the program's participants were simultaneously AWOL — about one in four of the kids enrolled in the initiative at the time.
The city Administration for Children's Services, which runs the program, confirmed 198 defendants generated 422 AWOL warrants between last September and March. Eight of the missing youths got arrested for new crimes. Ten ACS warrants were issued for one program participant who repeatedly disappeared from custody, the court papers show.
"This represents both an inability to control these juvenile delinquents as well as a potential threat to public safety," a clearly aggravated Hunt wrote in his decision.
The shocking stats were disclosed in the case of Arnold P., who walked away from St. John's Residence for Boys three days after his arrival in Rockaway Park in October. He resurfaced on Rikers Island in February after an arrest for participating in five new robberies, records show. Hunt reassigned Arnold P. to a higher-security facility.
ACS spokesman Michael Fagan said the agency expected some AWOL incidents when the program launched in September.
"We are working hard with our providers to address the problem of repeated AWOLs," he said.
On Wednesday, an aide to Gov. Cuomo pointed the finger at ACS, promising that state officials would work with the city "to ensure they take the necessary corrective action."
With Kenneth Lovett
_______________________________________________________________________
Brookhaven Lab to Conduct Airflow Study In New York City Streets and Subways This Summer
Project Represents Largest Field Study of its Kind Investigating How Airborne Contaminants Disperse in a Dense, Complex Urban Environment
By Unnamed Author(s) [Brookhaven National Laboratory] — Wednesday, May 1st, 2013 'Lab Manager Magazine' / Brookhaven, L.I.
The New York City Police Department and the U.S. Department of Energy's Brookhaven National Laboratory are scheduled to conduct this July the largest urban airflow study ever to better understand the risks posed by airborne contaminants, including chemical, biological and radiological (CBR) weapons as they are dispersed in the atmosphere and in the City's subway system. The NYPD will use the data collected during the three days of research to optimize emergency response following an intentional or accidental release of hazardous materials.
"The NYPD works for the best but plans for the worst when it comes to potentially catastrophic attacks such as ones employing radiological contaminants or weaponized anthrax," said Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly, adding that, "This field study with Brookhaven's outstanding expertise will help prepare and safeguard the city's population in the event of an actual attack."
"Brookhaven Lab is a world leader in the use of tracer gases to study airflow, and we are excited about this opportunity to apply that expertise to enhancing the safety of New York City residents and emergency responders," said Brookhaven Lab Director Doon Gibbs.
Both agencies will be working with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to test airflow through the subway system.
"The NYPD, in partnership with the MTA, is responsible for keeping more than 5 million daily subway customers safe and secure. This study will bolster the NYPD's understanding of contaminant dispersion within the subway system as well as between the subway system and the street, thereby improving its ability to better protect both our customers and the city population at large," said MTA Acting Chairman Fernando Ferrer. "We are glad they are joining Brookhaven National Laboratory for such an important effort, which will benefit the New York City subway without affecting its regular operations."
The Subway-Surface Air Flow Exchange (S-SAFE), as the project is formally known, was commissioned by the NYPD and funded through a $3.4 million Department of Homeland Security Transit Security Grant. It is the first of its scale to study airflow in a dense, complex urban environment both below and above-ground. Researchers from Argonne National Laboratory and Los Alamos National Laboratory, along with additional meteorologists and engineers, will support Brookhaven's scientists as they track the movement of harmless tracer gases detected by air sampling devices placed in select locations on the street and in the subway system.
There will be approximately 200 sampling devices deployed during this study. During the study, researchers will disperse low concentrations of harmless gases known as perfluorocarbons at select subway and street-level locations over three, non-consecutive days in July. Weather conditions will determine which days are selected for the tests, and will be announced to the public a day in advance. The research will be conducted during daylight hours in parts of the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island and in Manhattan from 59th Street to the Battery.
Perfluorocarbon tracer gases (PFTs) present no health or environmental hazard. They are non-toxic, inert, odorless, and invisible, and have been used in airflow studies since the 1980s, including a 2005 Urban Dispersion Program (UDP) conducted in Manhattan. PFTs also are used in medical applications including eye surgeries and artificial breathing systems.
The NYPD and MTA worked closely together on planning and implementation of the study, which will include 21 subway lines and several dozen stations citywide, in addition to the street-level research. The field study is designed to have zero impact on commuting and other public activity. Members of the public may notice clearly marked boxes containing the air sampling equipment secured in subway stations, on street light poles, and hand-carried by researchers.
In addition to the study in Manhattan in 2005, previous airflow studies were conducted in subway systems in Boston, and Washington, D.C. – but none as extensive as the one planned for New York City in July.
While the study is focused on the airflow and dispersion of airborne contaminants resulting from the release of a CBR agent, the findings will also enable City agencies to better understand dispersion characteristics of other potential inhalational hazards, such as smoke or fumes from chemical spills. The study is also expected to help police and other agencies decide where to best locate CBR detection equipment. Results from the study will help authorities refine evacuation or other responses in the event of an emergency.
_______________________________________________________________________
New Jersey
Off-duty Jersey City police officer issued 4 summonses in fatal crash
By Anthony J. Machcinski — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The Jersey Journal' / Jersey City, NJ
A off-duty Jersey City police officer who struck and killed a man crossing Kennedy Boulevard last month has been issued four summonses, including one for speeding.
Officer Michael Spolizino, 36, was driving on Kennedy Boulevard at 10 p.m. on April 19 when he struck Stephen A. Clifford, 24, of Jersey City, who was crossing Kennedy Boulevard at Fairmount Avenue.
Clifford, who had moved to Jersey City from Bellmore, N.Y. recently, was rushed to the Jersey City Medical Center and pronounced dead at 10:35 p.m.
Spolizino, a member of the Emergency Services Unit, was issued summonses for speeding, careless driving, no vehicle inspection sticker and failure to wear a seat belt. Police Chief Tom Comey refused to comment further and wouldn't reveal how fast they believe Spolizino was going at the time of the accident until the investigation is completed.
Comey said that the investigation is still active and the results will be handed over to the Hudson County Prosecutor's Office.
On the night of the incident, Spolizino told officers that he did not see Clifford crossing the street and that Clifford "came out of nowhere," the accident report said. There was no indication that Spolizino was under the influence of alcohol or any other substance and that a sobriety test was not administered, police said.
A witness, who did not give police his name, told police at the scene that he saw Clifford crossing the four-lane Kennedy Boulevard while the light was green, the accident report said. The witness added that it appeared Clifford hesitated, and then darted across the roadway before being struck.
_______________________________________________________________________
Joanne Chesimard, fugitive who killed N.J. state trooper, to be added to terrorist list
BY JIM NORMAN AND PETER J. SAMPSON — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The Bergen Record' / Hackensack, N.J.
Joanne Chesimard, now living in Cuba as a fugitive after murdering a New Jersey state trooper, will be placed on the FBI's Most Wanted Terrorist list — with the reward for her capture doubled — on Thursday, exactly 40 years after the death of Trooper Werner Foerster.
Some of New Jersey's top lawmen will gather at the FBI's headquarters in Newark to announce that Chesimard is being added to the FBI terrorist list, a law enforcement official said.
FBI Special Agent in Charge Aaron T. Ford, the new head of the FBI's Newark Division, also is expected to announce that the reward for Chesimard's capture is being doubled to $2 million, the official said.
Chesimard, a black militant who has been living under the name of Assata Shakur in Cuba for more than 25 years, was convicted in 1977 of killing Foerster during a gun battle on the New Jersey Turnpike in 1973. Three gunmen posing as visitors broke her out of the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women in Clinton in 1979. Chesimard eluded capture and resurfaced in the mid-1980s in Cuba, where she has since lived under the protection of the Castro regime.
New Jersey Attorney General Jeffrey S. Chiesa, State Police Superintendent Col. Rick Fuentes and Juan Mattos, Jr., the U.S. marshal for New Jersey, are expected to join Ford for the update on the efforts to recapture Chesimard.
Chesimard became the subject of an embarrassing controversy for President Obama two years ago, when Michelle Obama invited the rapper Common to appear at a White House arts event. Common had released a work called "A Song for Assata," which contained lyrics such as "Your power and pride is beautiful. May God bless your soul."
The backlash over the invitation was immediate, with the union representing state troopers pointing out that the Assata in question was Chesimard.
Fuentes, the State Police superintendent, has said he still has two detectives assigned to the Chesimard case and that she has "rock star status in Cuba," enjoying unrestricted access to the island, a car and free housing in exchange for being an anti-American "propaganda specialist for the Castro government."
_______________________________________________________________________
In struggling Camden, Christie says new regional police will restore safety
By Salvador Rizzo — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The Newark Star-Ledger' / Newark, NJ
CAMDEN — Gov. Chris Christie introduced the new, fully geared countywide police force for Camden today, vowing to reclaim the city's most dangerous streets and neighborhoods from a rising tide of crime.
Since it began operating in January, the Camden County Police Department's charge has been to restore law and order to the poorest and one of the most dangerous cities in America, along with surrounding towns that opt into the regional force.
At a news conference with local leaders and dozens of new officers, Christie said the force would have 400 police officers by the end of the year — 117 more than Camden had by itself — at no extra cost. The state would pitch in at least $120 million to the city this year, he said.
"Camden needed the help they're getting today and they needed it badly," Christie said. "I can't sugarcoat what the reality was. The reality was citizens feeling unsafe and risking their lives merely by walking the streets. The basics of public safety were diminished, and we needed to rebuild them."
With its tax base drying up and its economic engine stunted, Camden last year decided to disband its police department and switched to the regional force. The city had 67 murders in 2012, the most since it began to keep track. With a population of 77,000, it is among the highest murder rates in the country.
"We will be proud when Camden is no longer in the top five of the most dangerous cities in America," said Mayor Dana Redd, a Democrat, praising Christie and local and state officials for joining forces.
The change came after years of tough negotiations with the Fraternal Order of Police, the union that formerly represented Camden officers, which said today that throughout the process, Christie was unwilling to give the new officers a fair shake.
"Regional police departments are nothing new in the United States, but the way it was done down there — there was too much politics, too much name-calling," said Ed Brannigan, state president of the union.
Christie said police salaries had grown to unsustainable levels after years of plum deals between "often-corrupt" former city officials and union negotiators. In addition, on any given day, nearly one-third of the police officers would not show up to work, he said.
More than 150 members of the former Camden police department have joined the regional force. Brannigan said they can unionize after one year.
The Republican governor, vying for re-election, got a hero's welcome from state and local Democratic leaders today, including Senate President Stephen Sweeney. "It's not about Republicans or Democrats," said state Sen. Donald Norcross (D-Camden), who led the efforts in the Legislature. "We have plenty of time to do that in the next few months."
In March, Christie announced the state would be taking over Camden's school district. He said that move, combined with the regional police department, were the two keys to bringing the city back.
Outside, more than a dozen former officers held a silent demonstration to show their opposition. A former sergeant of the city police, Melvin Wayes, was arrested by a member of the new force for attempting to leave the designated demonstration area, The South Jersey Times reported.
Tracey Hall, a 20-year police officer who did not join the new force, said the terms offered were "insulting" to veterans of the old guard.
"It was shoved down our throat," she said. "We were told a lot of us weren't getting our seniority, a lot of the guys that were close to retirement would have to work another 10 to 15 years."
_______________________________________________________________________
U.S.A.
Cellphone Thefts Grow, but the Industry Looks the Other Way
By BRIAN X. CHEN and MALIA WOLLAN — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Times'
When a teenage boy snatched the iPhone out of Rose Cha's hand at a bus stop in the Bronx in March, she reported the theft to her carrier and to the police — just as she had done two other times when she was the victim of cellphone theft. Again, the police said they could not help her.
Ms. Cha's phone was entered in a new nationwide database for stolen cellphones, which tracks a phone's unique identifying number to prevent it from being activated, theoretically discouraging thefts. But police officials say the database has not helped stanch the ever-rising numbers of phone thefts, in part because many stolen phones end up overseas, out of the database's reach, and in part because the identifiers are easily modified.
Some law enforcement authorities, though, say there is a bigger issue — that carriers and handset makers have little incentive to fix the problem.
"The carriers are not innocent in this whole game. They are making profit off this," said Cathy L. Lanier, chief of the police department of the District of Columbia, where a record 1,829 cellphones were taken in robberies last year.
George Gascón, San Francisco's district attorney, says handset makers like Apple should be exploring new technologies that could help prevent theft. In March, he said, he met with an Apple executive, Michael Foulkes, who handles its government relations, to discuss how the company could improve its antitheft technology. But he left the meeting, he said, with no promise that Apple was working to do so.
He added, "Unlike other types of crimes, this is a crime that could be easily fixed with a technological solution."
Apple declined to comment.
The cellphone market is hugely lucrative, with the sale of handsets bringing in $69 billion in the United States last year, according to IDC, the research firm. Yet, thefts of smartphones keep increasing, and victims keep replacing them.
In San Francisco last year, nearly half of all robberies involved a cellphone, up from 36 percent the year before; in Washington, cellphones were taken in 42 percent of robberies, a record. In New York, theft of iPhones and iPads last year accounted for 14 percent of all crimes.
Some compare the epidemic of phone theft to car theft, which was a rampant problem more than a decade ago until auto manufacturers improved antitheft technology.
"If you look at auto theft, it has really plummeted in this country because technology has advanced so much and the manufacturers recognize the importance of it," said Chuck Wexler, the executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, a nonprofit group focused on improving police techniques. "The cellphone industry has for the most part been in denial. For whatever reasons, it has been slow to move."
Carriers say they have faith in the database, which they created with police departments across the country. They also say they are taking independent steps as well to address the problem. Verizon, for instance, says it has its own stolen phone database, making it impossible for devices reported as stolen to be reactivated on its network.
"We do care very deeply about this," said Jason Young, T-Mobile's vice president of product management. "If you've ever lost a phone or had one stolen, it's a scary thing, it's a painful thing and it's a costly thing."
Apple provides some assistance in locating lost or stolen phones with its free software, Find My iPhone, which can find a missing iPhone or remotely erase its data. But the service does not work once the phone is turned off or disconnected from the Internet. To locate an iPhone, an Apple customer can log in to iCloud.com with a Web browser and see a map of its approximate location, and can then hit a button to erase its information.
Google does not include any software in its Android operating system to help people locate a missing phone, although some third-party Android apps offer the feature. Mr. Gascón of San Francisco said that was not enough. "What I'm talking about is creating a kill switch so that when the phone gets reported stolen, it can be rendered inoperable in any configuration or carrier," he said.
Some security experts say such solutions are possible. One is software to prevent a phone from working after it is reported stolen, said Kevin Mahaffey, chief technology officer of Lookout, a mobile security firm. There would be ways to work around that, he said, but if companies made it time-consuming and expensive to reactivate a stolen cellphone, then people would stop stealing them so much.
Representative Eliot Engel, Democrat of New York, has proposed a legislative solution. A week ago, he introduced legislation that would make it illegal to modify a phone's identifier, among other preventive measures. In Britain, it is illegal already.
In San Francisco, the resale market for stolen phones is thriving, with a new iPhone netting a thief $400 to $500 in cash, said Edward Santos Jr., a police lieutenant who investigates robberies. The starting price of a new iPhone 5, without a contract, is $650.
Often, stolen phones are moved to a house or storage facility where middlemen erase the phone's memory, Mr. Santos said. Clearing a phone makes it difficult for the police to prove a phone was stolen and to return it to its owner.
In at least one case, Mr. Santos said, people suspected of stealing phones were found to be hacking the phones' unique identifying code, known as an International Mobile Station Equipment Identity, essentially erasing all digital evidence that the phone was stolen. This also makes it possible to reactivate a stolen phone, even after it has been entered into the database. Mr. Santos said he suspected that this kind of modification was widespread.
Some industry experts say consumers should have the right to modify their phones' identification features to avoid being tracked.
The right to change the identification is a "pro-privacy measure," said Seth Schoen, a senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a technology-oriented civil liberties group in San Francisco.
In the last six months, San Francisco police have broken up more than half a dozen large-scale stolen electronics operations, uncovering thousands of stolen smartphones as well as laptops in houses and storage units across the Bay Area. In one raid in November, the police found stolen electronics valued at $500,000. The people accused of stealing them told the police they sold their entire inventory every two weeks through flea markets in Oakland, Calif., and by shipping the phones overseas.
Recent cellphone theft cases in San Francisco suggest that many end up as far away as Mexico, Vietnam and China.
The international reach, huge profits and technological expertise of these black market operators suggest possible ties to larger organized crime networks, Mr. Santos said.
"It could be just a bunch of small groups, but these guys are very well organized, very tech savvy, well trained and well funded," he said. "I think it is just a matter of time before we find the mother lode, a warehouse that is just stacked to the ceiling with smartphones."
_______________________________________________________________________
Police and politicians push for more surveillance cameras after Boston bombings
By TAMI ABDOLLAH (The Associated Press) — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013; 3:42 a.m. EDT
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Police and politicians across the U.S. are pointing to the example of surveillance video that was used to help identify the Boston Marathon bombing suspects as a reason to get more electronic eyes on their streets.
From Los Angeles to Philadelphia, efforts include trying to gain police access to cameras used to monitor traffic, expanding surveillance networks in some major cities and enabling officers to get regular access to security footage at businesses.
Some in law enforcement, however, acknowledge that their plans may face an age-old obstacle: Americans' traditional reluctance to give the government more law enforcement powers out of fear that they will live in a society where there is little privacy.
"Look, we don't want an occupied state. We want to be able to walk the good balance between freedom and security," Los Angeles police Deputy Chief Michael Downing, who heads the department's counter-terrorism and special operations bureau.
"If this helps prevent, deter, but also detect and create clues to who did (a crime), I guess the question is can the American public tolerate that type of security," he said.
The proliferation of cameras - both on street corners and on millions of smartphones - have helped catch lawbreakers, but plans to expand surveillance networks could run up against the millions of dollars it can cost to install and run the networks, expert say.
Whatever Americans' attitudes or the costs, experts say, the use of cameras is likely to increase in the coming years, whether they are part of an always-on, government-run network or a disparate, disorganized web of citizens' smartphones and business security systems.
"One of the lessons coming out of Boston is it's not just going to be cameras operated by the city, but it's going to be cameras that are in businesses, cameras that citizens use," said Chuck Wexler, the executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum. "You'll see the use of cameras will skyrocket."
Part of the push among law enforcement agencies is for greater integration of surveillance systems. For decades, law enforcement has contacted businesses for video after a crime. An integrated network would make that easier, advocates say.
Since the Boston bombings, police officials have been making the case for such a network.
In Philadelphia, the police commissioner appealed last week to business owners with cameras in public spaces to register them with the department. In Chicago, the mayor wants to expand the city's already robust network of roughly 22,000 surveillance video.
And in Houston, officials want to add to their 450 cameras through more public and private partnerships. The city already has access to hundreds of additional cameras that monitor the water system, the rail system, freeways and public spaces such as Reliant Stadium, officials said.
"If they have a camera that films an area we're interested in, then why put up a separate camera?" said Dennis Storemski, director of the mayor's office of public safety and homeland security. "And we allow them to use ours too."
In Los Angeles, police have been working on building up a regional video camera system funded by about $10 million in federal grant dollars over the last several years that would allow their network to be shared with nearby cities at the flip of a switch, Downing said.
That effort is in addition to a recent request by an LA councilman who wants the city to examine allowing police access to cameras used to monitor traffic flow. If that happens, the LAPD's network of about 700 cameras would grow to more than 1,000.
"First, it's a deterrent and, second, it's evidence," Downing said, adding, "it helps us in the hunt and pursuit."
Law enforcement experts say police need these augmented systems because the bystander with a smartphone in hand is no substitute for a surveillance camera that is deliberately placed in a heavy crime area.
"The general public is not thinking about the kinds of critical factors in preventing and responding to crimes," said Brenda Bond, a professor who researches organizational effectiveness of police agencies at Suffolk University in Boston. "My being in a location is happenstance, and what's the likelihood of me capturing something on video?"
The U.S. lags behind other countries in building up surveillance. One reason is the more than 18,000 state and local law enforcement agencies that each determines its own policy. Another reason is cost: A single high-definition camera can cost about $2,500 - not including the installation, maintenance or monitoring costs.
Law enforcement budgets consist of up to 98 percent personnel costs, "so they don't necessarily have the funding for new technologies," Bond said.
There are also questions about their effectiveness. A 2011 Urban Institute study examined surveillance systems in Baltimore, Chicago and Washington, and found that crime decreased in some areas with cameras while it remained unchanged in others. The success or failure often depended on how the system was set up and monitored in each city.
While its deterrent effect remains debated, however, there's general agreement that the cameras can be useful after a crime to help identify suspects.
Cameras, for instance, allowed police in Britain to quickly identify the attackers behind the deadly 2005 suicide bombings in London. The country has more than 4.3 million surveillance cameras, primarily put in place after the IRA terror attacks.
Dozens are said to sit today around the house of George Orwell, the author of "1984," a story that foretold of a "Big Brother" society. Privacy advocates in the U.S. are concerned that the networks proposed by officials today could grow to realize Orwell's dystopic vision.
In recent years, traffic cameras used to catch scofflaw drivers running a red light or speeding have received widespread backlash across the country: An Ohio judge ordered a halt to speed camera citations, Arizona's Department of Public Safety ceased its program, and there have been efforts to ban such cameras in Iowa.
Amie Stepanovich, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center's Domestic Surveillance Project, said the most concerning was an integrated network of cameras that could allow authorities to track people's movements.
Such a network could allow be upgraded later with more "invasive" features like facial recognition, Stepanovich said, noting that the Boston surveillance footage was from a private security system at a department store that was not linked to law enforcement.
In many cases, the public may not be aware of the capabilities of the technology or what is being adopted by their local police department and its implications, said Peter Bibring, senior staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California.
Unlike private security systems monitored by businesses or citizens' smartphones, Bibring said, a government-run network is a very different entity because those watching have "the power to investigate, prosecute and jail people."
_______________________________________________________________________
U.S. Seeks Power to Wiretap Web Services, Including Google, Facebook
By Robert Lemos — Wednesday, May 1st, 2013 'eWeek.Com'
U.S. law enforcement and defense agencies are looking for ways to gain expanded access to Internet service providers' networks.
Frustrated by the inability of U.S. Internet service providers to deliver needed intelligence and court-ordered wiretap capabilities, military and law-enforcement officials are reportedly seeking to expand their surveillance powers.
A task force plans to propose legislation that would fine Internet firms who cannot provide court-mandated surveillance, according to an April 28 article in The Washington Post.
Because some service providers, such as Google and Facebook, provide end-to-end encryption, attempting to tap communications through intervening service providers has proved impossible.
In addition, the Obama administration has secretly authorized the interception of communications by Internet service providers to protect critical infrastructure, according to documents provided to the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
While the effort appears to be part of an information-sharing and attack-monitoring initiative, formerly known as the Joint Cybersecurity Services Pilot, the network monitoring would likely violate current U.S. laws regarding surveillance, experts told CNET News.com.
"The documents concern a collaboration between the Defense Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and private companies to allow government monitoring of private Internet networks," EPIC stated in a summary of the documents. "Though the program initially only applied to defense contractors, an executive order issued by the Obama administration earlier this year expanded it to include other 'critical infrastructure' industries."
The two initiatives highlight U.S. government efforts to improve its wiretapping capabilities in the face of dual-use technologies, such as encryption and anonymization services, that can help secure citizens' communications but also aid criminals and terrorists.
Law enforcement officials call the issue the "Going Dark" problem. Investigations on criminal and terrorist cases have been stymied by providers' inability to provide law enforcement officials the surveillance capabilities they want, Valerie Caproni, the FBI's general counsel told the House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security in February 2011.
"We confront, with increasing frequency, service providers who do not fully comply with court orders in a timely and efficient manner," she said in prepared remarks. "Some providers cannot comply with court orders right away, but are able to do so after considerable effort and expense by the provider and the government. Other providers are never able to comply with the orders fully."
Legislation proposed by the task force would compel Internet service providers to build the technological capability to comply with wiretap orders or face significant fines. Smaller providers—such as online games that provide communications capabilities—would be exempt from fines but would also be legally required to comply.
The Pentagon's attack-monitoring service, now known as the Enhanced Cybersecurity Services, could also gain exemption from wiretap laws, if the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) is passed by Congress. President Obama, however, has threatened to veto the legislation, which so far, has been held up by the U.S. Senate.
_______________________________________________________________________
Police $$ Lawyer Lotto $$ Jackpots
6 Police Misconduct Settlements Worth Millions
By ALBERT SABATÉ — Wednesday, May 1st, 2013 'ABC News'
When police abuse their authority everyone loses. Victims may get hurt or even lose their life, police damage their credibility and taxpayers end up shouldering huge payouts to victims and their families.
Last week, the Los Angeles Police Department settled a lawsuit brought against it by two women officers mistakenly shot at during the Dorner manhunt in February. The settlement will cost the city $4.2 million and attorneys called it "a bargain."
Here's a list of recent settlements paid out to victims of police misconduct.
Parents of Dancer Shot and Killed by Police After Jumping Ship Settle for $2.5 Million
Paul Hirschfield, 37, was one of the dancers on a boat chartered for a gay pride party in San Diego on July 19, 2010. At about 11 p.m., he jumped into the San Diego Bay and was shot and killed by Harbor Police during an altercation as they were trying to get him out of the water. Police said he fought with an officer and tried to grab his gun. Hirshfield's parents filed a wrongful death lawsuit, pointing out that he was unarmed and shot in the back. The victims parents .
Women Shot at During Dorner Manhunt Settle for $4.2 Million
Two women mistakenly shot at by Los Angeles police during the earlier this year reached a $4.2 million settlement. Emma Hernandez, 71, and her daughter Margie Carranza, 47, where delivering newspapers when police officers fired about 100 bullets at their pickup truck on February 7, 2013. Dorner reportedly drove a pickup truck, but the women's vehicle did not match the make, model or color of Dorner's. Los Angeles city attorney Carmen Trutanich said the agreement was a "no brainer because costs were going to skyrocket." "We got out of this thing pretty cheaply all things considered," he said according to the Los Angeles Times.
$3.5 Million Settlement After Police Kill man Inside Connecticut House
Heavily armed police charged into a home in Easton, Conn. with guns drawn and flash grenades exploding when they shot and killed Gonzalo Guizan, who was "quietly watching porn" on TV at the time. According to reports, the raid took place because police were under pressure to "do something" about Ronald Terebesi, the home owner. Terebesi would entertain exotic dancers in his home and was "considered a blot on an otherwise pristine neighborhood." He was also reportedly using drugs and his house had been shot at by the boyfriend of one of the dancers. The Guizan family settled their lawsuit $3.5 million in February 2013.
Homeless Man's Mother Settles for $1 Million
On July 5, 2011, Kelly Thomas, a 37-year-old homeless man with schizophrenia, was stopped by two officers for allegedly trying to break into cars at a bus depot in Fullerton, Calif. The officers beat him and used a Taser several times, eventually leaving him unconscious. Thomas was treated by paramedics and was taken to the hospital, but died five days later after being taken off life support. The City of Fullerton gave a to Cathy Thomas, the victim's mother.
Family of Deceased Beer-Drinking Celtics Fan Settles for $3 Million
David Woodman died after sustaining injuries during an arrest while celebrating the Boston Celtics 2008 NBA championships. His family settled a lawsuit with the city of Boston for $3 million. Police apprehended Woodman who was drinking beer near the Fenway area with a group of fans. Woodman collapsed, according to reports, and was taken to a hospital where he died 11 days later. An investigator's report concluded he died of a pre-existing heart condition. However, his family said they believed police lied about what happened during their son's arrest. Woodman had more than a dozen abrasions, bruises, cuts or lacerations that were not mentioned in the investigator's report.
Chicago's Surpasses $27 Million Set Aside for Settlements in Less Than a Month
The city of Chicago has already surpassed the $27 Million it set aside for settlements in 2013. The city reached settlements in two cases of police misconduct in January reaching $33 million. The first case settled for just over $10 million was for a man who had been wrongfully convicted for murder. A second $22.5 million settlement was reached for a woman with a bipolar disorder who was attacked, raped and injured when she fell from a 7th floor window after police released her in one of the city's most dangerous neighborhoods. In March, Boston officials agreed to settle three lawsuits totaling $7 million. The largest of the three was for $4.5 million for the wrongful death of Rekia Boyd, who was shot by an off-duty cop. Boyd was walking on the street, when the policeman shot his weapon blindly over his shoulder at a group of men.
_______________________________________________________________________
Homeland Security
Officials to review handling of Boston bombing intelligence
By Josh Hicks — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The Washington Post' / Washington, DC
Lawmakers and government officials this week announced plans to scrutinize the handling of intelligence before and after the Boston Marathon bombings last month.
Four inspectors general announced on Tuesday that they would launch a joint investigation into the matter, and the House Homeland Security Committee said it would hold a hearing on May 9 to examine the issue.
Inspectors general for the intelligence community, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security will take part in the review.
As for the House hearing, the committee plans to look at how law enforcement dealt with the crime scene after the bombings and how officials from all levels of government communicated with each other before and after the attack.
"As our nation recovers, it is imperative that we understand what happened, what signs may have been missed and what we can improve," Homeland Security Committee chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) said in a statement.
Witnesses for the hearing include Boston Police Commissioner Edward Davis, Sen. Joseph Lieberman and Homeland Security Undersecretary Kurt Schwartz.
_______________________________________________________________________
As FBI expands Boston investigation, Obama defends law enforcement efforts
By Sari Horwitz and Greg Miller — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The Washington Post' / Washington, DC
President Obama on Tuesday defended U.S. law enforcement's efforts in scrutinizing the Boston Marathon bombing suspects as federal officials said the FBI has broadened its investigation into possible links between one of the suspects and foreign militants.
In his first news conference since the Boston attack, Obama said law enforcement agencies had performed in "exemplary fashion" in the hunt for the bombers and in investigating one of the suspects before the bombings. He accused critics of chasing headlines.
"Based on what I've seen so far, the FBI performed its duties," Obama said. "Department of Homeland Security did what it was supposed to be doing. But this is hard stuff."
Obama's remarks came as the FBI expanded its investigation of the people who had contact with the two brothers suspected of carrying out the April 15 bombings. Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, was killed in a shootout with police four days after the bombings. His brother, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, was captured later the same day and faces federal charges that could lead to the death penalty.
Federal investigators are trying to trace the handgun, a 9mm Ruger, that the elder Tsarnaev used in the shootout. Two law enforcement officials said that an attempt was made to erase the serial number on the gun and that experts have been unable to restore all eight digits.
Law enforcement officials said several "persons of interest" in the United States and Russia are being investigated in connection with the brothers. One of the primary focuses is the seven months that Tamerlan Tsarnaev spent in Russia in 2012.
During that trip, Tsarnaev may have had contact with two suspected Russian militants in the country's restive North Caucasus region, according to the law enforcement officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.
The FBI and other agencies began scrutinizing the elder Tsarnaev in 2011 after the Russian security service warned the bureau and the CIA of concerns that he was becoming increasingly radicalized and might travel to Russia to carry out an attack. He was questioned by FBI agents in Boston, but the inquiry concluded that he posed no threat. In January 2012, he traveled to parts of Russia where there are active Islamic insurgencies. He returned to the Boston area in July.
In the aftermath of the bombings, the FBI and Russian authorities are trying to reconstruct Tsarnaev's activities in Russia. He spent most of his time with family members in Makhachkala, the capital of Dagestan, a Russian province where there is an active Islamist insurgency. Family members said he was not involved in any unusual activities.
But U.S. officials said the FBI is investigating information that Tsarnaev met with Mahmoud Mansour Nidal, who was suspected of recruiting for Islamist militants in Dagestan who are fighting the Russians. Nidal died in a gun battle with authorities last May in Makhachkala.
According to the officials, another line of inquiry is possible links between Tsarnaev and William Plotnikov, a Russian Canadian suspected of involvement with militants in the North Caucasus. Plotnikov was killed by Russian police in July and Tsarnaev returned to the United States a few days later, leaving behind a new Russian passport.
Authorities now believe Tamerlan Tsarnaev began his preparations for the bombings after his return to the Boston area last year, a period in which he assembled an extensive playlist of jihadist videos online.
Critics have questioned why the initial FBI inquiry on Tsarnaev was not reopened after his trip to Russia. His return to the United States was registered on a low-level watch list, but no action was taken.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence said Tuesday that its inspector general has launched an inquiry into U.S. counterterrorism agencies' handling of the shards of information they had collected on the brothers in the 18 months leading up to the attacks. The probe will focus on whether information was shared among agencies, including the FBI, the CIA and the National Counterterrorism Center.
Acknowledging the inquiry at his news conference, Obama said: "We want to go back and we want to review every step that was taken. . . . We want to see, is there in fact additional protocols and procedures that could be put in place that would further improve and enhance our ability to detect a potential attack?"
A spokesman for Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. said that, while Clapper has instructed U.S. spy agencies to cooperate with the inspector general probe, he does not believe any mistakes were made.
"Director Clapper believes that every agency involved in collecting and sharing information prior to the attack took all the appropriate steps," said the spokesman, Shawn Turner. "He also believes that it is prudent and appropriate for there to be an independent review of those steps to ensure that nothing was missed."
Meanwhile, an association of prosthetic companies pledged Tuesday to ensure that people who required amputations as a result of the Boston Marathon bombing would be provided artificial limbs, even if they have no health insurance or inadequate health insurance.
At a news conference, officials from the American Orthotic and Prosthetic Association estimated that 20 to 25 people injured in the bombings will need new limbs and that about half would not have sufficient insurance to cover the prostheses and the care and training needed to use them. They said a variety of companies in the field will donate their services to ensure that victims are able to walk and run again.
_______________________________________________________________________
Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Post' Editorial:
Woulda. Coulda. Shoulda.
Starting with 9/11, Washington has been quick to holler "no one's connecting the dots!" whenever there's been an attack. But when it comes to ensuring those dots are collected, it's another story.
Now we have the bombings in Boston, and we are seeing the same dynamic. Of all the questions, surely the most salient are these: What could the FBI have learned, when could it have learned it — and would it have made a difference?
Many Americans seem to have the impression that our federal agents are Jack Bauers who do as they please as they pursue the bad guys. But the FBI follows the law, as interpreted by the attorney general and distilled into the Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide.
For example, to get a wiretap for Tamerlan Tsarnaev, a technique that falls under the "very intrusive" category, the FBI would have had to go to a judge with evidence it does not appear to have had.
As a green-card holder, Tsarnaev enjoyed the constitutional protections of a US citizen. And one reason his case expired is that there's a time limit if investigators don't turn up any evidence.
Let's recall too that the FBI guidelines have been under fierce attack from the American Civil Liberties Union and Muslim groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (echoing the attacks on the NYPD for its intelligence collection in Muslim communities).
Before this, we had a Bush administration besieged for every initiative aimed at collecting those dots — whether it was the terrorist surveillance program, the interrogation of al Qaeda operatives or finding out whether, say, people connected to a terror investigation were checking out books on bomb-making.
In an ideal world, our politicians would find out what prevented us from uncovering the Tsarnaevs' plans and fix it.
But we don't have an ideal world.
We have Washington, where the likely answer to the Boston bombings will be even more rules governing, more bureaucracies involved in and more lawyers overseeing our intelligence investigations.
We don't blame Boston on President Obama. But when we hear him talking — as he did this week — about "additional protocols and procedures," we'd like to hear someone ask a question posed by Carrie Cordero, a former Justice official who now serves as Georgetown Law's director of national-security studies:
Was our failure to connect the dots in Boston due to the lack of protocols, procedures, agencies and lawyers — or the overabundance of them?
_______________________________________________________________________
Analyze "Pre-Attack Behavior" To Stop Domestic Terrorism
The killers among us
By: Roger Simon — Wednesday, May 1st, 2013 'Politico'
They blend in. They don't make threats. They carefully plan their attacks rather than "snap." They may be quite sane.
Their friends, acquaintances and relatives sometimes know they are planning to plant bombs or shoot their victims but say nothing to authorities in advance.
This is what I have learned about domestic terrorists and assassins by interviewing psychologists who currently work for and have worked for federal law enforcement agencies. Some of these psychologists have spent decades developing methods to identify potential attackers.
"We think it is more useful to pay attention to a person's ability to plan and execute actions than to focus on the question of whether the subject is mentally ill or not," said Robert A. Fein, a forensic and national security psychologist who spent more than 25 years working with the Secret Service.
The alleged Boston Marathon bombers demonstrated the ability to plan and execute an attack. They carefully planned how to make and trigger their bombs. We still have many questions about them, but one big one is whether others knew they were planning an attack but kept silent.
This is what psychologists call the "bystander effect."
"The bystander might be a family member, a peer, a colleague, supervisor or subordinate at work," said Fein. "In our study of school shootings, in about 80 percent of the attacks other kids knew something bad was going to happen [but the] kids who knew rarely told adults."
Fein does not believe in profiling but rather in studying patterns of behavior. When seeking out a domestic terrorist, he says, "if he is interested in extreme ideas, it doesn't say a whole lot because there are many people who hold or consider extreme ideas and never attack others."
Fein and his colleagues have developed a theory of "threat assessment" through which law enforcement officials can ascertain "pre-attack behavior."
"We encourage protectors and investigators to distinguish between persons who make threats and persons who pose threats," Fein said. "Of great concern are persons who pose threats who never make a threat."
No person who has ever attacked a president, Fein said, "ever communicated a direct threat to the president, the Secret Service, or to law enforcement." The alleged Boston Marathon bombers never made a threat as far as we currently know.
"We found a number of people who wanted to do bad things but didn't want to see themselves as criminals," a psychologist who works with federal law enforcement agencies told me. "They are murderers in search of a cause. They tell themselves, 'I want to change the world.' Some we give the romantic term 'terrorist.' They are people who want to do something bad, so they say it was for Al Qaeda or a jihad."
Today, the antiterrorism mantra for the public is: "If you see something, say something." But that, Fein points out, is advice usually meant for strangers, for people who don't know the potential killers. But what about those who do?
"What encourages people to come forward, and what blocks them?" Fein asked. "I am talking about co-workers or family members. How might people who have concerns be encouraged to come forward?"
I will be writing more about domestic terrorism and threat assessment in the days ahead. But the question of "ratting" on someone is a big, human and therefore messy problem.
A threat assessment expert who has worked with high government agencies put it this way: "As parents, we are in denial all the time about our kids' impulses. Who wants to think your kid is a murderer? Parents are paralyzed with either worry and fear, or they are in denial."
But law enforcement officers trained in threat assessment have developed methods to glean the truth. One psychologist told me: "In the old days if [Secret Service] agents were concerned about Johnny Smith, they would go to his grandma and ask, 'Is Johnny capable of killing the president?' But what grandma is willing to say yes?
"Instead, you ask grandma, 'Has Johnny done anything that concerns you?' And she says, 'Yes, he is disappearing on trips and won't tell me about it.'"
Another psychologist who has worked with law enforcement said: "I am working under the assumption that there were people who knew [in advance about the Boston bombings]. But would they come forward if they knew [the brothers] would be locked up for a long time?
"If I am a parent, I may try to intervene with my son, take his computer away or something. But would I call authorities if he might end up in federal prison for 30 years? That is a tough, tough question."
_______________________________________________________________________
Michael B. Mukasey: Defining 'Rights' in a Terror Case
The new arrests in Boston look like criminal cases. But why was the interrogation of the accused bomber handled like a criminal matter too?
By MICHAEL B. MUKASEY — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The Wall Street Journal' / New York, NY
(Op-Ed / Commentary)
The three suspects arrested Wednesday in the Boston Marathon bombing case appear to be considered accomplices after the fact. It is likely that they will be treated as common criminals rather than terrorists. Unfortunately, law-enforcement has approached the accused bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev that way as well.
A miasma of conflicting views about Mr. Tsarnaev's legal status has engulfed the case. The rules and principles that should govern the relevant facts are pretty straightforward, but they alone do not explain the actual outcome thus far, which seems rooted instead in the Obama administration's gauzy notions about what is required of law informed by morality.
At the time of Mr. Tsarnaev's April 19 apprehension, no warrant had been issued for his arrest. The case law on warrantless arrests requires the initiation of the court process within 48 hours, with exceptions arguably not relevant here. The reason for the 48-hour requirement, as explained by the Supreme Court in County of Riverside v. McLaughlin (1991), is to prevent secret arrests unsupported by probable cause, as determined by what the law calls a neutral magistrate. Of course, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's arrest was not secret, and the facts surrounding it far surpassed the modest probable-cause standard. All that was missing was the finding by a neutral magistrate.
That gap was filled, when a criminal complaint was filed by federal prosecutors based on an affidavit that established probable cause, and the magistrate judge issued an arrest warrant. Using that warrant, the authorities—if they wished to indulge an exacting taste for formality—could have rearrested Mr. Tsarnaev. No more was required.
At that point his interrogation had already begun, but it was being conducted by the FBI-led High Value Interrogation Group, solely—or so it should have been—for the purpose of gathering intelligence. Recall that the HIG, as the interrogation group is known, was created to fill the void left after President Obama, on his second day in office, abolished the CIA's then-classified interrogation program.
The president limited future use of interrogation techniques to those set forth in the Army Field Manual, a document long available on the Internet and actually used by terrorist groups to train their recruits to resist questioning. Mr. Obama also promised to create a team of specially trained law-enforcement officers and intelligence officials to question captured terrorists. That team had not yet been created when, almost a year later, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab tried to blow up himself and his fellow passengers aboard an airplane over Detroit on Christmas Day 2009. The opportunity to question him extensively was lost when he stopped talking to the FBI after being advised of his Miranda right to silence.
Didn't Dzhokhar Tsarnaev have the same right as Abdulmutallab, and weren't officials legally required to inform him of it? Well, not quite. The right in question is not, strictly speaking, a right to remain silent. Rather, it is derived from the Fifth Amendment, which guarantees that a defendant in a criminal case may not be compelled to be a witness against himself. But if an interrogation is being conducted to gather information, not to build a criminal case, then no right to remain silent exists. Law enforcement already has a surfeit of evidence—including photographs and videos of him at the scene of the bombing. The HIG interrogators weren't trying to help prosecutors construct their case.
Of course, Mr. Tsarnaev could have chosen not to talk to intelligence interrogators, or chosen to lie to them. But that is what he would have been exercising: a choice, not a right.
Wasn't there a requirement that Mr. Tsarnaev be brought without delay before a judge? Again, not quite. The rule in question requires that defendants be taken to court without unnecessary delay—but the rule has been interpreted in one case from the judicial circuit that includes Massachusetts to permit even a hiatus of almost four months between arrest and court appearance when a defendant was in state custody during that period. The circuit court found that so long as the delay wasn't used to obtain a confession, it was not unreasonable.
And what of the right to counsel? Didn't Mr. Tsarnaev have the right to a lawyer, and to have that lawyer present during any questioning? Once more, not quite. Another amendment, the Sixth, guarantees the right to counsel in a criminal case, but it guarantees no more.
If Mr. Tsarnaev was being questioned by the HIG solely to gather intelligence, and no admission of his or lead from information he disclosed was to be used in his criminal case, then he was no more entitled to a lawyer in connection with such questioning unrelated to his criminal case than he was entitled to a lawyer to close a real-estate transaction. The HIG could have easily ensured that none of the fruits of its questioning could be used in the criminal case.
Ideally, such intelligence questioning would have continued for a long period, probably months, so that interrogators could try to substantiate the information they obtained, then double back and ask more questions based on what they found. Intelligence-gathering is an incremental process, at best.
Would the HIG have run any risks by continuing to question Mr. Tsarnaev outside the presence of a lawyer? Not really. Defense counsel could have filed a habeas corpus petition on his behalf challenging the circumstances of the detention and his continued questioning for intelligence purposes. If the ruling on such a petition, for some reason I cannot now fathom, went against the government, and that ruling were sustained for months all the way through a Supreme Court review, then—and only then—the HIG questioning would have had to stop. No right of Mr. Tsarnaev's would have been compromised in the interim because, again, none of the fruits of the HIG questioning would be used in the criminal case.
Could all of this legal mumbo-jumbo have been avoided by labeling Mr. Tsarnaev an unlawful enemy combatant? No. As an American citizen, by law he could not be tried before a military commission, and labeling him an unlawful enemy combatant would have had no legal significance when it came to interrogating him.
There is one question about the Tsarnaev legal matter for which no answer readily appears: Why did the Justice Department order U.S. Marshals to bring a magistrate judge to Mr. Tsarnaev's hospital room on April 22 to advise him of a right he did not have if he was being questioned for intelligence purposes, and to introduce him to a lawyer with no authority to advise him in connection with such questioning?
Why indeed. Regrettably, it appears that here we must fall back to the Obama administration's frequently articulated concern, always presented in overarching moral terms, that America must prove to a constantly doubting world that the U.S. can follow the law even—especially—when it confers rights on unlovely folk like Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and even if those rights don't quite exist. Here, maybe it is time that our hectoring schoolmasters and schoolmarms consider a lesson taught by the philosopher Blaise Pascal: The first rule of morality is to think clearly.
Mr. Mukasey served as U.S. attorney general (2007-09) and as a U.S. district judge for the Southern District of New York (1988-2006).
_______________________________________________________________________
Three Are Accused of Impeding Boston Bombing Inquiry
By MICHAEL WINES and KATHARINE Q. SEELYE — Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 'The New York Times'
They were perhaps Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's closest friends during his two years at college, an American classmate from high school and two Russian-speaking students from Kazakhstan. The Kazakhs seemingly had money and drove expensive cars. They entertained Mr. Tsarnaev at their off-campus apartment, and he partied with them in New York. One of them lent Mr. Tsarnaev a black BMW after he smashed his Honda Civic in an accident.
And in the wake of the twin bombs that exploded last month at the finish line of the Boston Marathon, federal prosecutors now say, the three showed just how close their friendship was: two of them decided to put a backpack and fireworks linking Mr. Tsarnaev to the blasts into a black trash bag, and toss it into a Dumpster. Prosecutors say the third later lied to investigators when asked about it.
The two Kazakhs, Dias Kadyrbayev and Azamat Tazhayakov, were charged on Wednesday with destroying evidence to obstruct the federal inquiry into the marathon bombings. Their American friend, Robel K. Phillipos, was charged with lying to impede the investigation.
The story behind their arrest, detailed in lengthy affidavits, paints a vivid portrait of Mr. Tsarnaev in the days after the bombing, and portrays a dorm-room scene of confusion as the three young men, stunned to realize that their friend was being sought as a terrorist, debated whether and how to help him.
And it chillingly lays bare the skill with which Mr. Tsarnaev appears to have concealed plans for the bombing from even his most intimate associates. Three days after the blasts, as photographs of the then-unidentified suspects blanketed television and the Internet, Mr. Kadyrbayev sent Mr. Tsarnaev a text message: one photograph, he wrote, bore a marked resemblance to him.
"lol," Mr. Tsarnaev coolly replied. "you better not text me."
He added: "come to my room and take whatever you want."
Later that evening, he told interrogators, he came to see that request as a thinly veiled plea to cover up his crime.
Should the three men be found guilty, they would face potentially stiff penalties: up to five years in prison for the two Kazakhs, eight years for Mr. Phillipos and up to $250,000 fines for each of the three. Mr. Kadyrbayev, 19, and Mr. Tazhayakov, 20, have been held in jail since last week, ostensibly on suspicion of violating their student visas by not attending class at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth, where they had studied with Mr. Tsarnaev.
All four men entered classes there in the fall of 2011, but Mr. Phillipos dropped out and returned to Cambridge, where he and Mr. Tsarnaev had attended Cambridge Rindge and Latin High School together. A university spokesman said that Mr. Kadyrbayev was not currently enrolled, and that Mr. Tazhayakov remained a student but had been suspended until the charges against him were resolved.
In one respect, the two Kazakh students seem an odd match for Mr. Tsarnaev and Mr. Phillipos. Sent from oil-rich Kazakhstan to study in the United States, Mr. Tazhayakov and Mr. Kadyrbayev appear to have come from wealthy families. Mr. Kadyrbayev's Facebook page features photographs of him on beaches in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and Dubai. Mr. Tazhayakov's page indicates he comes from Atyrau, a petroleum center at the mouth of the Ural River. By contrast, the Cambridge homes of Mr. Tsarnaev and Mr. Phillipos are hard-worn apartment houses in working-class neighborhoods.
But the four quickly became close after starting classes, the affidavit and interviews with friends suggest, in part because Mr. Tsarnaev and the two Kazakh students all spoke fluent Russian. Mr. Tazhayakov struck up a friendship with Mr. Tsarnaev first, and appeared the closest to him, said Jason Rowe, a sophomore who was Mr. Tsarnaev's freshman dorm roommate.
A Cambridge friend of Mr. Tsarnaev's said their friendship began to ebb after Mr. Tsarnaev met the two Kazakhs. Photographs posted online suggest a deepening relationship with the foreign students; in one undated shot, Mr. Tsarnaev drapes an arm over a broadly smiling Mr. Kadyrbayev as the two sit at a kitchen table, plates of food laid out before them.
Despite dropping out of school and returning to Cambridge, Mr. Phillipos also appears to have become fast friends with the Kazakh students, visiting them frequently in the apartment they shared in New Bedford, about three miles from the Dartmouth campus.
And Mr. Kadyrbayev and Mr. Tazhayakov apparently traveled often to Cambridge, Mr. Kadyrbayev to meet "repeatedly" with the Tsarnaev family, the criminal complaint against him states.
By last year, Mr. Tsarnaev and the two Kazakhs appear to have become constant companions. A 2012 photograph, possibly from last November, shows the three posing in Times Square, bundled against the cold, the Kazakh students grinning broadly. "New York is so ratchet on black Friday it's ridiculous," Mr. Tsarnaev wrote on Twitter that month. "I'm on to bed son."
That world would rapidly begin to come apart a few months later.
An affidavit by Special Agent Scott P. Cieplik of the F. B.I. released Wednesday did not detail the men's reactions to the bombings — one of their lawyers said they had been "shocked and horrified" — but it makes clear that for days afterward, they had no inkling that Mr. Tsarnaev might have been involved.
On Wednesday, two days after the explosions, Mr. Kadyrbayev drove to Mr. Tsarnaev's dormitory and, standing outside, chatted while Mr. Tsarnaev smoked a cigarette, the affidavit quotes Mr. Kadyrbayev as saying. Later, Mr. Tsarnaev drove to the New Bedford apartment and stayed until about midnight.
Only one detail seemed amiss. Mr. Tsarnaev, whose long and unmanageable hair had been an object of wry posts on his Twitter account, had suddenly cut his mop short.
The next day, Mr. Tazhayakov told the F.B.I., Mr. Tsarnaev drove him home from a university class, dropping him off about 4 p.m. An hour or more later, Mr. Kadyrbayev called Mr. Phillipos as he was driving to the apartment from Boston with an urgent message: turn on the television news when you get home.
Investigators had released grainy photographs of two bombing suspects, lifted from video surveillance cameras. One of the suspects, Mr. Phillipos said, looked familiar.
The sequence of events that followed, patched together from separate F.B.I. interviews with Mr. Phillipos and the two Kazakhs, is not precisely clear. Sometime before 7 p.m., the three men drove to Mr. Tsarnaev's Pine Dale Hall dormitory room. His roommate said Mr. Tsarnaev had left a couple of hours earlier.
As the visitors watched a movie, the affidavit states, they noticed a backpack stuffed with fireworks that had been emptied of their powder. Mr. Kadyrbayev "knew when he saw the empty fireworks that Tsarnaev was involved in the bombing," the affidavit states.
He resolved to protect him.
At 8:43 p.m., Mr. Kadyrbayev sent the text message to Mr. Tsarnaev noting his resemblance to the photographs, and read the nonchalant reply. Mr. Tazhayakov told the F.B.I. that when Mr. Kadyrbayev showed him Mr. Tsarnaev's request to "take whatever you want," he concluded that he would never see his friend again alive.
Later that evening, Mr. Phillipos and Mr. Tazhayakov said, the three went back to Mr. Tsarnaev's dorm room. When they returned to their apartment, they were carrying the backpack, fireworks, a jar of Vaseline and Mr. Tsarnaev's laptop, all of which are now in the custody of federal agents.
Mr. Phillipos initially told the F.B.I. he did not recall going to Mr. Tsarnaev's dorm room that night, then said later that they had gone there, but left without entering, the authorities said. Only six days later would he recant: actually, Mr. Kadyrbayev texted him at 9 p.m. to "go to Jahar's room," where the three men took the laptop and evidence.
Back home, Mr. Phillipos said, the three "started to freak out, because it became clear from a CNN report that we were watching that Jahar was one of the Boston Marathon bombers." Mr. Kadyrbayev asked him "if he should get rid of the stuff."
"Do what you have to do," he said he told him.
Shortly thereafter, the bag and the fireworks were tossed into the apartment complex Dumpster.
The next afternoon, as Mr. Tazhayakov watched, a garbage truck emptied it and drove away.
Reporting was contributed by Ian Lovett and Jess Bidgood from Boston; Michael S. Schmidt from Washington; William K. Rashbaum and Serge F. Kovaleski from New York; and Kitty Bennett from St. Petersburg, Fla.
_______________________________________________________________________
Mike Bosak
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment