National
How Cases Involving 2 NYC Cops and 2 Unarmed Men Measure Up
COLLEEN LONG, Associated Press
TOM HAYS, Associated Press
NEW YORK (AP) — The indictment of New York Police Department Officer Peter Liang Wednesday on charges of manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide in the stairwell shooting of Akai Gurley comes two months after a grand jury declined to charge Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the chokehold death of Eric Garner. Both were unarmed black men who died at the hands of police, and the officers became the subject of criminal investigations.
“But the similarities stop there,” criminal law professor James Cohen said. Garner’s death touched off massive protests and calls for police reform. The encounter was captured on video and widely viewed online. The officer testified before the grand jury.
Gurley’s death occurred during a chance encounter on a pitch black stairwell in a Brooklyn housing project. Liang fired a single shot and his finger never should have been on the trigger, prosecutors said, but no one believes he intentionally wanted to kill Gurley. Liang didn’t testify in his defense.
Here’s a look at the two cases:
THE CIRCUMSTANCES:
Akai Gurley, 28, was having his hair braided by his girlfriend at her apartment in the Louis Pink Houses in Brooklyn on Nov. 20. He had just given up waiting for the elevator so he could leave when he stepped into a darkened stairwell to walk to the lobby. Meanwhile, Officer Peter Liang and his partner were patrolling the stairwells of the public housing complex. Liang, 27, had his gun drawn, his finger on the trigger, prosecutors said. As he pushed open the door with his shoulder, he fired one shot that ricocheted, striking Gurley on the floor above. Gurley made it down two flights before collapsing and later died. Liang is Chinese-American. His lawyer says the shooting was an accident.
Eric Garner, 43, was standing outside a Staten Island convenience store and was suspected of selling loose cigarettes on July 17. Officer Daniel Pantaleo and others accused tried to arrest him but he resisted. In an incident captured on video and widely viewed, the officer tries to take the heavyset Garner down, wrapping an arm around his neck. He cried “I can’t breathe,” lost consciousness and later died. The officer said he was using a legal takedown maneuver but critics said it was a chokehold, banned under NYPD policy. Pantaleo is white.
THE BOROUGHS:
Staten Island, where Garner died, is by far the least populated of the city’s five boroughs, with about 472,000 residents, the most conservative and least racially diverse, dominated by homeowners rather than renters, and home to many current and retired police officers. According to the 2010 census, it’s the only borough where non-Hispanic whites make up a majority — 64 percent. It had the lowest percentage of blacks at 9.5 percent. The borough leans Republican.
Brooklyn, where Gurley was killed, has 2.5 million people, and houses some of the wealthiest and poorest in the city. According to census figures, the borough is 36 percent non-Hispanic white, and 35 percent black. The median household income is $49,000. It contains areas with some of the highest crime rates in the city, and also the highest level of police involvement.
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS:
Brooklyn District Attorney Ken Thompson won a contentious race in 2013, displacing the longtime incumbent, and his tenure so far has been marked by a series of exonerations. The bulk of the cases stem from concerns about the investigative tactics of a now-retired detective. On Wednesday, Thompson said Liang’s case was not to be seen in the shadow of Garner. “This case has nothing to do with Ferguson or Eric Garner or any other case,” he said. “This case has to do with an innocent man who lost his life and a young New York City police officer who has now been charged with taking his life,” he said.
Staten Island District Attorney Daniel Donovan has held the job for a little over a decade. He is currently planning to run for the Congressional seat formerly occupied by disgraced Rep. Michael Grimm in a special election. Donovan asked for some details of the Garner grand jury to be released, but not a transcript of the minutes. The New York Civil Liberties Union and others asked a court to order Donovan to release the transcript, detailed descriptions of evidence and other documentation. A judge is weighing a request.
NOW WHAT:
Federal prosecutors are reviewing the Garner case, and the family has filed paperwork to sue the city.
Liang likely will face a judge, not a jury, and experts say it will be difficult to win a conviction because they will have to prove he knew there was a substantial risk of causing someone’s death and disregarded it to be convicted on the top charges. “It’s a very tough sell,” said Bennett Gershman, a Pace University law professor and former prosecutor. “I give the DA a lot of credit; it was a courageous use of authority here. Now comes the tough part. It’s easy to get a grand jury to indict; it’s quite different to win a conviction.” The family of Gurley also has filed paperwork to sue the city.
Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Activism
Barbara Lee Launches Campaign for Mayor of Oakland
“At this critical moment, we must not be a city divided, but a community united,” she Lee. “If elected I will bring my hands-on leadership, new ideas and decades of experience in identifying billions in resources for our great city, so all residents and businesses are stronger and safer and our community has optimism and confidence in Oakland’s future.”
By Post Staff
Barbara Lee on Wednesday morning formally announced her candidacy for Mayor in Oakland’s April 15 special election.
“Time and time again, Oaklanders have faced our toughest obstacles by uniting to meet our challenges,” said Lee.
“At this critical moment, we must not be a city divided but a community united,” she said. “If elected, I will bring my hands-on leadership, new ideas, and decades of experience in identifying billions in resources for our great city so all residents and businesses are stronger and safer and our community has optimism and confidence in Oakland’s future.”
“As Mayor, I’ll address our homelessness crisis, prioritize comprehensive public safety and mental health services, and lead with fiscal responsibility to deliver the core City services residents and business owners deserve. Let’s do this – together.”
“I’ve never shied away from a challenge,” said Lee. “I’m always ready to fight for Oakland.”
Watch her campaign video here, which is online at BarbaraLee4Oakland.com
Activism
U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee Remembers Jimmy Carter’s Sunday School Lessons
Barbara Lee said she still treasures her CD Sunday school lessons that she participated in as a visitor to Jimmy Carter’s Maranatha Baptist Church in Plains, Georgia. She told The Post that she attended gospel concerts at the Carter White House as the staff aide for the late Congressman Ron Dellums.
By Paul Cobb
“I’m deeply saddened to hear of the passing of President Jimmy Carter,” said Congresswoman Barbara Lee. “President Carter displayed a lifelong commitment to global peace, justice, and human rights. He inspired me and countless others.”
“I send my condolences to his family, his loved ones, and all who loved him. May he now Rest in Peace with his wife, Rosalynn,”. Lee continued.
Barbara Lee said she still treasures her CD Sunday school lessons that she participated in as a visitor to Jimmy Carter’s Maranatha Baptist Church in Plains, Georgia. She told The Post that she attended gospel concerts at the Carter White House as the staff aide for the late Congressman Ron Dellums.
“I also invited congressional staff to visit his Sunday school teachings. He taught us lessons on how to apply our faith to our policy work in government and in our respective communities. He practiced what he preached and represented a change in social and racial advancements.”
Activism
Expect The Worst? Political Scientists Have a Pessimism Bias, Study Finds
The research, co-authored by UC Berkeley political scientist Andrew T. Little, offers a possible solution: an approach that aggregates experts’ predictions, finds the middle ground, and then reduces the influence of pessimism, leading to the possibility of “remarkably accurate predictions.”
Political experts surveyed recently were prone to pessimism — and were often wrong, says a study co-authored at UC Berkeley. Still, when their predictions were averaged out, they were ‘remarkably accurate’
By Edward Lempinen, UC Berkeley News
The past decade has seen historic challenges for U.S. democracy and an intense focus by scholars on events that seem to signal democratic decline. But new research released two weeks ago finds that a bias toward pessimism among U.S. political scientists often leads to inaccurate predictions about the future threats to democracy.
The research, co-authored by UC Berkeley political scientist Andrew T. Little, offers a possible solution: an approach that aggregates experts’ predictions, finds the middle ground, and then reduces the influence of pessimism, leading to the possibility of “remarkably accurate predictions.”
The study was released by Bright Line Watch, a consortium of political scientists who focus on issues related to the health of U.S. democracy. It offers provocative insight into political scientists’ predictions for the months ahead, including some that would be seen as alarming risks for democracy.
According to an analysis that Little distilled from a Bright Line Watch survey done after the November election, political scientists generally agreed that incoming Republican President Donald Trump is highly likely to pardon MAGA forces imprisoned for roles in the Jan. 6, 2021 uprising that sought to block the peaceful transfer of power from Trump to Democrat Joe Biden.
The research concluded that it’s less likely, but still probable, that Trump will pardon himself from a series of federal criminal convictions and investigations, and that his allies will open an investigation of Biden.
In understanding the future course of U.S. politics, Little said in an interview, it’s important to listen to the consensus of expert political scientists rather than to individual experts who, sometimes, become media figures based on their dire predictions.
“If we’re worried about being excessively pessimistic,” he explained, “and if we don’t want to conclude that every possible bad thing is going to happen, then we should make sure that we’re mainly worrying about things where there is wider consensus (among political scientists).”
Believe the Consensus, Doubt the Outliers
For example, the raw data from hundreds of survey responses studied by Little and Bright Line researchers showed that more than half of the political scientists also expected Trump to form a board that would explore the removal of generals; deport millions of immigrants; and initiate a mass firing of civil service government employees.
But once the researchers aggregated the scholars’ opinions, determined the average of their expectations and controlled for their pessimism bias, the consensus was that the likelihood of those developments falls well below 50%.
Bright Line Watch, founded in 2016, is based at the Chicago Center on Democracy and is collaboratively run by political scientists at the University of Chicago, Dartmouth College, the University of Michigan and the University of Rochester in New York.
The research collaboration between Little and the Bright Line Watch scholars sprang from a collegial disagreement that emerged last January in the pages of the journal Political Science and Politics.
Little and Anne Meng, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, authored a research paper in that issue positing that there is little empirical, data-based evidence of global democratic decline in the past decade.
At the request of the journal editors, scholars at Bright Line Watch submitted a study to counter the argument made by Meng and Little.
But in subsequent weeks, the two teams came together and, in the study released on Dec. 17, found agreement that raw opinion on the state of democracy skews toward pessimism among the political scientists who have participated in the surveys run by Bright Line Watch.
A Stark Measure of Pessimism (and Error)
Surveys conducted during election seasons in 2020, 2022 and 2024 asked political scientists to provide their forecasts on dozens of scenarios that would be, without doubt, harmful for democracy.
The raw data in the new study showed a high level of inaccuracy in the forecasts: While the political scientists, on average, found a 45% likelihood of the negative events happening, fewer than 25% actually came to pass.
Before last month’s election, Bright Line Watch asked the political scientists to assess dozens of possibilities that seemed to be ripped from the headlines. Would foreign hackers cripple voting systems? Would Trump or Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic candidate, declare victory before the winner was called by the news media? Would Trump incite political violence again?
Altogether, the political scientists predicted a 44% probability for the list of negative events — but only 10% actually happened.
In the interview, Little defended the focus on possible negative developments by political scientists and others. It’s “very important” to be aware of the potential for harmful developments, he said.
But the focus on worst-case scenarios can also be distracting and destabilizing. The question, then, is why political scientists might develop a bias for pessimism.
To some extent, Little said, it may be a matter of expertise. The data show that scholars who specialize in American politics tend to be the least pessimistic — and the most accurate — forecasters. Political scientists with expertise in international relations, political theory or other areas tend to be more pessimistic and less reliable.
Little offered several other possible explanations. For example, he said, when scholars focus on one narrow area, like threats to democracy, they might see the potential threats with a heightened urgency. Their worry might shape the way they see the wider political world.
“People who study authoritarian politics are probably drawn to that because they think it’s an important problem, and they think it’s a problem that we need to address,” he explained. “If you spend a lot of your time and effort focusing on bad scenarios that might happen, you might end up thinking they’re more likely than they really are.”
And occasionally, he said, scholars may find that raising alarms about imminent dangers to democracy leads to more media invitations.
The Battle for Scholars’ Public Credibility
For the interwoven fields of political science and journalism — and for the wider health of democracy — accuracy is essential. That’s the value of the analytical system described by the authors of the new study. If researchers can find the expert consensus on complex issues and tone down unwarranted alarm, understanding should improve, and democracy should operate more efficiently.
Still, Little cautioned, it would be a mistake to discount or discard the insights offered by expert political scientists.
“You don’t want to say, ‘I’m just going to ignore the experts,’” he advised. “This research shows that that would be a very bad idea. Once you do the adjustments, the experts are very informed, and you can learn a lot from what they say.
-
Activism2 weeks ago
Books for Ghana
-
Arts and Culture3 weeks ago
Promise Marks Performs Songs of Etta James in One-Woman Show, “A Sunday Kind of Love” at the Black Repertory Theater in Berkeley
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Post News Group to Host Second Town Hall on Racism, Hate Crimes
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Butler, Lee Celebrate Passage of Bill to Honor Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm with Congressional Gold Medal
-
Bay Area2 weeks ago
Glydways Breaking Ground on 14-Acre Demonstration Facility at Hilltop Mall
-
Activism3 weeks ago
‘Donald Trump Is Not a God:’ Rep. Bennie Thompson Blasts Trump’s Call to Jail Him
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Delta Sigma Theta Alumnae Chapters Host World AIDS Day Event
-
Business4 weeks ago
Landlords Are Using AI to Raise Rents — And California Cities Are Leading the Pushback