HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Good Reads (Forum) » NYPD for hire: how unifor...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:47 AM

NYPD for hire: how uniformed New York cops moonlight for banks | Naomi Wolf | Comment is free | guar

I was surprised two weeks ago to walk into my local TD Bank, on Greenwich Avenue in the West Village, New York to find that the security officer who was usually standing by, on alert, had been replaced by a uniformed, armed, radio-carrying New York Police Department officer, Officer Battle. I confirmed from him that he was, in fact, an NYPD officer and was working part-time for TD bank.

Of course, this raised red flags for me. After the violent crackdown onOccupy Wall Street in November of 2011, when that group was having some of its most significant successes in protests and actions that challenged private banks and Wall Street institutions, many wondered what had motivated the unexpected aggression against protesters by local police officers tasked, at least overtly by municipal law, with upholding their first amendment rights.

The NYPD became, at the time, coordinated in its crackdown once Occupy had started to target banks. Was there a relationship behind the scenes of which we were unaware?

Chase bank had made a gift of $4.6m to the Police Foundation boasting on its website that this "was the largest" in that group's history, and hoping that the money would allow the NYPD to "strengthen security". This police fund, as well as some details of a Rudi Giuliani-initiated program by which police officers had been hired by corporations, created a brief stir online.

But were Chase, TD, Bank of America and others, which had been targeted by activists, actually now employing our police forces directly?

The answer is yes. A nontransparent program called "Paid Detail Unit" has been set up so that private corporations are actually employing NYPD officers, who are in uniform and armed. The difference is that when these "public servants" are on the payroll of the banks, they are no longer serving you and the impartial rule of law in your city despite what their uniform and badge imply. Neither New York Councilwoman Christine Quinn's press office nor an NYPD's spokesman responded to my queries regarding this program.

I went to a second TD Bank, on Third Avenue in Manhattan. There was NYPD Officer Kearse, also armed and in uniform. I asked him who paid him to watch the bank: he confirmed that the Paid Detail Unit did so. The bank pays fees directly to the NYPD, and the NYPD then pays him, after taking a cut. Kearse works at the bank 6.5 hours per shift, twice a month. That's not much, he said, compared to many NYPD officers "who do lots more".

"What would you do if there were protesters in this bank branch?" I asked.

"I'd remove them," he said.

"What if there were a conflict of interest between what the bank wanted him to do and what the rule of law was for citizens?" I asked.

He did not reply.

I asked a manager at the branch what the role of the NYPD officer was in the bank. She said, "All I know is he is there to watch us." She called a more senior manager to answer the rest of my questions, Patrick O'Toole:

"They are New York City police officers off-duty, paid by the Paid Detail Unit," he said. This is a program "that various corporations are able to use to obtain off-duty police officers for whatever purpose they need them. The bank supplies every branch in New York City with an off-duty police officer."

In the event of a protest, I asked, whom would the officer be working for? The bank, or the city and the citizens of New York? "I wouldn't know," he said, and referred me to TD Bank corporate security. "He's working under us when he's here: we pay Paid Detail and the NYPD writes the checks."

Crooksandliars.com shone rare light on the size of this program. According to that report, the city gets a 10% administrative fee, which, in 2011, amounted to $1.18m meaning that PDU wages netted NYPD officers a total of $11.8m, an amount which had doubled since 2002

Full story: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/17/nypd-for-hire-cops-moonlighting-banks

22 replies, 1659 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 22 replies Author Time Post
Reply NYPD for hire: how uniformed New York cops moonlight for banks | Naomi Wolf | Comment is free | guar (Original post)
geefloyd46 Dec 2012 OP
Smarmie Doofus Dec 2012 #1
adirondacker Dec 2012 #4
docgee Dec 2012 #2
George II Dec 2012 #3
Smarmie Doofus Dec 2012 #5
George II Dec 2012 #7
Smarmie Doofus Dec 2012 #8
George II Dec 2012 #13
geefloyd46 Dec 2012 #9
Heywood J Dec 2012 #10
George II Dec 2012 #12
Heywood J Dec 2012 #14
George II Dec 2012 #16
snot Dec 2012 #6
cbrer Dec 2012 #11
discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #15
George II Dec 2012 #17
discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #18
jsr Dec 2012 #19
discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #20
geefloyd46 Dec 2012 #21
discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #22

Response to geefloyd46 (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:22 AM

1. "He OWNS the police."

- Faye Dunaway, CHINATOWN

Jesus. I guess it's happened already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Smarmie Doofus (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:52 AM

4. I just watched that movie last week. Classic! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geefloyd46 (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:42 AM

2. That one question is the one that definitely needs answering:

"What if there were a conflict of interest between what the bank wanted him to do and what the rule of law was for citizens?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geefloyd46 (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:50 AM

3. It's not "NYPD" for hire, it's an off-duty policeman working privately....

....this has been going on in NYC for decades.

In Connecticut off-duty policeman work at road constructions sites WITH their patrol cars, and are paid by the construction company.

Why are people trying to make an issue of this all of a sudden?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:08 AM

5. Because of the (potential) dilemma posed by post #2 . n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Smarmie Doofus (Reply #5)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:40 AM

7. That is a purely hypothetical question.......

....that assumes the bank would ask an off-duty police officer to do something in violation of the law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:56 AM

8. Ya. That could never happen. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Smarmie Doofus (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:38 PM

13. Correct

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:57 PM

9. I have friends that are policemen. The real money they make are often in details...

That means they are dependent on the banks for their livelihood. In a day where legal civil protests are occurring right outside the banks. It calls into question where some of these policemen's heart are the public they supposedly serve or their pocketbook.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:25 PM

10. If he were working privately,

he wouldn't be in uniform and it wouldn't be going through the Paid Detail Unit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Heywood J (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:38 PM

12. Not true....fact is he is working privately and he's in uniform....a little research might help!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #12)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:05 AM

14. The article says they are paid by the NYPD.

His paycheck comes from his public employer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Heywood J (Reply #14)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:52 PM

16. From the article.......

.....""He's working under us when he's here: we pay Paid Detail * and the NYPD writes the checks."

also from the article..."the city gets a 10% administrative fee"

*The MONEY comes from the bank, it's administered through the police department. They're NOT public funds that are used. One of the big reasons for that is the NYPD already has payroll and administrative records for each officer. It's cost effective to do it this way and the city benefits overall through the administrative fee.

I still don't see why this is such a big issue for people. It's been going on for years in NYC (maybe longer), and for decades in other jurisdictions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geefloyd46 (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:46 AM

6. K&R'd!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geefloyd46 (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:05 PM

11. Hey, give 'em a break

 

It's expensive to maintain an office in Israel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geefloyd46 (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:01 AM

15. Here's my questions:

Hypothetically, if an officer is present during and testifies regarding an incident where the interests of the bank and a member of the public are in conflict, will the officer's testimony be above deontological reproach?

Hypothetically, if an officer testifies and is later found to have been less than complete, comprehensive, and correct in elements of his testimony in the bank's favor, will the officer's testimony in other cases not also become questionable?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #15)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:54 PM

17. It's doubtful that a police officer would risk his career and pension by committing perjury.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #17)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:12 PM

18. I didn't mention perjury.

It is often more difficult in situations, where subtleties and nuance can become important, to maintain an objective ethical compass.

In a court of law the testimony of a LEO is special in that it is his part of his position to remain objective. While it may not be possible to prove an officer has perjured himself, raising a reasonable doubt with a jury can have significant consequences. Those consequences may not be limited to a single case.

Some NYPD officers have been discovered illegally selling firearms. How can we in general rule out the influence of money and the need for independence within the justice system?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geefloyd46 (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:24 PM

19. Damn

but I'm not surprised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geefloyd46 (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:20 PM

20. On second thought...

...perhaps the police should make themselves available (financed by donations from parents) for the same duty at schools rather than banks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #20)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:06 PM

21. Banks tend to pay better...

They can get money from the vault while what are they going to get in schools Apples.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geefloyd46 (Reply #21)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:23 PM

22. re: "...what are they going to get in schools Apples..."

A clear conscience, maybe $15/hour, a few insults from the gang types if middle or high school, what more could you ask for?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread