Bratton Says Some Intentionally Confuse Policing Tactics

NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton included U.S. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries and the Rev. Calvin Butts among a group of advocates obscuring the difference between stop-and-frisk policing and enforcing quality-of-life violations, sometimes intentionally.

“They’re part of the group ... that are, unfortunately, misrepresenting—either out of lack of knowledge or appreciation or for political purposes—the importance of quality-of-life (enforcement),” Bratton said. “There is an intended confusion being created. The same advocates that sought to reduce stop, question and frisk are now trying to equate that as the same thing as quality of life—‘There’s too much quality-of-life enforcement.’ However, there is a distinct difference between the two.”

Jeffries has said he does not have any interest in running for mayor, though he has reportedly been fielding requests to do so from Butts and others. Despite nodding to potential de Blasio challengers and dissidents, Bratton suggested he does not plan to remain commissioner through the entirety of a second term under de Blasio—or another executive.

“I will not be the commissioner for six and a half years. … I’ll be 70 some-odd, 75 years old,” he said.

Speaking at City & State’s Newsmaker forum this morning, Bratton was asked about the recent push to reduce the punishment for quality-of-life offenses. Some New York City Council members and criminal justice advocates argue the NYPD’s enforcement of these offenses, such as urinating in public or drinking on a stoop, is overzealous and points to larger problems with the broken windows theory of law enforcement. That theory contends that tolerating minor offenses—such as vandalism and graffiti—creates an environment conducive to more serious crime. This spring, City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito proposed decriminalizing a handful of minor quality-of-life offenses. In responding, Bratton detailed the differing legal theories behind the NYPD's use of stop and frisk and officers enforcing laws against low-level offenses.

“Stop, question and frisk, under the law, is based on what is called reasonable suspicion—an officer suspects that a person may be or is about to commit a crime,” Bratton said. “Quality-of-life enforcement is based on a totally different legal phenomenon. It is based on probable cause, a higher standard of proof. The higher standard of proof is usually the officer witnesses the offense, which is a criminal offense, or he has a witness.” 

The New York Civil Liberties Union and others endorsing the decriminalization push have argued that the “sheer volume” of summonses issued strains the court system's ability to adjudicate justly and that “a significant percentage” of summonses are thrown out, sometimes for insufficient evidence or lack of complete information.

But Bratton said police are just one part of the criminal justice system and should not be conflated with a process that gives court officials and prosecutors discretion when it comes to upgrading and downgrading offenses or making plea deals. 

“It’s not just a matter of the officer issuing the summons. It’s what happens subsequent to it,” he said. “I’m quite comfortable that we’re doing pretty good. Does it need to be reformed? It certainly does. We’re working on it. I’m not fighting that. I’m working in many respects to keep it criminal, so my officers have the power to basically start the process, but then give them a lot of discretionary tools so it doesn’t necessarily have to end up in a summons or in an arrest.”