STOP-AND-FRISK 2012 NYCLU BRIEFING

Transcription

1 STOP-AND-FRISK 2012 NYCLU BRIEFING In May 2012, the New York Civil Liberties Union released a detailed analysis of the NYPD s stop-and-frisk activity during Based on the NYPD database that the Department now makes public following earlier NYCLU litigation, the 2011 report examined stops, frisks, summonses, arrests, the use of force and gun recoveries, all on a citywide and precinct basis. The 2011 report also delved into the wide racial disparities in the NYPD s stop-and-frisk regime. Since the release of the NYCLU report last year, the stop-and-frisk controversy in New York City has grown enormously. Shortly after release of the report, public officials and candidates seeking to succeed Mayor Michael Bloomberg started to regularly raise concerns about the stopand-frisk program. In the summer of 2012, Mayor Bloomberg went on the offensive, attempting to aggressively defend the program by claiming that it reduces shootings and saves lives. In October 2012, a federal judge presided over a hearing in a case brought by the NYCLU and others challenging the part of the stop-and-frisk regime conducted at private residential buildings enrolled in the Clean Halls program in the Bronx. In January 2013, the court ruled that the NYPD was systematically stopping building residents, visitors and passersby unlawfully. Meanwhile, a package of NYPD reform bills in the City Council, collectively referred to as the Community Safety Act, has generated robust public discussion and is moving towards passage. Among other things, the bills would ban profiling by the NYPD and create an inspector general to review Department practices. Finally, just days before the release of this report, a federal judge heard closing arguments in a two-month trial challenging the enormous number of street stops that are at the heart of New York City s stop-and-frisk regime. A ruling in that case is expected this summer. With all of these developments, a close examination of the stop-and-frisk activity from 2012 becomes particularly important. As with last year s NYCLU report, this report discloses detailed information about all aspects of the NYPD s stop-and-frisk program, including detailed breakdowns by precinct. New to this report is an analysis of marijuana-related aspects of the NYPD s stop-and-frisk regime. May 2013 Data analysis by NYCLU Data and Policy Analyst Sara LaPlante; report written by NYCLU Associate Legal Director Christopher Dunn; reported edited by NYCLU Communications Director Jennifer Carnig.

2 DATA HIGHLIGHTS The 532,911 stops in 2012 (a decrease of 22 percent from 2011) were spread unevenly amongst the city s 76 precincts, with the 75 th Precinct (East New York) leading the city with 24,408 stops. Setting aside the Central Park Precinct (22 nd ), the 17 th Precinct (Kipps Bay) had the fewest stops at 1,331. In 71 out of 76 precincts, black and Latino New Yorkers accounted for more than 50 percent of stops, and in 36 precincts they accounted for more than 90 percent of stops. In the 10 precincts with the lowest black and Latino populations (such as the 6 th Precinct in Greenwich Village), blacks and Latinos accounted for more than 70 percent of stops in six of those precincts. Young black and Latino men were the targets of a hugely disproportionate number of stops. Though they account for only 4.7 percent of the city s population, black and Latino males between the ages of 14 and 24 accounted for 40.6 percent of stops in The number of stops of young black men neared the entire city population of young black men (133,119 as compared to 158,406). More than 90 percent of young black and Latino men stopped were innocent. Though frisks are to be conducted only when an officer reasonably suspects the person has a weapon that might endanger officer safety, 55.8 percent of those stopped were frisked. Of those frisked, a weapon was found only 2 percent of the time. Frisks varied enormously by precinct, with officers in the 110 th Precinct in Queens frisking people 81.4 percent of the time, as compared to a low of 27.3 percent in the 19 th Precinct on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Black and Latino New Yorkers were more likely to be frisked than white New Yorkers and, among those frisked, were less likely to be found with a weapon. In 2012 as compared to 2003 (the earliest year a gun recovery figure is available), the NYPD conducted 372,060 more stops but recovered only 96 more guns. This amounts to an additional recovery rate of 0.02 percent. Of the 473,644 stops of innocent people in 2012, 53.7 percent were frisked. The 75 th Precinct led the city in stops of innocent people with 22,776 such stops. Excluding the Central Park Precinct, the 17 th Precinct had the fewest with 1,181. More than 26,000 people were stopped for alleged marijuana possession. More people were arrested for marijuana-possession offenses than for any other type of offense. Despite the fact that possession of small amounts of marijuana is a crime only if burned in public or openly carried in public, contraband of any sort was recovered in only 8.5 percent of marijuana stops. 2

3 ` I. OVERVIEW As the NYCLU previously disclosed, the NYPD conducted more than 500,000 stops in The total of 532,911 stops marked a decrease of 152,813 stops (22 percent) from Through the end of 2012, during the 11 years of the Bloomberg administration, there have been 4,889,838 stops. Annual stops have been as follows: 700, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,000 97, , The number of stops in 2012 varied widely by precinct. The 75 th Precinct (East New York) led the city with 24,408 stops. Excluding the Central Park Precinct (22 nd ), the 17 th Precinct (Kipps Bay) had the fewest stops at 1,331. The top and bottom five precincts are as follows: 3

4 When stops are measured as a percentage of precinct populations, there again is a wide range among precincts. Setting aside one atypical precinct, 1 the 73 rd Precinct (Brownsville) had the greatest percentage of stops as measured against its population with stops representing 25.6 percent of the total population, while the 17 th Precinct (Kipps Bay) had the lowest percentage at 2 percent. The top and bottom five precincts are as follows: As in past years, the most common reason given in 2012 for stops was furtive movement, with officers identifying this as a reason in more than half of all stops (51.5 percent, or 274,645 stops). The reasons identified for stops in 2012 break down as follows: 1 The precinct with the highest stop percentage when measured against population is the Midtown South Precinct (14 th ) in the Times Square area, with a stop percentage of 43.3 percent. Because this precinct sees enormous influxes of people who are not residents, however, the NYCLU has excluded this precinct from this particular analysis (but only from this analysis). 4

5 ` It is notable that violent crime suspected was a reason listed in only 11.1 percent of stops. The NYPD routinely argues that the disproportionate number of stops of black people is justified because black people are disproportionately involved in violent crimes. Given that nearly 90 percent of stops have nothing to do with a suspected violent crime, the race of those involved in violent crime generally cannot explain the disproportionate number of black New Yorkers stopped every year. As has been true throughout the Bloomberg administration, black and Latino New Yorkers were overwhelmingly the targets of stop-and-frisk activity in Of the 532,911 stops last year, 284,229 (54.8 percent) 2 were of black people, and 165,140 (31.8 percent) were of Latinos. Conversely, whites accounted for only 50,366 (9.7 percent) of the stops. In 71 out of 76 precincts, black and Latino New Yorkers accounted for more than half of all stops. Led by the 67 th and 73 rd Precincts in Brooklyn with 99.1 percent of black and Latino stops, there were 36 precincts where more than 90 percent of those stopped were black and Latino. By contrast, the lowest percentage was in the 123 rd Precinct (Tottenville on Staten Island) where 15 percent of those stopped were black or Latino. The top and bottom five precincts are as follows: 2 In a negligible number of cases, race and age information is not recorded in the database. Throughout this report, percentages of race and age are percentages of those cases where race and age are recorded, not of all stops. 5

6 The NYPD often seeks to justify the high percentage of stops of black and Latino New Yorkers by contending that those high percentages merely reflect the concentration of stop-and-frisk activity in high-crime precincts that are black and Latino. While there are many responses to this contention that are beyond the scope of this report, the 2012 data are striking in what they reveal about the large percentages of blacks and Latinos being stopped in precincts that have substantial percentages of white residents. For instance, the population of the 17 th Precinct, which covers the East Side of Manhattan, has the lowest percentage of black and Latino residents in the city at 7.8 percent, yet 74 percent of those stopped in the precinct were black or Latino. Similarly, the 6 th Precinct, covering Greenwich Village, is 8 percent black and Latino, yet 83.5 percent of stops there were of blacks and Latinos. The 10 precincts with the lowest black and Latino populations are as follows: 6

7 ` Young black and Latino males were the targets of a hugely disproportionate number of stops in While black and Latino males between the ages of 14 and 24 account for only 4.7 percent of the city s population, they accounted for 40.6 percent of those stopped. By contrast, white males between the ages 14 and 24 make up 2 percent of the city s population but accounted for 3.9 percent of stops. Remarkably, the number of stops of young black men last year almost matched the total number of young black men in the city (133,119 as compared to 158,406). 7

8 II. FRISKS AND FORCE Though the term stop-and-frisk is often used, stops and frisks are two separate acts that involve two different levels of required legal justification. To stop a person, a police officer must have reasonable suspicion the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit an unlawful act. To frisk a person, however, the officer must have reason to believe the person stopped has a weapon that poses a threat to the officer s safety, a higher and more specific standard. Data from 2012 stops indicate that NYPD officers are routinely frisking people without suspicion that the person has a weapon. Of the 532,911 stops last years, officers conducted frisks in 297,244 of them, or 55.8 percent of all stops. 3 While this figure alone strongly suggests that officers are engaging in far too many frisks, the concern that officers are unjustifiably frisking people is clearly demonstrated by the fact that weapons were found in only 2 percent of the instances in which frisks were conducted in The number of frisks and frisk rates varied enormously by precinct. The precinct with the most frisks was the 40 th Precinct in the Bronx with 12,841 while (setting aside the Central Park Precinct) the precinct with the fewest was the 17 th Precinct on the East Side of Manhattan with 404. The precinct with the highest frisk rate was the 110 th Precinct in Queens, where 81.4 percent of stops had frisks; at the bottom was the 19 th Precinct, with a frisk rate of 27.3 percent. The top and bottom five precincts in frisks and frisk rates are as follows: 3 In 44,248 stops (8.3 percent of all stops), officers conducted full searches of the person stopped. 8

9 ` Given that far more black and Latino New Yorkers were stopped in 2012, one would expect that more blacks and Latinos would be frisked, and that was true. Of the 297,244 frisks, 258,952 (89.2 percent) were of blacks and Latinos. By contrast, only 22,085 frisks (7.6 percent) were of whites. 200, , , ,000 95,671 50, ,085 9,177 Black Latino White Asian, 9 Am. Indian

10 What one would not expect and what raises further concerns about racial bias in the NYPD s stop-and-frisk program is that blacks and Latinos were more likely to be frisked and, among those frisked, are far less likely to be found with a weapon. Of blacks and Latinos who were stopped, 57.6 percent were frisked, while 43.8 percent of whites who were stopped were frisked. Yet, a weapon was found in only 1.8 percent of blacks and Latinos frisked, as compared to a weapon being found in 3.9 percent of whites frisked. These figures strongly indicate that race is a factor in officer decisions to frisk a person. In some circumstances, officers are authorized to use physical force in conjunction with a stop. On the form officers complete in conjunction with stops (known as a UF-250), they are to indicate if force is used and, if it is, to check one of the following boxes: hands on suspect, suspect on ground, pointing firearm at suspect, handcuffing suspect, suspect against wall/car, drawing firearm, baton, pepper spray and other. In 92,073 of recorded stops (17.3 percent) in 2012, at least one act of force was recorded. In many cases more than one act of force was used, with a total of 110,120 acts of force being used in those 92,073 stops. The incidents of force used in 2012 break down as follows: 10

11 ` The use of force varied widely across the city. In terms of stops where force was used, the 44 th Precinct in the Bronx had the most with 6,670, while the Central Park Precinct (the 22 nd ) had the fewest at 23. In terms of frequency of force being used, it was still most common in the 44 th Precinct, where force was used in 43.3 percent of stops. By contrast, force was used in only 3.3 percent of stops in the 111 th Precinct in Queens (Bayside, Douglaston, Little Neck). The top and bottom five precincts by force used and force rates are as follows: 11

12 Far more black and Latino New Yorkers had force used against them in 2012 than did white people (80,789 as compared to 6,308). This is not simply the result of more blacks and Latinos being stopped. Rather, NYPD data show that blacks and Latinos who are stopped are significantly more likely to have force used against them than are whites, as shown by the chart below: 20.0% 18.0% 15.0% 12.5% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Black, Latino White 12

13 ` III. GUN RECOVERY The NYPD has increasingly sought to justify the large number of stops on the grounds that the stop-and-frisk program is critically important to recovering guns. In making this claim, the Department has noted that in 2012 stop-and-frisk resulted in the recovery of more than 700 guns. The Department s citation to this figure is significantly misleading, however, when used in attempt to justify the increase in stops during the Bloomberg administration. In truth, while the number of stops has increased enormously since 2003 (the earliest year for which a gun recovery figure is available), the number of additional weapons being recovered as a result of those additional stops is tiny, as shown in the following graphs: 13

14 Comparing 2012 to 2003 illustrates this point. In 2003, the Department recovered 633 guns when it conducted 160,851 stops. In 2012, the Department conducted an additional 372,060 stops (for a total of 532,911). Yet those additional stops yielded only 96 more guns than were recovered in 2003 (729 compared to 633). 4 The additional stops saw a gun recovery rate of only 0.02 percent. Cast somewhat differently, stops in 2003 resulted in one gun recovered for every 254 people stopped. The additional 372,060 stops in 2012 (above the 2003 level) resulted in just one gun recovered for every 3,876 additional people stopped. 4 The Stop-and-Frisk 2011 NYCLU Briefing excluded the number of assault weapons found from the total number of guns found. The numbers quoted here and shown in the graph above now include assault weapons. 14

15 ` IV. STOPS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Of the 532,911 stops in 2012, 473,644 were of people who had engaged in no unlawful behavior as evidenced by the fact they were not issued a summons nor arrested. Of those, 254,522 were black (55.2 percent), 145,305 Latino (31.5 percent), and 44,505 white (9.7 percent). Young black and Latino males bore the brunt of these stops, accounting for 189,144 stops of innocent people (38.2 percent). In the 75 th Precinct in Brooklyn, there were 22,776 stops of innocent people, the highest number of any precinct in the city. By contrast, the 1,181 stops of innocent people in the 17 th Precinct (Kipps Bay) marked the lowest number of any precinct in the city (excluding the Central Park Precinct). The top and bottom five precincts are as follows: 15

16 The highest percentage of stops that were of innocent people came in the 70 th Precinct (Flatbush), where 95.0 percent of people stopped were innocent. The lowest percentage was in the 9 th Precinct (East Village), though even there 78.6 percent of the stops were of innocent people. The top and bottom five precincts are as follows: More than half of the innocent people stopped were frisked (254,181, or 53.7 percent), and 15 percent of them had force used against them (71,113, or 15.0 percent). 16

17 ` V. MARIJUANA ENFORCEMENT In 1977, New York effectively decriminalized marijuana possession and use. Currently, private possession of 25 grams of marijuana or less is a non-criminal violation like speeding or driving through a stop sign. What remains a criminal misdemeanor is possession of marijuana in a public place if the marijuana is burning or open to public view. Despite this move to decriminalization, NYPD arrests for alleged misdemeanor marijuana offenses during the Bloomberg administration have soared, averaging nearly 40,000 arrests each year since 2002 and totaling nearly 90,000 for The NYCLU and others have long expressed the concern that unlawful frisking and searching in conjunction with NYPD street stops has played a significant role in fueling these arrests. The NYPD s stop-and-frisk data support this concern. In 2012, the NYPD recorded more than 26,000 stops for suspected marijuana-possession offenses, nearly 5 percent of all stops (26,225 or 4.9 percent). Though national research indicates that white people actually use marijuana at higher rates than black people, NYPD marijuana stops were heavily skewed towards blacks, with 61.4 percent of stops being of black New Yorkers and only 8.7 percent being of whites. The contraband-recovery and arrest statistics for marijuana offenses strongly suggest that officers are stopping people for alleged marijuana offenses without any actual justification. Thus, despite the fact that the misdemeanor offense requires that the marijuana be in public view and that police officers can stop people only after seeing what appears to be marijuana, in only 8.5 percent of all misdemeanor marijuana stops was any type of contraband recovered (which might include drugs other than marijuana). Consistent with this, only 13.9 percent of people arrested in conjunction with marijuana stops were arrested for any offense. Perhaps the most remarkable fact arising out of the NYCLU s analysis of the role of marijuana in the NYPD s stop-and-frisk program is that marijuana possession offenses are the top arrest category for the entire program. In 2012 there were 5,307 arrests for marijuana-possession offenses, which represented nearly one in six arrests (16.4 percent). The seven offenses for which there were more than 1,000 arrests are listed below. 17

18 Thus, despite the NYPD s repeated claim that its stop-and-frisk program is valuable because it targets guns, the facts show that it is much more a marijuana arrest program. As noted earlier in this report, in 2012 the NYPD recovered 729 guns through the stop-and-frisk program. By contrast, more than 5,000 people were arrested last year under the program for marijuanapossession offenses. 18

19 Stop-and Frisk 2012 APPENDIX Total Stops 532,911 total - 32,315 arrests 6.1% 284,229 black 54.8% 165,140 Latino 31.8% 50,366 white 9.7% 487,065 men 92.8% 265,378 ages % 729 guns found 0.1% Frisks Searches 297,244 total 55.8% 44,248 total 8.3% 27,148 arrests 9.1% 19,737 arrests 44.6% 163,281 black 56.3% 22,683 black 52.5% 95,671 Latino 33.0% 14,432 Latino 33.4% 22,085 white 7.6% 4,423 white 10.2% 282,484 men 96.3% 41,249 men 94.3% 162,236 ages % 21,706 ages % 6,209 weapons found 2.0% 6,635 weapons found 10.0% 688 guns found 0.2% 608 guns found 1.3% Force Innocent Stops (no arrest or summons) 92,073 total 17.3% 473,644 total 88.9% 14,859 arrests 16.1% 254,522 black 55.2% 49,018 black 54.5% 145,305 Latino 31.5% 31,771 Latino 35.3% 44,505 white 9.7% 6,308 white 7.0% 433,865 men 93.0% 86,378 men 95.0% 239,206 ages % 48,749 ages % 254,181 frisks 53.7% 492 guns found 0.5% 71,113 force used 15.0% NYC Population 8,185,314 total - 1,875,108 black 22.9% 2,346,883 Latino 28.7% 2,717,796 white 33.2% 3,885,589 men 47.5% 1,278,233 ages % source: 2010 American Community Survey 19

20 Stop-and-Frisk 2012 Total Stops by Precinct Ranking Number of Stops Stops as a Percentage of the Population Precinct Stops Rank Precinct % of Population* Rank 75 24, % , % , % ,414 4 Precinct Stops Rank % 4 Precinct % of Population* Rank 79 15, , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % *Population data from the 2010 Census.

21 Stop-and-Frisk 2012 Black and Latino Stops by Precinct Ranking Black and Latino Stops Black and Latino Stops as a Percentage of Total Stops Precinct Stops Rank Precinct % of Total Stops Rank 75 22, % , % , % ,446 4 Precinct Stops Rank % 4 Precinct % of Total Stops Rank 79 14, , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % 45 21

22 Stop-and-Frisk 2012 Black and Latino Stops by the Black and Latino Population Black and Latino Stops by the Black and Latino Population Precinct Black and Latino Population* Black and Latino Stops % 74.0% 6 8.0% 83.5% % 76.9% % 15.0% Precinct Black and Latino Population* Black and Latino Stops % 79.0% % 94.7% % 46.5% % 96.0% % 55.2% % 97.1% % 74.3% % 95.7% % 78.3% % 98.8% % 43.7% % 97.7% % 33.7% % 96.8% % 70.6% % 96.5% % 79.8% % 96.7% % 34.4% % 96.1% % 63.0% % 97.1% % 81.4% % 95.4% % 82.7% % 97.2% % 57.9% % 93.9% % 82.6% % 96.6% % 84.8% % 97.6% % 81.6% % 98.2% % 87.5% % 97.8% % 75.0% % 98.1% % 84.5% % 96.1% % 78.3% % 98.4% % 88.7% % 98.0% % 84.0% % 98.3% % 72.2% % 99.1% % 80.4% % 98.4% % 80.9% % 98.8% % 90.3% % 99.1% % 83.1% % 98.8% % 87.2% % 97.9% % 87.2% % 99.0% % 95.9% % % 91.0% *Population data from the 2010 Census % 88.9% % 85.4% % 92.1% % 83.9% % 89.2% % 97.0% % 92.4% % 80.0% % 86.5% 22

23 Stop-and-Frisk 2012 Frisks by Precinct Ranking Number of Frisks Frisks as a Percentage of Total Stops Precinct Frisks Rank Precinct % of Total Stops Rank 40 12, % , % , % ,951 4 Precinct Frisks Rank % 4 Precinct % of Total Stops Rank 79 8, , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % 45 23

24 Stop-and-Frisk 2012 Force by Precinct Ranking Number of Stops Where Force Was Used Stops Where Force Was Used as a Percentage of Total Stops Precinct Stops Rank Precinct % of Total Stops Rank 44 6, % , % , % ,020 4 Precinct Stops Rank % 4 Precinct % of Total Stops Rank 75 2, % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % , % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % 45 24

25 Stop-and-Frisk 2012 Innocent Stops by Precinct Ranking Number of Innocent Stops Innocent Stops as a Percentage of Total Stops Precinct Stops Rank Precinct % of Total Stops Rank 75 22, % , % , % ,064 4 Precinct Stops Rank % 4 Precinct % of Total Stops Rank 44 13, , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , , % % , % % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % , % 45 25

26 Stop-and-Frisk 2012 Data by Precinct Precinct Total Stops Black, Latino Stops Frisks Force Innocent Stops Black, Latino Pop Total % of pop Total % of Total Stops Total % of Total Stops Total % of Total Stops Total % of Total Stops % Black, Latino 1 3, % 2, % 1, % % 2, % 10.0% 5 2, % 1, % 1, % % 2, % 15.6% 6 3, % 2, % 1, % % 3, % 8.0% 7 3, % 2, % 2, % % 3, % 40.0% 9 5, % 3, % 2, % 1, % 4, % 31.1% 10 2, % 1, % 1, % % 2, % 24.6% 13 3, % 2, % 1, % % 3, % 13.8% 14 8, % 6, % 2, % 1, % 8, % 17.2% 17 1, % % % % 1, % 7.8% 18 2, % 2, % % % 2, % 21.3% 19 4, % 3, % 1, % % 3, % 9.0% 20 3, % 2, % 1, % % 2, % 12.1% % % % % , % 10, % 5, % % 10, % 75.6% 24 4, % 3, % 1, % % 3, % 32.6% 25 6, % 5, % 3, % 1, % 5, % 87.8% 26 5, % 5, % 2, % % 4, % 45.3% 28 6, % 6, % 2, % % 6, % 77.0% 30 6, % 5, % 3, % % 5, % 85.3% 32 10, % 10, % 6, % 3, % 8, % 90.3% 33 3, % 3, % 2, % % 3, % 85.2% 34 9, % 8, % 4, % 1, % 8, % 73.6% 40 18, % 17, % 12, % 5, % 15, % 96.8% 41 8, % 7, % 5, % 1, % 7, % 96.9% 42 7, % 7, % 5, % 2, % 6, % 97.0% 43 10, % 9, % 6, % 1, % 9, % 88.5% 44 15, % 14, % 11, % 6, % 13, % 95.4% 45 3, % 3, % 1, % % 3, % 58.9% 46 5, % 5, % 4, % 2, % 4, % 95.5% 47 8, % 8, % 5, % 2, % 7, % 88.0% 48 5, % 4, % 3, % 1, % 5, % 90.1% 49 5, % 4, % 3, % % 5, % 62.8% 50 1, % 1, % % % 1, % 54.6% 52 9, % 9, % 6, % 2, % 8, % 84.1% 60 7, % 5, % 4, % 1, % 7, % 29.6% 61 6, % 2, % 2, % % 6, % 11.5% 62 4, % 1, % 2, % % 3, % 14.1% 63 3, % 2, % 2, % % 3, % 51.4% 66 3, % 2, % 1, % % 2, % 15.3% 67 10, % 10, % 6, % % 10, % 95.2% 68 2, % % % % 2, % 15.8% 69 5, % 5, % 2, % 1, % 4, % 89.3% 70 11, % 9, % 6, % 1, % 10, % 51.1% 71 4, % 4, % 2, % % 4, % 77.3% 72 5, % 4, % 2, % % 4, % 48.4% 73 22, % 21, % 9, % 1, % 20, % 96.3% 75 24, % 22, % 12, % 2, % 22, % 88.3% 76 4, % 3, % 1, % % 3, % 35.8% 26

27 Stop-and-Frisk 2012 Data by Precinct (continued) Precinct Total Stops Black, Latino Stops Frisks Force Innocent Stops Black, Latino Pop Total % of pop Total % of Total Stops Total % of Total Stops Total % of Total Stops Total % of Total Stops % Black, Latino 77 9, % 9, % 5, % % 9, % 77.5% 78 3, % 2, % 1, % % 3, % 23.5% 79 15, % 14, % 8, % 1, % 14, % 78.8% 81 9, % 9, % 6, % % 8, % 92.7% 83 11, % 10, % 7, % 1, % 10, % 85.5% 84 3, % 3, % 1, % % 3, % 24.9% 88 5, % 5, % 3, % % 4, % 58.5% 90 9, % 8, % 4, % % 9, % 38.7% 94 2, % 1, % % % 1, % 19.2% 100 4, % 3, % 2, % % 3, % 39.2% 101 9, % 9, % 7, % 1, % 8, % 74.5% 102 6, % 4, % 3, % 1, % 5, % 49.2% , % 11, % 7, % 2, % 11, % 71.1% 104 4, % 3, % 3, % % 4, % 36.0% 105 8, % 6, % 4, % % 7, % 67.0% 106 5, % 2, % 2, % % 4, % 40.3% 107 4, % 3, % 2, % 1, % 3, % 29.6% 108 4, % 2, % 1, % % 3, % 36.5% 109 9, % 6, % 6, % 2, % 8, % 18.9% 110 9, % 8, % 7, % 2, % 8, % 57.6% 111 3, % 1, % 2, % % 3, % 12.1% 112 2, % 1, % 1, % % 2, % 16.0% 113 8, % 8, % 5, % 1, % 7, % 92.8% 114 8, % 6, % 5, % 1, % 7, % 37.2% 115 8, % 7, % 6, % 3, % 7, % 70.4% , % 10, % 5, % 1, % 10, % 50.4% 122 6, % 2, % 2, % % 5, % 14.1% 123 1, % % % % 1, % 9.4% 27

28 New York City Precincts by race Majority black & Latino (38 precincts) Not majority black & Latino (38 precincts) Race data from 2010 Census. Blocks by precinct compiled by John Keefe. Precinct outline by Harry Levine.

29 New York City Precincts Manhattan (22 precincts) Brooklyn (23 precincts) 1 Financial District, Tribeca 60 Coney Island, Brighton Beach 5 Chinatown, Little Italy 61 Sheepshead Bay 6 Greenwich Village, Soho 62 Bensonhurst 7 Lower East Side 63 Mill Basin, Flatlands 9 East Village 66 Borough Park, Kensington 10 Chelsea 67 East Flatbush 13 Gramercy, Stuyvesant Town 68 Bay Ridge, Dyker Heights 14 Midtown South, Times Square, Garment District 69 Canarsie 17 Kipps Bay, Murray Hill, Turtle Bay 70 Flatbush, Ditmas Park 18 Midtown North, Theatre District 71 Crown Heights (south), Lefferts Gardens 19 Upper East Side 72 Sunset Park, Windsor Terrace 20 Upper West Side (south) 73 Brownsville, Ocean Hill 22 Central Park 75 East New York, Starret City 23 East Harlem (south) 76 Red Hook, Carroll Gardens 24 Upper West Side (north) 77 Crown Heights (north), Prospect Heights 25 East Harlem (north) 78 Park Slope, Prospect Park 26 Morningside Heights 79 BedStuy (west) 28 Central Harlem (south) 81 BedStuy (east) 30 Manhattanville, West Harlem, Hamilton Heights 83 Bushwick 32 Central Harlem (north) 84 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO, Boerum Hill 33 Washington Heights (south) 88 Fort Greene, Clinton Hill 34 Washington Heights (north), Inwood 90 Williamsburg 94 Greenpoint The Bronx (12 precincts) 40 Mott Haven, Melrose Queens (16 precincts) 41 Hunts Point 100 Rockaway, Broad Channel 42 Morrisania, Crotona Park East 101 Far Rockaway 43 Soundview, Parkchester 102 Richmond Hill, Woodhaven, Ozone Park (north) 44 Concourse, Highbridge 103 Jamaica (south), Hollis 45 Throgs Neck, Co-op City, Pelham Bay 104 Ridgewood, Middle Village, Glendale 46 University Heights, Morris Heights, Fordham (south) 105 Queens Village, Rosedale 47 Eastchester, Wakefield, Williamsbridge 106 Ozone Park (south), Howard Beach 48 East Tremont, Belmont 107 Jamaica (north), Fresh Meadows, Hillcrest 49 Pelham Parkway, Morris Park, Bronxdale 108 Long Island City (south), Sunnyside, Woodside 50 Riverdale, Fieldston, Kingsbridge 109 Flushing, Bay Terrace 52 Bedford Park, Fordham (north), Norwood 110 Elmhurst, South Corona 111 Bayside, Douglaston, Little Neck Staten Island (3 precincts) 112 Forest Hills, Rego Park 120 St. George, West Brighton, Port Richmond 113 St. Albans, Springfield Gardens 122 New Dorp, Todt Hill, Bloomfield 114 Astoria, Long Island City (north), Rikers Island 123 Tottenville, Bay Terrace 115 Jackson Heights Majority black and Latino precincts underlined. Adapted from list by Harry Levine.