Last spring, a 19-year-old in New York City was stopped by police officers on the subway during her commute. She was supposed to have a free transfer from the bus to the subway, but when the transfer didn’t register at the turnstile, she and a friend entered through the platform emergency exit door.
The police stopped them, took their names, and let her friend go. The officers informed the 19-year-old that she had a prior arrest from when she was in her early teens in 2018, and proceeded to question her.
However, the police should not have had access to her juvenile records. A New York state law protects juvenile records from being accessed by anyone, including law enforcement, without a court order in cases where there was no finding of guilt.
The arrest in question happened after an incident involving the girl’s mother, which led to child services filing a petition against her mother for abuse and neglect, resulting in the girl being placed in foster care. The arrest was never prosecuted, and was later dismissed and sealed. Yet, the officers were able to access this sealed record from their phones and question her about it.
Subsequently, the 19-year-old, along with two other plaintiffs, filed a class-action lawsuit against the city and NYPD Commissioner Edward Caban for illegally accessing, using, and leaking sealed youth records. The lawsuit alleges that officials share these sealed records with prosecutors and the media, particularly with pro-police tabloids that publish juvenile arrest information sourced from the police.
Legal advocates working on the lawsuit state that the NYPD’s practice of leaking sealed juvenile records is a reflection of their broader disregard for civil liberties, especially concerning young people of color.
Illegal Disclosure
The lawsuit accuses the NYPD of improperly training personnel on handling sealed records, and points out contradictions in internal practices regarding sealed records. The plaintiffs argue that NYPD policies that train personnel to access sealed juvenile records violate state law.
It’s not just the NYPD; other agencies such as the Port Authority and the city’s Department of Correction have also accessed sealed juvenile records to question individuals. This practice violates the New York Family Court Act, which seals all arrest-related records for juveniles who have not been found guilty of any offense, unless a judge orders the case to remain unsealed.
The purpose of these laws is to protect juveniles from being treated as adults in the criminal system, recognizing differences in brain development and decision-making capacity, and providing opportunities for rehabilitation.
Secondly, there is a disproportionate impact on black and brown youth who are more likely to encounter law enforcement, surveillance, and arrest, leading to the potential for discrimination based on their records in the future.
The actions of the NYPD in accessing and sharing sealed records not only go against these principles but also violate state law.
Melanie Westover Yanez, a litigation attorney at Millbank, emphasized the importance of returning individuals, especially juveniles, to the presumption of innocence if they were wrongly arrested. She highlighted the harm caused when sealed records are disclosed to prosecutors, the media, or police who may use them in unrelated situations.
Legal Aid’s Freeman pointed out that the NYPD’s disregard for state law undermines the fairness that the legal system is designed to uphold.
Additionally, Legal Aid has taken legal action against the NYPD for maintaining an unlawful DNA database and unlawfully retaining juvenile fingerprints. These actions further highlight the agency’s disregard for privacy and legal protections.
In a separate lawsuit, the NYPD was found to have leaked sealed records for adults without convictions, prompting a judge to order the department to cease using sealed records and revise its data management practices.
The recent lawsuit filed by plaintiffs seeks an injunction to halt the NYPD’s access to sealed juvenile records and a declaration that such practices are illegal under state law.
Freeman expressed concern about the detrimental impact on both the credibility of juvenile defenders and the public’s trust in the fairness of the justice system.
One plaintiff, George, shared how his lawyer’s intervention saved his job and highlighted the injustice of being judged based on past juvenile records. He emphasized the unfairness of facing consequences for actions or suspicions from youth that do not reflect their current character.
Source link
