I understand that you're worried that guy may be wrongly convicted. And that you're worried you might also be wrongly convicted.

Indeed many males have been wrongly accused and convicted of sexual assault in the past. And history has many examples of that.

However, I claim these fears have been blown out of proportion in today's NYC.

And the fear-mongering environment (of innocent people being unjustly convicted) is actually part of what has been blocking the answer to what you asked: "why he still hasn’t been tried after 4 years".

That problem doesn't get addressed because our legislative is more worried about the defendant's rights than worried about achieving justice as a whole.

>2019 was before covid and before bail reform.

I was not talking about the bail reform, but I noticed this pattern where someone would inject a non sequitur defense about the "bail reform", and draw the attention of the most rabid bullies in the sub.

I'm going to start calling that out.

>So I’m curious what you think people are burying their head in the sand about.

Since you're curious, I'll be more specific: advocates have been ignoring that our government is doing a bad job at preventing preventable violence and delivering justice for the victims.

Many of those victims end up in a more disadvantaged position than most people who is spending any time at Riker's recently (TBH, it's not a high bar, because even people who stay at homeless shelters are at greater risk of death than people who stay at Riker's...). The two victims from this one guy are condemned for life with that trauma.

I think it's fine to advocate for the constitutional rights of the defendants. When are we going to prioritize the victims?

>Why aren't we actually prosecuting violent crimes?

We are, but not very successfully.

This thread below (now locked by the mods) covered how that guy, even if arrested for a felony, has a system stacked in his favor (15 to 1 to not get a felony conviction).

https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/11j3msr/comment/jb1i9df/?context=3

By reddit standards, that thread had a rather cordial and informative discussion about the topic.

The US has a high in a incarceration rate.

But NYC has a much lower incarceration rate.

We are on par with or lower incarceration rate than Canada and Luxembourg.

But at what cost? This is one kind of criminal who is kept out of jail. No one is being held in jail for stealing a sandwich anymore.

This is a report about the 2019 case from the same suspect: https://nypost.com/2019/04/10/cops-bust-creep-who-forced-teen-to-touch-his-groin-during-break-in/

>McIver allegedly pulled his vehicle to the front of the girl’s building on Beck Street near Avenue St. John in Longwood and slipped into her apartment through a fire escape window shortly before 4 a.m. Monday, authorities and law enforcement sources said.
>
>The 16-year-old girl told police she woke up to find him standing over her bed.
>
>“I want you to touch me, ” the stranger told her, according to police sources. “Don’t scream. I have a gun.”
>
>He then grabbed her hand and placed it on his pants, over his genitals, police said. The terrified teen was able to free herself from his grasp, prompting the man to flee from the room through the same fire escape window.

>McIver already has an attempted rape case pending from 2019, when he broke into a sleeping 16-year-old girl's Bronx bedroom.

I think even the most ardent criminal justice advocates don't get surprised at this anymore.

They can bury the head in the sand and stay silent, but cannot claim ignorance.

While I understand the anti-police sentiment, convictions rate is not really a measure of the quality of police arrests.

A better measure of the quality of the arrests is whether prosecutors are charging the case (assuming the prosecution doesn’t change, obviously).

Arrests that are not justified will have their prosecution declined, and that statistic is also available in the linked sheet.

I think the devils are in the details.

But the overall change in the conviction rates are undeniable.

My layman understanding is that the messier the case is, more pieces of potential exculpatory evidence is created, and it’s more chances for the prosecution to violate the discovery requirements and benefit the defense (even the evidence in question turns out to be innocuous).

https://www.city-journal.org/new-york-discovery-reform-is-crushing-prosecutors gives an example of an hypothetical bar brawl.

And then we also had this bad cop case that was dropped because of the discovery requirements: https://nypost.com/2023/01/31/manhattan-da-abruptly-drops-case-against-crooked-cop-joseph-franco/

A better question would be: what are the odds that this individual was arrested and released for some other offense, and was only able to victimize the woman yesterday because of that?

Personally, I believe that keeping someone in jail pre-trial as punishment is not defensible, but keeping someone in jail to prevent further crimes (and to ensure the criminal doesn't skip court) is something I can get behind.

That will depend on the evidence they have on this case, but felony conviction rates dropped quite a bit in NYC.

In 2017, 14.3% of the felony arrests resulted into a felony conviction. In 2019, that was 12.0%.

In 2021, that dropped to only 6.1%.

So even if he gets arrested for a felony here, the odds are stacked in his favor (15 to 1).

The reforms (such as the discovery reform) enacted in 2020 can't be ignored.

>Police released surveillance images of the suspect, a man believed to be in his 30's, approximately 5'8" and last seen wearing a black jacket, gray sweatshirt and black pants.

​

>Anyone with information in regard to this incident is asked to call the NYPD’s Crime Stoppers Hotline at 1-800-577-TIPS (8477) or for Spanish, 1-888-57-PISTA (74782). The public can also submit their tips by logging onto the Crime Stoppers website at https://crimestoppers.nypdonline.org/ or on Twitter @NYPDTips.

>If you're in a social circle where violence is an acceptable means of solving conflicts, then the probability of having violence used against you goes up exponentially, if you don't associate with people that use violence, then you'll basically never see it.

That's true, but that's not the natural human behavior. In particular, children and teens won't follow that unless their are consistently educated on it.

>Population density really only affects resource violence, which is fairly minimal & consistent to begin with.

Population density influences so many things, such that it'd be a really strong claim to say that its impact is limited to resource violence.

To give you a counter-example, exposure-to-violence (e.g. witnessing a violent crime) is a stronger factor than poverty (4.7x stronger) on teenagers becoming first-time violent offenders themselves.

A high density environment amplifies the opportunities of a single violent incident to be exposed to more teens.

So a single violent crime in NYC would have 20x potency on exposing a teen compared to a single violent crime in Oklahoma City. Or another way to look at it: violence can spiral out of control in a higher density environment much faster than in a lower density environment. Not very different than a respiratory virus, right?

>the present study conceptualizes ETV as both the violence that a youth has experienced and the violence that a youth has witnessed.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=325972017144530636&hl=en&as_sdt=0,33

That’s the thing about density.

If a bodega a worker gets shot (like the one who was shot a couple days ago in the UES), there will be a lot more people who know that person, compared to when someone in Oklahoma City gets shot.

The population density in NYC is like 20x bigger.

De Blasio was a disaster, but he reserved the very worst measures for his departure. NYPD, mass release from Riker's, school changes...

Your question included this assumption:

>regime of ending stop and frisk and curbing police goonery

My response showed your assumption was misguided. So you don't really have a question now.

Besides, terry stops have nothing to do with posting police in the subway, which is mentioned in the article. Talk about deflection, huh?

If you're a black resident in NYC, that's 15.3 homicides per 100,000.

But if you're white, that's 0.8 homicides per 100,000.

If Oklahoma is unsafe at 9 homicides per 100,000, can you articulate why NYC can be considered a safe place for everyone?

>Noooo you mean Debumblio was also just another mayor who did whatever financial interests wanted him to nooooooo

Earlier you cited De Blasio as some sort of example or model mayor. Now he is not? A little more coherence doesn't hurt.

By the way, I have no problem with making Riker's a better place. I have issues with the notion that De Blasio was some sort of hero or that he represented anything whatsoever consistently. All those things, he could've started on year 1, rather than on year 7.

When exactly did De Blasio end stop and frisk? https://theintercept.com/2021/06/10/stop-and-frisk-new-york-police-racial-disparity/

De Blasio, he wanted to pose as progressive, but at core he wasn't. Just like many other "progressive" politicians in NYC, so much so that progressiveness in NYC has lost its historical meaning at this point.

Why else do you think De Blasio would wait 7 years to:

• Disband the violent crimes unit
• Defund the Police
• Announce an "emergency" plan to improve the situation at Riker's

> Last February, the NYPD assigned 1,000 more cops to the subway system and promised a renewed focus on quality-of-life offenses, with services provided for the homeless and mentally ill. > > A month later, it established the Neighborhood Safety Unit, tasking its officers with getting guns off the street, and announced a renewed focus on quality-of-life infractions. > > Police have said the unit has helped tamp down gun violence in various neighborhoods, though the crime rate is still up significantly compared to 2019.

Policing measures reducing crimes. That must be surprising to the far-left ideologues in this sub.

At least in spirit, the NYC laws require the private business to establish rules for the privately owned public spaces that ensures the space can be equally enjoyed by everyone.

If occupying one chair with your feet meant it was one less chair for someone else to use it, or one soiled chair or something, the enforcement/rules appears to be aligned with the spirit.

That being said, none of it excuses a security guard going on an ego power trip.

The city is now indirectly subsidizing Uber eats deliveries.

>But Without the Bounty

To be realistic, even if the city required a payment to file a citizen report, I'm sure a lot of cyclists would happily pay that if that meant the citizen report was actually dealt with.

I'm obviously not proposing that. This is just a commentary about how motivated the cycling community can be.

Yup, adding lanes induces demand. But it also benefits more drivers...

>$1.4 million a year
>
>the centers have helped prevent nearly 700 overdoses

Let's say those 700 overdoses were in a single year (they weren't, because they were operating since 2021, but let's do that to steelman the argument).

That's $2,000 per overdose prevented. A narcan dose costs between $22 and $60. (In Europe, that would cost $3)

That makes it quite profitable to be preventing overdoses. And actually reducing addition would be quite costly for this high growth industrial complex.

The system is not just underfunded, but also very wasteful.

A tiny quantity of individuals being repeatedly arrested and released are consuming a disproportionate amount of resources in the police, DA, public defense, courts.