Gothamist: City Wants NYPD Spying Files to Remain Sealed

Ollie

Tue, 27 Mar 2007 07:57:13 -0500

Now dear new yorkers, I think you should very seriously ask for a complete revamping of the NYPD, you can no longer trust a police force that breached into your rights so willingly. They must all be fired. That includes Bloomberg as well, who let such things happen, or even take part in it.

Still Not Amused

Mon, 26 Mar 2007 21:01:14 -0500

Well what did you all expect ????? With any victory comes a measure of defeat !

brettbum

Mon, 26 Mar 2007 17:01:32 -0500

regarding discovery, I suspect that it may be one of those situations where an attacking attorney can not get what they do not ask for. Sounds like they broke the law to me. At least they didn't teach some dolts how to be terrorists like the FBI did down in Miami.

r

Mon, 26 Mar 2007 13:17:07 -0500

This intelligence gathering program went waaaay beyond targeting "potential law breakers." The infiltration and tracking of peaceful groups represent a presumption of criminality on NYPD's part toward all organized dissent. Proponents of this kind of surveillance always seem to argue that if you don't have anything to hide, you shouldn't worry about the police keeping files on your ideas, your comings and goings, your political beliefs. But if NYPD doesn't have anything to hide, what is it afraid of? Why not open the records to the public?

Murray Hillster

Mon, 26 Mar 2007 11:17:06 -0500

"Wouldn't that info be part of Discovery anyway?" That's what I was thinking as well. The attorneys for the plaintiffs in the mass arrest matters, at least, are going to get their hands on these materials. Particularly when the police essentially admit that the materials are relevant. And they'll use the material if it helps their case. I think what the city rep quoted really meant was that the sealed information will hurt the city defend itself to the public regarding the mass arrests.

S.D.

Mon, 26 Mar 2007 11:04:06 -0500

Amusingly:The Times also reports that the city is worried the sealed information will hurt its "ability to defend itself in lawsuits over mass arrests."Don't know if a crime was committed or not, but that reasoning sounds a little bogus to me. They feel that information that may be used in a lawsuit against the city should not be released to help defend against such a lawsuit? Wouldn't that info be part of Discovery anyway?