What’s difficult, apparently, is understanding the difference between post-conviction sentencing and pre-conviction bail. Bail only involves people who have not yet been convicted - that is, who are presumed innocent of any crimes at the stage of the process we’re talking about. That presumption has to be accounted for in any discussion of pre-trial detention.

Different political priorities and considerations, I’d assume. If SDNY were to bring charges, it’d basically be Biden prosecuting his own predecessor, and that may not be something Biden wants to do. It looks more like Biden using the federal courts against a direct political rival, as opposed to Bragg, who certainly has different politics than Trump but isn’t a direct opponent.

Rules like that aren't unheard of.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/03/realestate/dogs-service-elevator-nyc.html

It's probably just Dolan.

Because both the subways and the bridges/tunnels are operated by MTA, they can use money from one for the other. More toll payments might mean less of a need to raise subway fares.

We can’t really tell you door-to-door times without knowing where the doors are! The ferry is generally a very pleasant and quick ride, but the landings are (obviously) on the river, so not necessarily the most convenient for everyone. Basically if you live right near one landing and work right near another, it’ll be great; if you’re a fair distance on one or both sides, it can be a lot longer.

Do you actually live in NYC, OP?

If he’s 45 and actually looks like it, he’ll be fine. 80% of places won’t ID him. If you try going to one that does, just go somewhere else. You’ll probably have better luck with fancier bars, breweries, etc., than clubs.

They can self-represent or hire private outside counsel if they want. They just usually don’t, because their internal lawyers don’t usually handle these sorts of cases, and private outside counsel is expensive while the Law Department is free.

The NYPD could decline representation by the Law Department if they wanted to. They don’t, because the Law Department knows what they’re doing.

Lawyers from the NYC Law Department represented the NYPD. That’s how it works. The Law Department is like the NYPD’s law firm.

The NYPD is represented in big defensive civil rights cases like this by the NYC Law Department, which is a city agency that (among other things) acts as outside counsel for other city agencies and employees. Basically the city equivalent of the state Attorney General.

The NYPD does also have its own internal law department, but they don't handle big litigations like this one.

Dude, what are you talking about? They actively fought this case for two years. The PACER docket has like 900 filed documents on it. It’s kind of absurd to say they weren’t allowed to defend themselves.

Didn't you already post this here?

Anyway, your best starting point might be to consult an attorney.

You could also try submitting a complaint to the state Attorney General: https://ag.ny.gov/consumer-frauds/Filing-a-Consumer-Complaint

Because it prevents the busiest train station in the county from being expanded to meet current needs, or even maintained at modern standards.

A tunnel would certainly be the best solution, but getting there seems utterly impractical. How do you conceivably build a tunnel through some of the densest areas of Brooklyn (including through the Atlantic Terminal transit complex) without impossibly enormous cost and disruption?

The article says that proponents claim that current tunneling technology would allow it to be built without disturbing properties at ground level, but I can't help but be skeptical.

I don't exactly love them, but if they serve as a reliable revenue source for the MTA, and as long as they're not too obstrusive (i.e., no sound), I'll tolerate them.

I can't even tell what this is asking.

“Exculpatory evidence” doesn’t necessarily mean definitive evidence of innocence. It means anything that could conceivably be taken as harming the prosecution’s case. The existence of any exculpatory evidence at all doesn’t mean that the case should have been brought or should be dropped.

I highly doubt it was purposeful -- why would a prosecutor from the Police Accountability Unit purposefully screw up a case, at the expense of her own career, to protect a cop? Seems much more like an inadvertent error.

Doesn't make the outcome any better, of course.

I get the sense from the limited information available that this was an actual Brady issue (that is, exculpatory material not being turned over), as opposed to an issue with the discovery reforms. I guess one could argue that the Brady material was missed because of the burdens of the new discovery requirements, but that seems speculative at best.

Wow, that's really embarrassing for the DA's office. They must have been pretty substantial and unambiguous Brady violations for the office to consent to dismissal with prejudice.

A few months ago I saw what I'm pretty sure was one of the old "medallions" on the side of the street waiting to be taken away in the trash, in Dumbo of all places. Not sure how it got there, but seeing that they're replacing them makes me even more certain that that's what it was!

From Newark? No, don’t drive, that’s crazy. You can be in the city in 20 minutes via PATH train from Newark Penn Station.

Driving would save no time (and might take longer), and between tunnel tolls and parking costs would cost many times more.

If drinks with citrus taste like pickles to you, the problem might be on your end.