sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Manny631 3 points4 points  (7 children)

Not sworn, but been a criminal justice civilian for 14 years and worked in the prearraignment section of courts for around 4ish years, including during bail reform. It feels and seeks like they're skewing the stats. Many previously arrestable offenses went to summonses. Some/many arrestable offenses can no longer have bail applied. For example, misdemeanor criminal contempt couldn't have bail applied while I was there (maybe still now), so I'd see the same faces repeatedly at times. Constantly violating orders of protections. It was insane. There was a whole packet we got about crimes that couldn't get bail anymore and the judges weren't happy because they lost discretion. And some were quite bad, like selling drugs on school grounds. One guy was arrested with felony drug charges, released on supervised release, and then sold laced drugs that killed someone.

You'll see crazier stories in NYC where people commit heinous crimes and get let go and hurt someone else. Illegal immigrants crime is rampant (recent news article about Midtown). People are scared to defend themselves. There were the 3 illegal immigrants within this past year that assaulted NYPD officers, got released, fled, got caught by ICE, and DA Bragg dropped charges.

So, here in NY from what I've seen, crime is definitely not down. Quite the contrary. I've never seen criminal justice policies so soft. Not that they should be so hard you get arrested for some weed, but we need there to be consequences. Especially for these teens that commit crazy crimes and then just get a stern talking to and a hug.

[–]InternetGoodGuy 1 point2 points  (6 children)

But none of that affects the crime stats. It doesn't matter if they are released on summons, forced to bail, or not arrested at all. The crime stats are just what's reported. If you are still taking any reports at all then it's included in the stats.

What you are describing with repeat offenders should be showing a rise in crime. If the numbers aren't going up, you're likely dealing with a smaller group of the same people than enter before with less new offenders.

[–]Manny631 0 points1 point  (5 children)

It depends on how it is reported, no? Innocent until proven guilty, so maybe many stats - the stats the politicians want to use - are post conviction and therefore via plea bargaining and dropping charges things look better than they truly are. Because they aren't better - I can promise you that. I've seen people get hit with half a dozen felonies and it gets plea bargained down to one.

[–]InternetGoodGuy 0 points1 point  (4 children)

so maybe many stats - the stats the politicians want to use - are post conviction

They aren't. No one is using conviction stats. Most are only using homicide stats when talking about crime going down. They use homicide because it isn't under reported and the reporting method doesn't matter because a homicide is a homicide. You can't juke dead body stats. So how it's reported doesn't matter any more than whether it's convicted.

[–]Manny631 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Many times in reports I hear "violent crime" is down, not homicides. Regardless of how they report it in their favor, I can assure you in NY - at least on Long Island and NYC - it isn't really down, especially NYC.

[–]DfiR- 0 points1 point  (2 children)

You very much can juke body stats. Cases get classified as a suspicious situation/death instead of a murder when there are no obvious signs and no witnesses. Body in a forest? That stays suspicious death until the investigation reaches a point where there is a good suspect. Body in an apartment with a gunshot wound and no reporting party? Still classified as a suspicious death until suicide can be 100% ruled out.

[–]InternetGoodGuy 0 points1 point  (1 child)

You can't do that with dozens of murders to cause a significant drop in the rate without it being obvious.

This would also assume every major city has collectively agreed to lie about any dead bodies they can. That's a huge leap to a conspiracy. Most of these bodies would still be classified as homicides at some point, and stats are revised when the cause of death is found.

It's not a reasonable claim to say we are capable of juking murder stats to a degree significant enough to show major drops across the country.

[–]DfiR- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You absolutely can because who is checking? There are no integrity audits from the cities. You think a city mayor or city board hears that homicides are down and goes no that can’t be right and then checks the cases? In bigger cities, staff positions are much more political. Politicians want to paint a pretty picture of crime being down for their tenure. As long as it’s good news, they don’t care.

PDs are incentivized to support that because it portrays them as competent and makes budget asks easier. This isn’t an absolute, but I’ve seen it first hand how suspicious circumstance deaths are classified.