This story is the equivalent of one of those white grandpas in the south calling the news because some Antifa wrote "Black People Rule" on their garage. Or that lady who carved a B into her face and claimed a gang of Obama supporters robbed and assaulted her.

>I find it very hard to believe the couple went to trouble of finding a rat, cooking it just to swindle some cash from a restaurant.

Interesting because that is always how these rat/mouse in food stories end up.

Which is more likely? That a scammer pulled a common scam? Or that someone didn't notice they cooked a rat? Or spooned out a rat? We already know the answer.

Having rat droppings in a restaurant is bad. But that doesn't make it logical that someone would cook a mouse or rat and it end up in a soup. It's highly unlikely.

This is almost 100% of the time a money grab scam by the customers. I'm sorry, but given the track record of stories like this I have a hard time believing it.

It's absolutely an outreach problem. Eric Adams patently decided to stop promoting the program at all the second he took office. He doesn't care about it. So of course he doesn't care if any slots are.

That's not an end run around bureaucracy. It's literally adding another layer of bureaucracy.

Ask anyone working for the city how "simple" things become when the Mayor adds a new office to "oversee" what agencies are already working on. It's just another low staffed, over paid and under-informed office to submit more reports to and the odds are those offices won't even exist in the next administration.

Adding even more bureaucracy to fix bureaucracy is certainly...a plan.

I was under the impression all Airbnbs under a 30-day stay were already banned a long time ago. So I'm always surprised when I see headlines like this.

The study was conducted by John Jay College of Criminal Justice and like all studies conducted by such institutions you can just...read the results they published.

It's weird how we've allowed this to be normal for all electeds. Bloomberg and de Blasio both had similar issues with few to no consequences.

If a city worker misappropriated 5-6 figures in funds they'd be fired and prosecuted. If they had this on their record before applying for a city job or while being onboarded, they wouldn't be hired.

>once you group misdemeanor, pending case, and violent felonies together.

Yes, that's generally how studies and averages work.Overall ricidivism is down. Period.

It doesn't contradict the headline. They took data of all releases during ball reform and recidivism went down. Again, sorry that isn't what you wanted to hear but the numbers are the numbers.

It's not disingenuous, you just don't want to hear the fact that ricidivism went down. This study was by John Jay College - a criminal justice school - not by Gothamist.

>This new study found that the two-year rearrest rate for those released due to bail reform was 44%, compared to 50% for those with similar charges, criminal histories and demographics who were held in jail in the period before the reform.

Because most violent arrestees aren't released. They do not account for a significant percentage of those out. Given *all the data on all those released pre-trial"...the numbers went down. So who is being disingenuous here?

The headline isn't misleading. The majority of people released on bail didn't have violent crime arrests and didn't reoffend. Which is the entire point.

It feels like this design was a product of the pre-COVID times when we were all packed in like sardines, ridership kept creeping higher and higher with less comfortable commutes. We have lower ridership now and riders aren't as interested in more standing room. We want more seats and a more relaxing setting. Rather than reevaluate user needs, they just plowed ahead anyway.

NYC employees are paying into their pension and for those benefits. It's not a free gift from taxpayers (which city workers also are - tax payers).

Maybe not brand name. A package of plastic adhesive bandages. One size.

I like the way you think!

Again I ask, what does this have to do with this story about a cop being let off the hook by other cops despite illegal activity?

Oh, so you're saying a cop brandishing a gun illegally who should know better is more justified in brandishing a gun illegally? Is that right? Generally we hold people who are mentally stable and not deranged to a higher standard, but I guess this is a cop so he just gets to bypass the law.

Ok Boomer.

Since you feel so strongly about this you should return any Social Security or Medicare payments or benefits you are offered when you actually retire. Because you don't deserve it and you didn't pay for it fully and nobody owes you anything. Is that right?

Do you think that's a rare crime? Or you just wanted to bring up the DuCk SaUcE KiLLEr for jollies? This has nothing to do with that. This is about cops looking out for cops.

What the hell does this story have to do with the DuCk SaUcE KiLLEr. Focus.