New NY State License Plate Revealed—And Required On All Cars
Cops: Fort Greene Violence Sparked By Chicken Wing Promotion
Access-A-Ride Renders Bike Lane Inaccessible
The UWS Gets Its Very Own Apple Store
64 Things Restaurant Patrons Must NEVER Do
Matthew Jones, the Brooklyn man who was arrested for refusing to move out of the way other pedestrians on a Times Square sidewalk in 2004, had his guilty plea overturned by the New York Court of Appeals Tuesday. At approximately 2 a.m. on a June evening of 2004, Jones was standing on the corner of 42nd St. and 7th Ave., talking with a group of his friends. A police officer noticed that a number of pedestrians were being blocked by the group and asked Jones to move along and clear the sidewalk. After refusing to move, he eventually ran from the cop and was charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. He pleaded guilty to the charges, but later changed his mind and challenged them in court.
The court was unanimous in its decision to overturn the conviction, and Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick wrote an opinion stating the prosecution had not met the burden of proof that Jones was intentionally causing a disturbance or risk to others.
“Something more than a mere inconvenience of pedestrians is required to support the charge.In other words, being an inconsiderate jerk is not against the law in NYC.“Otherwise, any person who happens to stop on a sidewalk — whether to greet another, to seek directions or simply to regain one’s bearings — would be subject to prosecution under this statute.”
(Untitled photo of rude Big Apple, by neps at flickr)
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I wonder how often these judges are out in the real world.
I suppose if someone other than a cop had been there and, say, got into a heated argument with Matthew Jones, then stabbed him to death as a result - I suppose we wouldn't be talking about a judge talking about inconveniencing others so much.
Not James Frey,
What??
We could make up any possible scenario but what's important in this case is what actually happened. Sure, the guy sounds annoying, but I believe that the police often overstep their boundaries. I'm not convinced that the police even know the laws that they are meant to uphold. It appears that they just harass and arrest at will.
The judge offers up "scenarios" -
"Any person who happens to stop on a sidewalk — whether to greet another, to seek directions or simply to regain one’s bearings - would be subject to prosecution under this statute."
- to justify her ruling.
Getting stabbed to death as the result of a heated dispute is a scenario, one the judge apparently didn't consider (along with dozens if not scores of similarly gruesome outcomes) when handing down her ruling.
Let's give another scenario: Mr. Jones and friends congregate on the sidewalk, refuse to move. As a result, pedestrians have to walk around them. One steps too far out onto the street, gets struck by an automobile. Dies as a result. What's the judge's ruling then, VanessaNYC?
"What actually happened" is not the only thing cops must consider when enforcing the law, and/or when deciding to exercise common sense. A judge is rarely ever in the same position a police officer is. Which is why they can enjoy their exercises in asininity.
BTW, have you ever been in Times Square?
Guys, this requires a very basic understanding of our legal system which, sadly, most American don't seem to have.
You have to think of this in legal terms because it can set precedence, not in terms of the fact that this guy may be a jerk. Any ruling in a case sets precedence, so if he was found guilty - the judges are right - cops then have the power to make anyone move, at any time.
Just because a given situation seems to demand it, isn't the case. You have to think above it. The same goes for illegal search and seizures, privacy rights, detainment, etc. Each case may seem like 'people deserve it' but when they are ruled against, your rights as an American citizen disappear.
Though I do belive snaking a taxi half a block ahead of someone should call for 10+ years. That is as much of a violation of the NYC code-of-respect as someone can commit.
Not James Frey,
Seriously??
Vanessa,
No, not seriously.
Let's continue on to Madame Tussaud's. Ignore the guy in your way.