Atlantic Monthly Contributors's Blog, page 1091

The NYPD's Taunting Thieves with iPads and Purses Full of Cash

New York City isn't necessarily known to be home to the country's friendliest police force, but the NYPD's latest tactics for cutting down on petty theft sound downright mean. The method involves leaving valuable items — a purse full of cash, an iPad, a wallet, a pack of cigarettes — unattended and waiting to see if people decide to rip it off. The NYPD says the technique "has been a valuable tool for catching career criminals and deterring thefts in public places," according to the Associated Press. Critics, however, maintain that these sting operations border on entrapment.

Although the NYPD's been doing this for years, objections to the method are just now bubbling up in the courts. It would be hard to think of a more telling example of an innocent person being tricked into quasi-criminal behavior than the case of Deirdre Myers, a 40-year-old single mother who was arrested in the Bronx in 2010 for basically looking inside of a car. The incident almost sounds like a prank. Myers was stoop-sitting in front of her building when a car being followed by police squealed to a stop in the street. The driver jumped out and ran; the police chased after him. Confused by the whole scene Myers went to have a look inside of the would-be perpetrator's abandoned car, where she saw what appeared to be a roll of cash sitting inside. But without having reached for the bait at all, Myers found herself on the ground in handcuffs. She was confused when the cops that arrested her pulled up to the station and she saw the driver of the abandoned car smoking a cigarette out front. He was an undercover officer.

The NYPD seems to these entrapment-like strategies. It helps get the arrest count up and every now and again they probably do catch a career criminal or real bad guy. They've discussed using the technique to identify individuals who might commit a mass shooting and have drawn criticism for using it as an anti-terrorism technique. The NYPD's been criticized for this practiced, nicknamed Operation Lucky Bag, in recent years as well, after some said it was "ill advised and… a clear violation of civil rights." However, arresting single mothers for looking inside of abandoned cars is just crazy. "It's such a bizarre and extreme attempt to set somebody up," executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union Donna Lieberman told the AP. "It's like lucky bag on steroids."

       

Russia, U.S. Fighting a 'War of Lists'

Russia and the United States are in the middle of a sanction-off.

First, Russia banned Americans from adopting its children last year.

Then, on Friday, the United States put 18 Russians on its "Magnitsky List" of officials accused of human rights abuses (there's an additional "handful of names" on a classified list as well). People on the list will not be able to travel to the U.S. and any assets they may have in this country will be frozen.

The next day, Russia responded unoriginally with a list of its own. It also had 18 people accused of human rights abuses, but this time, they were American. Those people will not be able to travel to Russia and any assets they have in that country will also be frozen. So there.

From the New York Times:

“Our principled opinion on this unfriendly step is well known: under the pressure of Russophobically inclined U.S. congressmen, a severe blow has been dealt to bilateral relations and mutual confidence,” said the spokesman, Aleksandr Lukashevich.

He added, “The war of lists is not our choice, but we had no right to leave this open blackmail unanswered.”

What does this mean? It's unlikely that the lists themselves will cause bloodshed (unless someone got a paper cut while handling them), as Reuters writes that "both governments showed restraint, keeping high-level current officials off their lists in an apparent effort to contain the political damage." More likely, it's just posturing and a sign that relations between the countries are becoming increasingly tense. 

It'll be interesting to see what happens when National Security Advisor Tom Donilon visits Moscow on Monday to discuss missile defense systems. This could put a damper on those talks. 

At least one of the sanctionees isn't too bothered. According to the New York Times, this was John Yoo's response: 

“Darn,” Mr. Yoo said in an e-mail. “There goes my judo match with Putin.”

       

Palestine's Prime Minister Has Resigned

Last week, rumors swirled that Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas was going to fire Palestinian Authority prime minister Salam Fayyad. Today, Fayyad has resigned. Or "resigned," as BBC World's Twitter account put it.

Abbas appointed Fayyad in 2007. He was in charge of nearly 40 percent of the West Bank. He was politically independent, seen as a liberal, and popular with the West though less so within the Palestinian government (Hamas, for instance, refused to accept Fayyad's appointment, accusing him of cooperating with the Israel). Abbas and Fayyad had been embroiled in what the AP called an "increasingly bitter dispute" after Fayyad's finance minister Nabil Kassis resigned last month. Fayyad accepted the resignation, only for Abbas to overrule him and undermine his power. Secretary of State John Kerry had been trying to get the two to reconcile as part of his ongoing attempts to broker peace in the Middle East, but by late last week that appeared impossible, as it was reported that Fayyad had offered his resignation. Abbas accepted it today, and is expected to appoint new prime minister within the next couple days.

Fayyad could use the time off. Just last week, he was hospitalized for pancreatic inflammation.

       

New Jersey Has Prime Seats For Tonight's Aurora Borealis

The Northern lights will be on display tonight for the top half of the United States, thanks to a Thursday morning solar flare. A small sliver of the mid-Atlantic should get the best view. 

I'm not exactly sure how that all works, so here's Accuweather's Samantha-Rae Tuthill to explain:

On the Kp index, the flare has been categorized at 6 to 8. This is a scale for measuring the intensity of a a geomagnetic storm. The 6 to 8 rating means that the effects of the radiation will have a greater reach.

Oh. Hmm. Perhaps meteorologist Gary Szatkowsi can help:

“We are seeing only moderate storm activity right now,” he said. “The rating for these storms is G1-G5, with G1 being the lowest.”

Szatkowski said right now the storm is rating a G2, which is moderate.

Okay, here's a pretty simple map, also courtesy of Accuweather:

If you're in the visible zone and want to see them for yourself, 8 pm EDT is estimated to be the prime borealis time -- though, as with most things Mother Nature, it's impossible to pinpoint an exact time.

       

Rich Lady Accused of Bad Table Manners

According to this EXCLUSIVE report in the New York Post, real estate heiress Joselyn Wohl has been accused of stabbing her life coach in the hand with a fork.

This is not the first time Wohl is alleged to have attacked a member of her coaching team: in December, her sobriety coach Heather McKean sued her for throwing her down a flight of stairs. Said McKean's lawyer:

"One day Joselyn made up her mind she didn't want Heather around anymore and attacked her on the stairwell and yanked her down the stairs."

In all fairness, I might've done something like that too when I decided I didn't want my little brother around anymore. I was six at the time. Wohl is thirty-three. 

Wohl's latest accuser, Sajjadur Rahman, says he was having dinner with Wohl last September when she apparently just couldn't help herself and stabbed him with her fork "without just cause or provocation." And she really got him, too: according to Rahman's attorney, a piece of the fork is still stuck in Rahman's finger.

No word yet on whether or not Wohl punctuated the alleged attack with a triumphant "Fork you!"

 

       

Masters Rules: Good for Tiger, Bad for This 14-Year-Old Kid From China

Controversy has erupted at one of the most prestigious tournaments in professional golf. Tiger Woods, in the midst of his glorious comeback, has been accused of cheating and receiving special treatment by Masters officials after he was given a two-stroke penalty instead of disqualified for an illegal ball drop. Meanwhile, a 14-year-old kid from China -- the youngest player in Masters history -- was given a one-stroke penalty for "slow play."

On Friday, Guan Tianlang switched clubs before taking his second shot on the 17th hole. According to the rules, he had forty seconds to take the shot. He used fifty. PENALTY! Sorry, kid. Tianlang is now not only the youngest player in the tournament's history -- he's also the first to be assessed that slow play penalty, which was almost enough to put him below the cut for the tournament's third round.

Many felt that Tianlang was unfairly singled out by Masters officials:

Plus, pace of play is a horrific problem on tour and has been for years. But you're going to take your stand now? At a major? And against a teenage amateur from China?

And if you were going to penalize him Friday, then you should have done it Thursday. Crenshaw's caddie, Carl Jackson, told reporters that Guan's play was actually slower that day. But guess what? Guan said he received no warnings on Thursday.

Meanwhile, on the 15th hole, there was this:

In summary: the ball fell into the water hazard. Woods decided not to play the ball from the "drop area" -- the designated spot around the hazard -- because it was wet and gross. Instead, he re-took the shot.

Here's the problem: he was supposed to drop the ball as close as possible to the spot from which he'd just hit it. As he admitted in a press conference following the round, he chose to drop the ball two yards behind the spot ... possibly to avoid what happened to his previous ball, which he shot just a smidge too far, causing it to hit the pin and bounce back into the water. He should've taken a two-stroke penalty for that. He didn't.

Golf Digest predicted that Woods would be disqualified from the tournament following a meeting with Masters officials this morning, but instead he was given the two-stroke penalty he should have taken in the first place.

Many feel this is not enough, and that Woods should voluntarily drop out of the tournament. 

BBC Sport journalists were furious, noting the apparent difference in how Tianlang and Woods were treated:

Nice straightforward Saturday at Augusta. Not. Are the rules the rules whether you're 14 or 14-time major champion? Masters chiefs deciding.

— Rob Hodgetts (@RobHodgetts) April 13, 2013

The rules of golf are clear. Tiger took an incorrect drop so there's only one outcome. Guan Tianlang will have to be disqualified.

— Andrew Cotter (@MrAndrewCotter) April 13, 2013

This may seem like no big deal, especially in the context of other sports where players consistently (and sometimes proudly) flout the rules, but in golf, those rules are sacred. Golfers have been disqualified -- and disqualified themselves -- for much less.

Update: 

At hole #15, I took a drop that I thought was correct and in accordance with the rules. I was unaware at that time I had violated any rules.

— Tiger Woods (@TigerWoods) April 13, 2013

I didn’t know I had taken an incorrect drop prior to signing my scorecard. Subsequently, I met with the Masters Committee Saturday morning..

— Tiger Woods (@TigerWoods) April 13, 2013

and was advised they had reviewed the incident prior to the completion of my round. Their initial determination...

— Tiger Woods (@TigerWoods) April 13, 2013

was that there was no violation, butthey had additional concerns based on my post-round interview. After discussing the situation...

— Tiger Woods (@TigerWoods) April 13, 2013

...with them this morning, I was assessed a two-shot penalty. I understand and accept the penalty and respect the Committees’ decision.

— Tiger Woods (@TigerWoods) April 13, 2013

       

Mubarak's Retrial Judge Recuses Himself For Mysterious Reasons

The retrial of former Egyptian ruler Hosni Mubarak, convicted for his part in the murders of Tahir Square protesters and sentenced to life in prison last June, ended almost as soon as it began today. The judge recused himself from the case and referred it to a lower court.

It's still unclear why the judge stepped down. The Washington Post reports that Judge Mostafa Hassan Abdallah stepped down because "he is presiding over another case related to violence allegedly perpetrated during Egypt’s uprising" while Al Jazeera says it was because the judge "did not wish to embarrass himself." CNN, on the other hand, is reporting that the judge "quit the case over a medical condition." And the Guardian claims he "resigned on the grounds that any judgment he made would be viewed suspiciously because of his previous involvement in trials of Mubarak-era officials."

All outlets seem to agree that the decision was not well-received inside the courtroom, which erupted in shouts of protest as the judge walked out and Mubarak (who turned up in style, wearing a "white tracksuit" and "gold-rimmed aviator sunglasses") was loaded onto a helicopter and flown back to a military hospital.

Interest in Mubarak's trial and punishment seems to have waned over time, as memories of Tahir Square grow more distant and hope that Mubarak will ever be punished fades.

From the Washington Post:

Many others have also grown bored — or even sympathetic to Mubarak, who suffers from a litany of health problems — as the court case slowly winds its way through a second year, and many other former officials have been acquitted for lack of evidence.

“It’s a cold case. You and I have to follow it, but everyone else is tired of it,” said Saad Abdel Wahed, a retired head of the Giza Criminal Court.

And Al Jazeera:

Our correspondent said that although Egyptians had turned out to witness the proceedings, "many feel the country has more important things to worry about".

According to Egyptian law, because Mubarak was sentenced to life in prison in his first trial, that is the most severe punishment he would face if his retrial ever does happen and he were to be convicted again. It is not yet known when the retrial will continue.

       

Report: The Syrian Chemical Weapons 'Red Line' Has Been Crossed

Just when we thought that those Syrian chemical weapons attack claims were another false alarm, The Times is reporting that British scientists have found "hard evidence" that chemical weapons were used "at least once." We just don't know which side used them. 

According to the Times' anonymous sources, soil samples believed to have been taken from an area near Damascus were smuggled back to Britain for testing. The samples tested positive, but it's not yet known for what, exactly. Nor is it known which side used the weapon in the first place, nor how often.  

President Obama has said that if Syrian president Bashar al-Assad ever used chemical weapons, he would cross a "red line" and "held accountable." But no one seems to agree on how to do that, and most countries have been happy not to have to figure it out. If the Times report is true, they will. Soon.

       

Obama's Other Job Doesn't Pay Like It Used To

President Obama may want to think twice about that sequester pay cut. His tax returns, released Friday, show that his main source of income -- which used to be royalties from the sale of his books -- is now his presidential salary. A salary that is now just 95 percent of what it once was.

According to the U.S. and foreign source income summary included with Obama's 2012 returns, his business (a.k.a. book-writing) earned $273,739. That certainly looks great, but not so much when you consider that he makes just under $400,000 at his day job.

This is the first year since he was elected that Obama has made more as a public servant than as an author. In 2008, tax returns show, his business earned $2.6 million. In 2009, that more than doubled to $5.7 million. The numbers came back down after that: $1.57 million in 2010, then $487.928 in 2011. Now it's just $273,739. 

Take note, Hillary Clinton: writing is a rough, rough business.

 

       

Did These Torrington Rape Documents Feed Social Media Victim Shaming?

The arrest warrants for two 18-year-olds accused of raping two 13-year-old girls were unsealed late Friday afternoon in Torrington, Connecticut, two months after the alleged attack, and they paint a very different picture of what happened than the story we've been hearing from the Torrington police — which is the same story the accused rapists' many student defenders on social media have been using to blame the alleged victims.

According to the Hartford Courant, Torrington police spokesman Lt. Mike Emanuel told reporters last month:

"It's very complex, but [the case is] under control," Emanuel said. "I'm not minimizing this," he said, but he stressed that the 13-year-olds knew the older teenagers. The reason the incidents are being investigated as sexual assaults is because the girls are so young and the age difference is more than three years.

"It was consensual in the sense that it was not an attack but not consensual in the eyes of the law," Emanuel said.

The social media campaign from within and around Torrington High framed the February incident similarly, as many users on Twitter and Instragram identified as classmates of the accused (one of whom was the school's football MPV) called the alleged attack rape in statutory name only and a "victimless crime."

If the accusations in the newly released warrants and police interviews are true, this was not the case. One of the 13-year-old girls "verbally told [Edgar] Gonzalez that she did not want to have sex" and "continued to say no" but he "had sex with her anyway." Gonzalez also grabbed her head and poured alcohol down her throat because she "needed a shot," according to the unsealed documents. The same girl said she "felt fuzzy from the alcohol" and told her mother that she smoked marijuana for the first time. Gonzalez said that he did not force the girl to have sex with him, but admitted that he knew she was 13 — it is illegal in Connecticut to have sex with a minor, and the state's three-year age boundary does not affect this case. The second girl, according to the new documents, did not smoke marijuana or drink on the night when the two snuck out of a sleepover to the house of the other suspect, Joan Toribio, and was very reluctant to speak to the police, telling them at one point that "I ruined his life."

That line of thinking — ruining lives, girls who "wanted the D," and worse — has been prevalent in the ongoing victim-shaming at Torrington High, even as the case unfolded in the press but stayed quiet in local law enforcement. Town and school officials seem helpless to figure out a way to stop the reactions, and asking Torrington High School students to stop attacking the victims on social media didn't help. Torrington police are not investigating it and the school system won't have an update to its bullying policy until May at the earliest, according to the Register Citizen.

There are a lot of questions left to answer on how to prevent this from happening again and again. Here's another one: Would unsealing those documents sooner have stopped the students from siding with the accused rapists and blaming the 13-year-old victims?