7 ms·

Expert in stolen goods here. I was talking to a NYC colleague the other day about how there are trends in favor of not punishing people for certain criminal ac

Expert in stolen goods here. I was talking to a NYC colleague the other day about how there are trends in favor of not punishing people for certain criminal activity in the city. We were talking about driving with a suspended license, but I asked about shoplifting. She said, "Oh, no. That's on the opposite trend. Not only are they prosecuting it to the maximum, but they just changed the law to make it easier to hold people on bail for shoplifting." She made it clear that shoplifting was never a low priority for prosecution, but now it's a higher one. I understand that the claim in this article is that aggregators/sellers/fences whatever should be surveilled and prosecuted (more), but just wanted to add this tale from the courthouse and emphasize that the street-level shoplifter will be the target of most policy interventions here, which is the least effective and least humane strategy.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Thorrez 4y ago
Ideally they would get the street-level shoplifter to inform on the shoplifter's boss in order to get a low sentence or immunity, so that the real kingpin can be caught.
rullelito 4y ago
Expert in making stuff up perhaps.
- public_defender 4y ago
  In polite company we say "lawyer."
Oxidation 4y ago
The other thing that's interesting from their state graph is that it disagrees with the "people fleeing anarchist California to orderly Texas to escape rampant crime" meme. Not only does Texas have higher rates of larceny theft[1], it is the biggest outlier on the graph in terms of lack of prosecution for it - no other state is further below the trend line. [1]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/232583/larceny-theft-rate-in-the-us-by-state/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/232583/larceny-theft-rat...
- nlitened 4y ago
  Also should be taken into account, it's about _reported_ larceny theft. Allegedly, they say that in "anarchist California" people don't even bother reporting anymore.
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  It probably doesn't help that our Attorney General has been under indictment for securities fraud for years now.
steve76 4y ago
[dead]
jfengel 4y ago
What is more effective and humane? Is it about removing the poverty that drives that kind of theft, or were you thinking of something more direct?
- mlyle 4y ago
  This is about organized retail bulk theft. Punishing the individual shoplifters is useful. But it's also useful to crack down on secondary markets through which (mostly) stolen goods are shifted.
  - prvit 4y ago
    How? Should we ban Amazon and Ebay?
    - mlyle 4y ago
      Ban Amazon and eBay? No. We haven't banned pawn shops, either. But we do understand that they are a conduit for theft and can induce other crime, and so we tend to impose a certain amount of regulation upon them to reduce the scope of the harm. What exact form that would take is up for discussion. And, of course, there's other secondary markets-- sketchy people with tables illegally selling gray market consumer goods.
      - prvit 4y ago
        mlyle 4y ago
        > So you want that the government do something, but don’t know what? Actually, I pretty well know what, and I'll explain despite your bad faith. * We have a century-old toolkit of ways to deal with legitimate businesses that often end up as fences. Mostly record-keeping requirements and a degree of secondary liability to encourage vetting of where they buy merchandise from. You see this toolkit applied to pawn shops, scrap metal dealers, etc... * We also have pretty good ways, in major municipalities, of shutting down sellers of goods who open impromptu businesses on street corners with dubious goods. Increased amount of retail theft may be a signal to redouble these efforts. * And, of course, enforcement against the actual frontline shoplifters is important, too. Of course, all of these things are tradeoffs that impede some legitimate businesses to some extent to protect other businesses from illegal activity. The exact amount and form is open to discussion.
someguydave 4y ago
It seems you are a fan of closing down urban retail
LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
> the street-level shoplifter will be the target of most policy interventions here, which is the least effective and least humane strategy. Getting a low-level criminal or junkie off the street, alive, is worth a lot. You can then offer them a chance to turn their sentence into rehab or something if they don't need jail. And there's no reason we can't go for the higher ups too, there's (jail)time for everyone!
- public_defender 4y ago
  > Getting a low-level criminal or junkie off the street, alive, is worth a lot. Off the street and on to Riker's Island. A jail so dangerous that it has a high likelihood of being put into federal receivership in the next year. People are safer on the street. Full stop.
  - oerpli 4y ago
    But the streets are safer with some of those people in Riker.
    - jahnu 4y ago
      Short term. What happens long term? What are the aggregate consequences of such policies to society? I don't know the answers to these questions, I would want an expert to weigh in.
      - raverbashing 4y ago
        > What are the aggregate consequences of such policies to society? Might ask yourself the same question about shoplifting gangs being let loose And if Riker's is a problem, then deal with that specific problem. Not prosecuting people seems to be one level removed from it. (yes, they are connected, but for example, not sending pre-trial people there could be a start)
      - concordDance 4y ago
        Probably mostly positive actually. Removing people who either have poor self control or little ability to find productive work means they don't teach those habits to their children and those around them. This does not mean the answer is executions though, as people's lives and happiness have value even if they're scumbags.
bhk 4y ago
This is clearly not true. > Manhattan D.A. Acts on Vow to Seek Incarceration Only for Worst Crimes > The district attorney, Alvin Bragg, told prosecutors in his office in a memo that they should ask judges for jail or prison time only for the most serious offenses — including murder, sexual assault and economic crimes involving vast sums of money — unless the law requires them to do otherwise. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/06/nyregion/alvin-bragg-manhattan-da.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/06/nyregion/alvin-bragg-manh... And this isn't entirely new with Bragg... https://nypost.com/2022/06/07/nyc-da-downgrades-macys-loving-serial-shoplifters-charges/ https://nypost.com/2022/06/07/nyc-da-downgrades-macys-loving... https://nypost.com/2021/10/02/nyc-man-leads-record-shattering-shoplifting-surge-with-46-arrests/ https://nypost.com/2021/10/02/nyc-man-leads-record-shatterin...
- public_defender 4y ago
  It clearly is true. I can actually watch it happen. You can too, if you go to arraignments in NYC. The line ADAs have no discretion to dismiss petit larceny (shoplifting) at arraignment. They need supervisor approval. There are other cases like driving under suspension (VTL 511 -- mentioned in GP) where they do have this discretion. There is a reason for the difference, which is that petit larceny is a priority. Also, the DAs supported the "harm over harm" amendment to bail reform (CPL 510.10(4)t) for the explicit purpose of seeking bail in repeat shoplifting cases. And can you guess how they're using it? You are conflating DA public statements with actual operational policy. It is nothing new that DAs claim to prioritize things that are not on their roadmaps.
  - bhk 4y ago
    So on the one side I see news reports of dozens of cases of serial shoplifting offenders out on the streets, and the NYC DA informing his staff and letting the public know that if you steal less than $500 you will not go to jail. But you're claiming that the DA actually intended to send them to jail. So he was baiting them to commit the crime? I don't buy it. And you're claiming that his prosecutors have no discretion in prosecuting these cases? I don't buy it, but if you have some references to support that claim, other than word of mouth, I'm all ears. I can't find precisely what the amendment was and when it took effect, but the subject of the article was a surge in retail theft over several years, so if you're talking about some changes in the past year, then maybe we will be able to see some effects in the next year.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Thorrez 4y ago

Ideally they would get the street-level shoplifter to inform on the shoplifter's boss in order to get a low sentence or immunity, so that the real kingpin can be caught.

rullelito 4y ago

Expert in making stuff up perhaps.

public_defender 4y ago
In polite company we say "lawyer."

Oxidation 4y ago

The other thing that's interesting from their state graph is that it disagrees with the "people fleeing anarchist California to orderly Texas to escape rampant crime" meme. Not only does Texas have higher rates of larceny theft[1], it is the biggest outlier on the graph in terms of lack of prosecution for it - no other state is further below the trend line. [1]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/232583/larceny-theft-rate-in-the-us-by-state/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/232583/larceny-theft-rat...

nlitened 4y ago
Also should be taken into account, it's about _reported_ larceny theft. Allegedly, they say that in "anarchist California" people don't even bother reporting anymore.
hotpotamus 4y ago
It probably doesn't help that our Attorney General has been under indictment for securities fraud for years now.

steve76 4y ago

[dead]

jfengel 4y ago

What is more effective and humane? Is it about removing the poverty that drives that kind of theft, or were you thinking of something more direct?

mlyle 4y ago
This is about organized retail bulk theft. Punishing the individual shoplifters is useful. But it's also useful to crack down on secondary markets through which (mostly) stolen goods are shifted.
- prvit 4y ago
  How? Should we ban Amazon and Ebay?
  - mlyle 4y ago
    Ban Amazon and eBay? No. We haven't banned pawn shops, either. But we do understand that they are a conduit for theft and can induce other crime, and so we tend to impose a certain amount of regulation upon them to reduce the scope of the harm. What exact form that would take is up for discussion. And, of course, there's other secondary markets-- sketchy people with tables illegally selling gray market consumer goods.
    - prvit 4y ago
      - mlyle 4y ago
        > So you want that the government do something, but don’t know what? Actually, I pretty well know what, and I'll explain despite your bad faith. * We have a century-old toolkit of ways to deal with legitimate businesses that often end up as fences. Mostly record-keeping requirements and a degree of secondary liability to encourage vetting of where they buy merchandise from. You see this toolkit applied to pawn shops, scrap metal dealers, etc... * We also have pretty good ways, in major municipalities, of shutting down sellers of goods who open impromptu businesses on street corners with dubious goods. Increased amount of retail theft may be a signal to redouble these efforts. * And, of course, enforcement against the actual frontline shoplifters is important, too. Of course, all of these things are tradeoffs that impede some legitimate businesses to some extent to protect other businesses from illegal activity. The exact amount and form is open to discussion.

someguydave 4y ago

It seems you are a fan of closing down urban retail

LawTalkingGuy 4y ago

> the street-level shoplifter will be the target of most policy interventions here, which is the least effective and least humane strategy. Getting a low-level criminal or junkie off the street, alive, is worth a lot. You can then offer them a chance to turn their sentence into rehab or something if they don't need jail. And there's no reason we can't go for the higher ups too, there's (jail)time for everyone!

public_defender 4y ago
> Getting a low-level criminal or junkie off the street, alive, is worth a lot. Off the street and on to Riker's Island. A jail so dangerous that it has a high likelihood of being put into federal receivership in the next year. People are safer on the street. Full stop.
- oerpli 4y ago
  But the streets are safer with some of those people in Riker.
  - jahnu 4y ago
    Short term. What happens long term? What are the aggregate consequences of such policies to society? I don't know the answers to these questions, I would want an expert to weigh in.
    - raverbashing 4y ago
      > What are the aggregate consequences of such policies to society? Might ask yourself the same question about shoplifting gangs being let loose And if Riker's is a problem, then deal with that specific problem. Not prosecuting people seems to be one level removed from it. (yes, they are connected, but for example, not sending pre-trial people there could be a start)
    - concordDance 4y ago
      Probably mostly positive actually. Removing people who either have poor self control or little ability to find productive work means they don't teach those habits to their children and those around them. This does not mean the answer is executions though, as people's lives and happiness have value even if they're scumbags.

bhk 4y ago

This is clearly not true. > Manhattan D.A. Acts on Vow to Seek Incarceration Only for Worst Crimes > The district attorney, Alvin Bragg, told prosecutors in his office in a memo that they should ask judges for jail or prison time only for the most serious offenses — including murder, sexual assault and economic crimes involving vast sums of money — unless the law requires them to do otherwise. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/06/nyregion/alvin-bragg-manhattan-da.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/06/nyregion/alvin-bragg-manh... And this isn't entirely new with Bragg... https://nypost.com/2022/06/07/nyc-da-downgrades-macys-loving-serial-shoplifters-charges/ https://nypost.com/2022/06/07/nyc-da-downgrades-macys-loving... https://nypost.com/2021/10/02/nyc-man-leads-record-shattering-shoplifting-surge-with-46-arrests/ https://nypost.com/2021/10/02/nyc-man-leads-record-shatterin...

public_defender 4y ago
It clearly is true. I can actually watch it happen. You can too, if you go to arraignments in NYC. The line ADAs have no discretion to dismiss petit larceny (shoplifting) at arraignment. They need supervisor approval. There are other cases like driving under suspension (VTL 511 -- mentioned in GP) where they do have this discretion. There is a reason for the difference, which is that petit larceny is a priority. Also, the DAs supported the "harm over harm" amendment to bail reform (CPL 510.10(4)t) for the explicit purpose of seeking bail in repeat shoplifting cases. And can you guess how they're using it? You are conflating DA public statements with actual operational policy. It is nothing new that DAs claim to prioritize things that are not on their roadmaps.
- bhk 4y ago
  So on the one side I see news reports of dozens of cases of serial shoplifting offenders out on the streets, and the NYC DA informing his staff and letting the public know that if you steal less than $500 you will not go to jail. But you're claiming that the DA actually intended to send them to jail. So he was baiting them to commit the crime? I don't buy it. And you're claiming that his prosecutors have no discretion in prosecuting these cases? I don't buy it, but if you have some references to support that claim, other than word of mouth, I'm all ears. I can't find precisely what the amendment was and when it took effect, but the subject of the article was a surge in retail theft over several years, so if you're talking about some changes in the past year, then maybe we will be able to see some effects in the next year.