
One for the "The NYPD must have a ticket quota to fulfill" file: The Daily News highlights a middle-aged woman who was given a summons for being at the Rivington Street playground without a child. Now, most people are generally familiar with the Parks Department rule that prohibits adults from entering playgrounds without a child, if only by reading signs or the accusing sneers from parents, but in this case, belly dancer Sandra Catena didn't notice a sign and sought out a bench to sit on. Then two police officers approached her, telling her she was breaking the law because she was not accompanied by a child. They even called backup on her! Though one cop told her the judge would probably throw out the summons, Catena did them one better by going to the Daily News.
The rule is supposed to keep pedophiles from children. Which may be effective, but it's also keeping playgrounds from the adult kids-at-heart. Where are our playgrounds? Why can't we use the monkey bars to our heart's content? Do we only get the swings at Central Park? Anyway, one Lower East Side parents scoffs at the Parks Department and NYPD's enforcement of the rule, saying she sees adults without kids in the park all the time.
Photograph of the playground in West Chelsea by Tien Mao





I wonder why it's important to note that she's a belly dancer. Would you (or the Daily News) note her profession if she were a receptionist or a teacher? I didn't think so.
I actually did NOT know that I was prohibited from sitting by a playground by myself. What a great way to make someone who wants to read the paper or rest for a couple of minutes feel like a pervy jerk.
dancer, you're kidding right? the professions of people are named all the time in the news.
besides, it's not everyday that you read about a pervy belly dancer.
The same thing happened to me a few years ago (not arrested, just asked to leave). I really didn't mind. I understand why the regulation matters.
that's not the same thing, don. this is what happens when you make overly harsh laws (90 days in jail and $1000 fine for sitting) and make up for it by giving cops the freedom to use "common sense".
They mention her profession because it gives the story more color, and in this case, also paints her in a more favorable light. The reader wouldn't be as sympathetic for her if she was described as "a mysterious drifter."
When publishing an article in which they attempt to garner sympathy for someone, newspapers will look for any manner of describing the person that makes the reader identify and sympathize with that person. For instance, I'm guessing that she is neither married nor a mother, or else it would have been included in the article as well.
By naming her profession and reason for being there, the article is basically saying that if you can account for yourself, you shouldn't get a ticket for being alone in the playground. If you can't, then tough luck, I guess.
What does "common sense" even mean? "only arrest men"? That's supposed to make it _better_?