Retired Lieutenant Discusses “Stop and Frisk”, Residency Requirements for Police Officers, and How the Department Can Improve Relations with Blacks and Hispanics
A FROM THE G-MAN
EXCLUSIVE
Lt. Robby Schwach entered the Police Academy in
July of 1989, after spending three years volunteering with a civilian patrol in
Far Rockaway. He had always been
interested in police work, but it wasn’t something he thought was attainable.
While working with the civilian patrol, Schwach noted that he met a lot of good
cops, and many who were not-so-good, and decided police work might be something
he would be good at. The Far Rockaway High School graduate was already eager to
pursue a career in law enforcement, but a harrowing incident in 1984 provided additional
motivation for joining the New York City Police Department.
In this exclusive interview, the NYPD veteran discusses
that incident, the impact it’s had on his career, and responds to questions
about the controversial “stop and frisk” policy, the shooting of innocent or unarmed
suspects by police officers, and how the NYPD can improve its volatile relationship
with Black and Hispanic communities.
G-Man: Thank you for granting this interview, Lieutenant. Having covered the
NYPD for a number of years, I realize that the department has a tendency to
proceed with caution when it comes to the media, so I appreciate your
willingness to help From The G-Man in its effort to address some of the issues
that are of vital importance to New York City residents, particularly those in
communities of color. I’d like to begin by asking you to talk about the 1984
incident that profoundly changed your life.
Schwach: Right after graduating
from Far Rockaway High School in 1984, our senior class President, Jackie
McKail, was killed in a robbery in Laurelton.
Jackie was a bright and caring young woman. I think she was originally
from Haiti. She intended to study pre-med in college and hoped to help sick
kids. Her death hit a lot of us very hard because it was so senseless and
unnecessary.
The mid-1980s in south
Queens were very violent times. I know
at least ten kids who were shot or stabbed during my high school years. Living
in fear was not a great way to grow up. I honestly felt that by becoming a cop,
in addition to my interests in policing, if I could prevent what happened to
Jackie and her family from happening to someone else, it would be worth it.
After graduating the police academy in 1989, I
was assigned to a field training unit and spent much of the time at the
109th Precinct, in Flushing, and the 103rd in Jamaica, Queens. My
first permanent assignment was to the 100th Precinct in Rockaway
Beach. I spent four years there, three of which were as part of the
community policing unit. This was the most satisfying assignment I’ve ever
had. The concept involved assigning one of two officers to a “beat”, a
specific area that they would be responsible for.
Shifts and duties within the beat fluctuated depending on the conditions
in that area. If cars were being broken
into overnight, I’d work in a scooter on the midnight shift. If kids were cutting out of school during the
day, I’d team up with a partner, pick them up in a van, and return them to
school. If people were being accosted
and robbed coming out of the subway station, I’d work on foot, in and around
the station during commuting hours. I
enjoyed this assignment because it gave me the opportunity to be
innovative.
For instance, we had kids with gang/turf issues
that caused violence in school and within the area. As a kid, I remember
growing up and being able to walk freely through the various neighborhoods in
Far Rockaway because I had friends in so many areas. The friendships were
formed through playing basketball. Using this to my advantage, I started the
United Neighborhood Basketball League at a school on my beat. Kids in the local junior high school played
twice a week after school. A volunteer teacher served as a referee, and I was the
security guard. The uniforms were donated by the Police Athletic League.
I chose a kid from each neighborhood to be the
team captains, but there was one catch. The captains had to have at least one
kid from each of the six, distinct neighborhoods in the area. Once kids started playing ball with each
other, the whole neighborhood thing disappeared. Eventually, kids were getting
to know people from other neighborhoods by playing and practicing with them.
The
kids abandoned their traditional neighborhood cliques and started hanging out
more with their team members. Incidents
of violence in the school went down exponentially, as much as 80 percent the
first year of the program. I also worked closely with teachers and
administrators to deal with other issues: such as graffiti and vandalism. The
ability to stay in one area to concentrate on problems, with the flexibility to
change shifts and resources, made this my favorite assignment.
In July of 1994, I was promoted to Sergeant and
had to leave Rockaway. I worked in the 9th
Precinct on the lower east side of Manhattan for a year, before joining the staff
of a new patrol borough command in northern Queens. I tried to replicate some
of the programs I started in Rockaway in these areas, but my efforts were rarely
successfully. At that time, the
department had moved away from community policing and adopted more of a law and
order strategy.
In April of 1997, President Clinton visited Shea
Stadium and took part in the commemoration of the 15th anniversary
of Jackie Robinson’s breaking the color barrier in professional baseball. I supervised
the security plans for his visit, and that drew a lot of attention. As a
result, I ended up with a plum assignment in a city-wide unit responsible for
crowd management. The unit dealt with demonstrations, parades, occasional riots,
and responded to terrorist threats.
In 2004, I was promoted to Lieutenant. My last
assignment placed me in command of my old crowd management unit in the Special
Operations Division. I earned several departmental awards, including “Cop of the Year”, and a few medals. However,
it’s the dozens of letters of commendation from members of the community that I’m
most proud of – as well as the fact that despite being involved in hundreds of
arrests, violent protests, and hundreds of community events, I never received a
civilian complaint. I retired in 2010, with
the same rank.
G-Man: The next topic of discussion involves the recent killing of unarmed suspects or “accidental shootings”, like the one where a young bodega worker was shot and killed by an officer
while fleeing a robbery. These shootings seem to be occurring more frequently,
which is causing outrage among not just the families of the victims, but many
New York City residents and community leaders who feel there is no
justification for shooting or killing an unarmed man or woman. What is your
response?
Schwach: The accidental shooting
at the bodega is an anomaly, in my opinion. It seems like the officers involved
were walking up to a bad situation where they knew guns were involved. One of
the victims ran right into the officer who had his gun out and when the two
collided, the gun went off. It’s very
tragic, but I see that incident as very different from others where the officer’s
judgment is questioned.
Ironically, NYPD cops are using their guns less
frequently. A total of 36 cops, out of 33,497, fired guns intentionally in 2011,
not including training at the range, as opposed to 314 in 1971. This was reported
in an October 12, 2012 Daily News editorial. I think that when there are a
series of shootings in a relatively short period of time, as there have been
recently, the perception is that these sorts of things are happening more often
than they are.
As far as justification goes, each situation is
different. I think part of what fuels
public resentment is the theory that cops, at least some of them, are eager or too
quick to shoot. I don’t think this is
the case. I think that the mentality of
most cops is that they would rather never use their gun if they don’t have to,
but if they feel threatened, and they feel their lives are at stake, they’re
going to defend themselves.
Training in the police academy involves several
simulations where student officers are “shot at”. Some of these training
scenarios are “no win” and the (student) officer is “killed”. That training,
combined with actual events where cops were shot and killed because they didn’t
shoot first, tends to make you somewhat paranoid. Again, I’m not making
excuses, just offering an explanation of what may be going through minds.
G-Man: If given an opportunity, what three policies would you put
in place to prevent these types of shootings from taking place?
Schwach: Only regular training programs
can reduce these events. Unfortunately, we’ll never be able to eliminate these
events entirely. All of my suggestions involve training. For example, I’d return to some of the more
realistic firearms training that was offered many years ago, with officers
spending a few days at the range reviewing new tactics: running before shooting (to simulate the
stress) and using moving targets.
I’ve
been retired two years now, but for the last decade of my career, firearms
training involved two half-days each year at the range, shooting at stationary paper
targets. There are computer simulation programs that some officers are exposed
to at the range, but they were state-of- the-art in the latter part of the last
century.
As part of a larger picture, I think the divide
between the police and members of the community has widened in the last few
years. I see this as a direct result of the downsizing of the NYPD. We have a few thousand fewer officers on the
street than we did five years ago. While this saves money for the city in tough
economic times, the fewer cops are all working harder and going from assignment
to assignment.
There’s no opportunity
for meeting with people, walking down the street, or speaking with residents
and store owners. Those relationships go
a long way to closing the divide, but officers today have no time for this
anymore. Only officers assigned specifically to community affairs duties, one or
two in each precinct, have the time to do this, and they’re not the ones on
patrol answering the 911 calls.
G-Man: On
August 3, 2012, the New York Post reported the following: “A federal judge
in an 86-page decision ruled that a lawsuit by several plaintiffs raises
serious questions about quotas, racial profiling, and constitutional rights
that should be heard by a jury: Despite attempts to have it thrown out, the
Center for Constitutional Rights' lawsuit accusing the NYPD of "stop and
frisk" racial profiling will proceed. Yesterday, Judge Shira A. Scheindlin
ruled that there was enough evidence, stating, "This case presents an
issue of great public concern... the disproportionate number of
African-Americans and Latinos who become entangled in our criminal justice
system, as compared to Caucasians." Do you believe the judge’s ruling was correct? If not, why?
Schwach: I haven’t read the
decision, but I’d be careful reading too much into this. First, the judge was saying that there was
enough question to allow a lawsuit to proceed, she wasn’t agreeing with the
charges. Second, the stats, although accurate don’t present a true picture. If
I’m working as a cop in a neighborhood where 75 percent of the descriptions on
reports of crimes indicate a perpetrator who is a white male, in his 40s, 5’4”,
and 220 pounds, then that’s who I’m stopping and questioning more often than
not. Does it make me racist because I’m not stopping more people who are
African-American, Asian or female? In my
effort to catch criminals, my stops and actions were based on the descriptions
of the criminals I was looking for.
With rare exception, people only become
“entangled” in the criminal justice system when they are criminals. In order
for an individual to become “entangled” in the criminal justice system, they have
to go through various “gates” where their arrest was verified. Initially, the officer making the arrest -- and
his/her partner in most cases -- has to believe the individual has committed
the crime. Then, a supervisor on the
street, usually a sergeant, has to verify that the arrest is legitimate.
When
the group arrives at a local police precinct, the suspect and the arresting
officer go in front of a desk officer (supervisor - either a sergeant or lieutenant)
who must also be satisfied with the arrest.
Soon thereafter, the arresting officer is interviewed by an assistant district
attorney who decides what, if any charges will be filed. Later on, the suspect
is brought in front of a judge for an arraignment. The judge must be satisfied
with the arrest and charges to allow things to proceed.
If the alleged crime is of a serious nature, an impartial
group (grand jury) must agree that there is enough evidence to warrant
proceeding. My point is that, in order
to go through the system, there have been several people, including impartial
people, who believed the arrest was appropriate to the extent that the
individual should be prosecuted. As far
as Stop/Question/Frisk goes- “Stop,
Question, and Frisk” is a great tool, rooted in English common law where police
can stop an individual based on information and observation, when they think
criminality is afoot. The idea is stop the individual and question them to
determine what’s going on.
The frisk (a pat down for weapons) only comes
into play if the officer has reason to believe, based on the nature of the
crime, and observation, that the suspect is armed. You wouldn’t frisk someone for jumping a
subway turnstile, necessarily, unless by observation you notice something that
would indicate a weapon. You would frisk someone if the crime you were stopping
them for was armed robbery, as weapons possession is inherent in the crime.
G-Man: Was there any aspect of “stop and frisk” that made you uncomfortable
during your service?
Schwach: Yeah, especially when political correctness
enters the equation. I had a beat where
robberies were occurring around the subway station I was responsible for. All of the reports (5) from victims indicated
that the perpetrator was a Black, male, between 20-25, with various descriptions
of height and weight. The robberies occurred in the winter, between 6 and 8 p.m.,
when it was dark, and involved physical force, not weapons. Does that justify me stopping every Black
male? Of course not! Does it justify me in stopping and frisking every Black
male in the station at night? Of course not! Did it justify me stopping Black
men in the described age range who were “hanging out” in the station, not
getting on a train, but then following people leaving the station? I think you could understand why I did.
When all was said and done, the few people that
were stopped had very good reasons for their behavior, and there was no need
for frisking, and no justification for making arrests. At the end of a two week
period, the robberies stopped. Was one of the guys I stopped the bad guy? I
don’t know. Did the robber get arrested somewhere else for another crime? I
don’t know.
Ultimately, at the end of the month, I had
submitted seven “250s”, the form for tracking a Stop/Question and Frisk. My
Sergeant asked if I was racist, since I was only stopping Black men! But that
was the description of the guy I was looking for! Should I have stopped some
elderly Asian women to “even out the stats”? Like many other tactics, I think
the Stop/Question/Frisk is an important tool, but may not always be
appropriate.
The more cops are judged by numbers
(stop/question/frisk situations, summonses, arrests), the more likely the
pressure on cops to use these tactics more often to show they’re active and
gain approval from their supervisors. Crunching numbers for crimes at Compstat
has made the city safer. Crunching numbers for individual cops to determine
their productivity breeds insensitivity and unnecessary confrontations.
G-Man: During my tenure as a journalist, I’ve had conversations with community
and church leaders, civil rights activists and elected officials serving and
living in minority communities. When discussing the issue of police brutality
within these communities, a number of them cited what I now call “the Long
Island Factor”.
Simply
put, some believe a considerable number of Caucasian officers, who were born
and raised on Long Island or the outskirts of New York City, are patrolling
Black and Hispanic communities with a preconceived notion about the community,
which may have been cultivated during their childhood and well into
adolescence.
Others
believe a significant number of these “non-residents” have outright disdain for
the members of these communities. During your 21 years of service, have you
ever encountered officers that “fit the description”? If so, what impact did it
have on your job performance and ability to serve in Black and Hispanic
communities?
Schwach: Growing up in Far Rockaway, I thought the “Long
Island Factor” was legitimate until I actually joined the department. There are
good people who become good cops. They come from all over the place, and where
you were raised is not an accurate predictor of an officer’s job performance.
Let’s face it, there are still areas in New York
City where an overwhelming number of residents are white, and kids go to local
public and private schools, rarely encountering anyone outside of their
“circle”. Even though they’re from New
York City, would they be better cops than someone who grew up in Hempstead,
Long Island, which is much more diverse? Probably not.
I used to teach a civics lesson to junior high
school kids. We’d list on the blackboard
(before smart boards) all of the characteristics that the kids thought cops
should have. “Brave, fair, strong,
serious, committed” were regular choices. After the listing, I’d draw a big
circle and say, “This is the Police Planet, where people like that live…that’s
where we get cops from, right?” The kids
would figure my illogical path right away and correct me. They understood that
we get cops from the same neighborhoods we get teachers, lawyers, journalists
and McDonald’s employees. Simply put, no neighborhood has a monopoly on virtue.
In my opinion, the difference between good cops
and no-so-good ones is the same as good people and not-so-good people. It all boils
down to the way the individual was raised, and has NOTHING to do with race,
gender, sexual orientation, or hometown.
The same can be said for any other occupation.
There is one advantage to having cops live in
the city. In an emergency, they’re closer
to work if we need them. However, there has only been one incident in the last
three decades where cops were all called in from home: September 11.
G-Man: As a former police officer, is there anything specific you’d like to
say to members of the Black and Hispanic community, especially the young
people?
Schwach: Yes. I would like to say exactly what I said when I was a member of the
department. I tried never to judge
people by the color of their skin or the neighborhood they lived in. Don’t
judge me or other officers because we’re in blue. If we can get past the
colors, we can do pretty amazing things in our communities. If we concentrate on the colors, and prejudge
each other, we’re destined to fail.
G-Man: What do you think of the Rev. Al Sharpton and his protests against the
NYPD?
Schwach: I have several issues with Reverend Sharpton,
but I’ll keep them to myself. I don’t
think this is an appropriate venue. As
far as protests go, I think he had, and has, every right to protest the
government for a redress of grievances. It’s our right under the Constitution. I
have no problems with him or anyone else protesting when they wish to highlight
a perceived injustice or show support for a cause.
G-Man: What should the NYPD be doing more of in order to improve relations
between its police officers and communities of color?
Schwach: I have some great ideas,
but they’re all expensive. At a time of economic distress, the city can’t
afford to take cops off patrol to spend more “off-patrol” time meeting people
on a different level, talking to people, and gaining their trust. I always joked that no one calls 911 to invite
us to a birthday party. They only call 911 when things get so out of control that
they have no other choice. As a result, many people, kids especially, relate
the cops to bad situations or trouble.
We don’t visit them to congratulate them on
their kindergartner graduating or their child receiving a little league
award. We show up to take Dad away when
he’s drunk. We pull them over when Mom
forgot to signal before changing lanes. We bring them back to school when they cut class. It’s no wonder people think we’re the enemy,
even before we do anything!
Do you know how many times a parent walked up to
me with their kids, while I was in uniform, and said to them, “If you don’t listen to Mom and Dad, this
policeman will take you away from me and put you in jail!” You don’t think that’s setting these kids up to
believe that the police are the enemy?
I spent a lot of time working with one
particular kid on my beat, who is Hispanic. We’ll call him Jason. That was his
first name. Jason’s dad was MIA and his
mom’s boyfriend beat her up. Jason had serious personal issues, but was rarely
violent. He had been arrested as a kid for trespassing, graffiti, and was
regularly truant. I talked to him often,
stopped by to ensure his mother’s boyfriend was behaving, and gained his trust.
He eventually went to store-owners and offered to clean up graffiti.
One night, I was chasing a guy who had broken
into a car to steal the radio. I chased
him for three blocks, on foot, before another officer in a patrol car cornered him
and took him into custody. The police dispatcher said that 911 had received
calls from a youth who was begging that they send help to Officer Schwach because
he was in trouble. The call back number was Jason’s. This kid had seen me from
his bedroom window in the housing project he lived in and called for help to
make sure I was okay.
These types of relationships only happen when the
police, kids, and adults have the opportunity to meet in non-confrontational
situations and are able to relate to each other as human beings, not combatants. Those opportunities are very rare today.
G-Man: What should Black and Hispanic communities be doing more of to improve
relations with the NYPD?
Schwach: The onus should be on
the police to improve relations. People shouldn’t have to do anything. Having
said that, I would also like to see reasonable adults, in all communities, take
more of an effort to raise their children responsibly. No community should accept
violence in their neighborhood. However, some adults facilitate the violence by
ignoring neighbors that they know are selling drugs, carrying guns, and by
teaching kids to honor the “no snitching” code.
G-Man: In closing, would you like to make a statement to Mayor Michael
Bloomberg, Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, or members of the NYPD about policing
in Black and Hispanic communities?
Schwach: Before this interview, I
couldn’t conceive of one question that I wouldn’t want to answer, but you’ve
managed to come up with one. (Smiling) My comments speak for themselves. I
don’t think making one statement would do any good, and I don’t believe that’s
it’s my place to lecture others. But thanks for the opportunity.
No comments:
Post a Comment