Gyroscopic Investing

I was out of the country for the past week (thus my total absence from the forum), and just came back to work this AM to hear a rather shocking story from my postdoctoral fellow.

As the university does not provide housing for postdocs, he picked an apartment a couple blocks from work, in an area that was historically sketchy but is currently pretty safe though not gentrified (read:  largely Hispanic/lower class/favorite adjective here).

A few days ago, he woke up to find that the NYPD had broken into his apartment with guns drawn and pointed at his head.  They said they had evidence of some drug deals against him, something about a video and an informer from the building who gave the NYPD his apartment number.  He asked about a warrant and they did not show him one.  They handcuffed him and took him to jail.  He had to run to an appointment with a lawyer he found through friends so didn't tell me the rest of the story, but he did say they did not read him his rights and that he hasn't been charged.  He wasn't in the jail for more than an hour or so.

It sounds like a case of mistaken identity, but also a pretty spectacular bit of overreach by the NYPD not to mention that this could be something that affects him in important ways in future unless he can get completely cleared.  I put in a call to the university's legal counsel to see if there's something the university can do to help, but other than that I expect I'll get more info after he comes back from his meeting with the lawyer.

Needless to say, the fellow in question has zero chance of having engaged in anything like what he is suspected of.  He is a bioengineering PhD with his sights set on an academic career, and he's not only been super hard working and productive for the two years he's been here, but he's the nicest and most straightforward person you could hope to meet.

Suggestions, comments etc appreciated!!!!

I have a lawyer friend in NYC who is very interested in cases like this. PM sent.

Wow. I hope he sues the city. I would.

WiseOne,

I can't offer anything but moral support. Help him be strong through this, as he is probably scared out of his mind.  I'm sure he's going to be left with some decisions over the coming days and months that will have a short-term pain & long-term gain trade-off aspect to them.  Here's hoping he has the fortitude to make the wise decisions for himself, and possibly even the citizenry of New York City. Though I certainly can't judge him if he makes decisions out of fear. I can't imagine the will he probably has to "cooperate" right now and get the hell out of there.

Best of luck to him!  He's lucky to have someone like you up to bat for him. In a situation like this, resources on the outside are indispensable. 

And I agree with dualstow. Hopefully he'll have a check coming.

Pointedstick wrote: I have a lawyer friend in NYC who is very interested in cases like this. PM sent.

I used to get annoyed with "civil liberties" focused attorneys and activist public defenders that cover people due to what they foresee as wrongs of the government. Usually as it pertained to the war on terror, as well as certain violent crimes that earned criminals an ass-whooping by police.

I'm pretty embarrassed about that viewpoint now. Tip of the cap to your friend, and thanks on behalf of born-again civil libertarians everywhere for helping out WiseOne and her colleague.

The only advice that I think can be given in this situation is to retain the best lawyer he can find/afford. While this report is disturbing, I am not especially shocked.

Ad Orientem wrote: The only advice that I think can be given in this situation is to retain the best lawyer he can find/afford. While this report is disturbing, I am not especially shocked.

I guess I sort of am shocked.  I still amazed when I see a police raid on a home done in the manner it's often done, for the reasons it's often done. 

moda0306 wrote: I guess I sort of am shocked.  I still amazed when I see a police raid on a home done in the manner it's often done, for the reasons it's often done.

OFFICER SAFETY MUTHAFUCKA

If the cops truly raided his apartment with no evidence and no warrant, I'll assume things will be sorted out soon enough with good representation.

In the meantime, my one suggestion is to support your friend personally especially regarding the raid tactics, but guard yourself for the possibility that perhaps the cops are right.  I worked on a few projects for pharmaceutical delivery systems, and learned that the number of medical professionals who get caught up in prescription drug trafficking is pretty astounding.  Hospital staff stealing drugs and selling them on the side is unfortunately all too common.  It's a huge issue. 

That said, I hope your instincts are right and it's just a big mistake.  Here's hoping it will all be cleared up soon and your friend can get back to work.

Tyler wrote: If the cops truly raided his apartment with no evidence and no warrant, I'll assume things will be sorted out soon enough with good representation.

In the meantime, my one suggestion is to support your friend personally especially regarding the raid tactics, but guard yourself for the possibility that perhaps the cops are right.  I worked on a few projects for pharmaceutical delivery systems, and learned that the number of medical professionals who get caught up in prescription drug trafficking is pretty astounding.  Hospital staff stealing drugs and selling them on the side is unfortunately all too common.  It's a huge issue. 

That said, I hope your instincts are right and it's just a big mistake.  Here's hoping it will all be cleared up soon and your friend can get back to work.

Even if he was guilty of some drug activity, this seems to stink of all sorts of violations of his rights, all for what is essentially a victimless crime (IMO).

moda0306 wrote: Even if he was guilty of some drug activity, this seems to stink of all sorts of violations of his rights, all for what is essentially a victimless crime (IMO).

Agreed.  Warrantless no-knock swat raids are ridiculous and need to be shut down. 

We don't know what drugs he is accused of selling or how he is suspected of acquiring them, so I won't go so far as to say the alleged crime is victimless.  I've had to design drug packaging so that hospital workers could not remove the medications via syringe and replace them with saline before putting them back in circulation.  The stories you hear from hospital administrators are kinda crazy.  That said, I'm getting on a tangent and I want to make it clear that there's no evidence at all that is happening in this case.  I only brought it up to point out that even respected doctors make bad decisions sometimes. 

I will say that if the cops truly had the evidence they claimed, he probably wouldn't have been released so quickly.  On the surface, the odds are on the side of WiseOne's postdoc having solid grounds for a lawsuit. 

Tyler wrote: ...
I worked on a few projects for pharmaceutical delivery systems, and learned that the number of medical professionals who get caught up in prescription drug trafficking is pretty astounding.
...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1609479/combined

So quick update - there's been no charges but certainly an arrest which is bad enough.  It seems the police realized that they'd messed up which is why they let him go so quickly (no bail or anything).  He doesn't know if there are plans to charge him but it's been several days now so probably not.

They destroyed a good bit of personal property in the raid and the postdoc is considering a lawsuit in response.  I told him that it's far more important to get the whole incident cleared from his record so that it wouldn't show up on a background check, although that may be impossible.  He'll be applying for jobs soon, and the question "have you ever been arrested" is pretty routine.

It crossed my mind that I'm not exactly unbiased in presuming innocence, but really there is zero possibility here...the postdoc is an engineer/neuroscientist not a clinician, for starters, and anyway none of us have direct access to medications.  Well except for 4-aminopyridine but nobody is interested in that I am sure :-)

Ad - I am sure this does happen a lot but that doesn't make this at all acceptable.  The police action was so far out of proportion it's unreal - why a no-knock raid instead of a routine records check, which would have revealed no history etc?  Anyway I've got a new rule now:  any incoming students/postdocs/fellows will be told which neighborhoods to look in and how to look (streeteasy).  No sketchy dives in funky areas just to save a few bucks in rent money.

They do no-knock raids to surprise suspects so they can't flush their (alleged) drugs down the toilet as soon as the police announce their presence, thereby destroying the evidence against them. Yet another lovely consequence of drug prohibition. If you think about it, it's the most perverse sort of "policing" ever: they don't actually have the evidence yet; they have to invade people's homes and terrorize them in order to get it. If the evidence never materializes for whatever reason, someone's been terrorized (or worse) for nothing.

Pointedstick wrote: They do no-knock raids to surprise suspects so they can't flush their (alleged) drugs down the toilet as soon as the police announce their presence, thereby destroying the evidence against them. Yet another lovely consequence of drug prohibition. If you think about it, it's the most perverse sort of "policing" ever: they don't actually have the evidence yet; they have to invade people's homes and terrorize them in order to get it. If the evidence never materializes for whatever reason, someone's been terrorized (or worse) for nothing.

I would say it's a tossup on which of "The War on Terror", actual declared wars like WWII, or "The War on Drugs" has been the biggest excuse for shredding our Constitutional rights.

Libertarian666 wrote: I would say it's a tossup on which of "The War on Terror", actual declared wars like WWII, or "The War on Drugs" has been the biggest excuse for shredding our Constitutional rights.

It also helps to explode the myth of constitutional rights. WiseOne's student had no such things on the day this happened. In no way did their alleged existence prevent someone from being grossly violated and traumatized by enforcers of the government and having his property destroyed. His ability to be compensated by the perpetrators is severely curtailed by the concept of "qualified immunity", let alone that they or the ones who ordered the attack should actually be punished. The only chance for such a thing is media publicity and popular outrage, not anything written on some musty old document. The only court that matters for this kind of thing is the court of public opinion.

Pointedstick wrote:

Libertarian666 wrote: I would say it's a tossup on which of "The War on Terror", actual declared wars like WWII, or "The War on Drugs" has been the biggest excuse for shredding our Constitutional rights.

It also helps to explode the myth of constitutional rights. WiseOne's student had no such things on the day this happened. In no way did their alleged existence prevent someone from being grossly violated and traumatized by enforcers of the government and having his property destroyed. His ability to be compensated by the perpetrators is severely curtailed by the concept of "qualified immunity", let alone that they or the ones who ordered the attack should actually be punished. The only chance for such a thing is media publicity and popular outrage, not anything written on some musty old document. The only court that matters for this kind of thing is the court of public opinion.

So are you saying there is no such thing as a right? Because that's what it sounds like to me.

Libertarian666 wrote:

Pointedstick wrote:

Libertarian666 wrote: I would say it's a tossup on which of "The War on Terror", actual declared wars like WWII, or "The War on Drugs" has been the biggest excuse for shredding our Constitutional rights.

It also helps to explode the myth of constitutional rights. WiseOne's student had no such things on the day this happened. In no way did their alleged existence prevent someone from being grossly violated and traumatized by enforcers of the government and having his property destroyed. His ability to be compensated by the perpetrators is severely curtailed by the concept of "qualified immunity", let alone that they or the ones who ordered the attack should actually be punished. The only chance for such a thing is media publicity and popular outrage, not anything written on some musty old document. The only court that matters for this kind of thing is the court of public opinion.

So are you saying there is no such thing as a right? Because that's what it sounds like to me.

Pardon me for chiming in, but it seems to me where we are, and increasingly headed is:  we are a nation ruled by self-serving power, the nation we once were (maybe) that was governed by law is a bygone memory.

... M

Libertarian666 wrote: So are you saying there is no such thing as a right? Because that's what it sounds like to me.

I am saying that rights are non-existent mental constructs that have power over human behavior only if they are respected, and only if the absence of that respect is met with consequences. Without both, right are little more than figments of our imagination.

Pointedstick wrote:

Libertarian666 wrote: So are you saying there is no such thing as a right? Because that's what it sounds like to me.

I am saying that rights are non-existent mental constructs that have power over human behavior only if they are respected, and only if the absence of that respect is met with consequences. Without both, right are little more than figments of our imagination.

Ok, but I'm not sure how that differs from love, respect, or other similar "figments of our imagination". Or maybe it doesn't.

Pointedstick wrote:

Libertarian666 wrote: I would say it's a tossup on which of "The War on Terror", actual declared wars like WWII, or "The War on Drugs" has been the biggest excuse for shredding our Constitutional rights.

It also helps to explode the myth of constitutional rights. WiseOne's student had no such things on the day this happened. In no way did their alleged existence prevent someone from being grossly violated and traumatized by enforcers of the government and having his property destroyed. His ability to be compensated by the perpetrators is severely curtailed by the concept of "qualified immunity", let alone that they or the ones who ordered the attack should actually be punished. The only chance for such a thing is media publicity and popular outrage, not anything written on some musty old document. The only court that matters for this kind of thing is the court of public opinion.

I'd have to point out that while I do think rights are figments of our imagination, 1) we better damn well act like they exist from a public policy perspective, and 2) a good system of checks and balances with an embedded system of due process, while not perfect, is far better, all other things being equal, at preserving our imaginative rights.

I agree with PS.  We like to think that we US Citizens have better protected rights than the rest of the world.  Edward Snowden's revelations and this latest adventure, among other things, makes it very clear that this is nothing more than a myth.  My postdoc does plan to see about a lawsuit.  Should be fun to watch but my guess is that he'd get more bang for his buck by taking his story to the NY Times.  I certainly plan to make sure the university knows about it, also - although the administration is not known for being efficient and I'm still waiting for a call back from the lawyer I contacted.

Mainly prevention is the best medicine here.  I told him to move to a better neighborhood ASAP (with which he's in full agreement), and furthermore I'll be giving very specific instruction on such things to any future students coming from out of town especially.  I even offered to pay the broker's fee to make it happen on a postdoc salary.

I'm also reminded of the Peter Williams phrase describing police in the era of consensual crimes:  "clergymen with billy clubs".  Or guns, as the case may be.

WiseOne wrote: My postdoc does plan to see about a lawsuit.  Should be fun to watch but my guess is that he'd get more bang for his buck by taking his story to the NY Times.

Hey, if it does make the Times let us know. I read it, but not daily.

WiseOne wrote: I agree with PS.  We like to think that we US Citizens have better protected rights than the rest of the world.  Edward Snowden's revelations and this latest adventure, among other things, makes it very clear that this is nothing more than a myth.  My postdoc does plan to see about a lawsuit.
...

If rights are a myth, how can we sue if they are violated? 

Perhaps it's not the case that our rights are a myth but simply that our hold on them is far more tenuous than we believed.