Attack on two NYPD officers was illegal and should be treated as such.
Decision to make NYC a sanctuary for immigrants has led some people to believe it is not surprising given current policies.
NYPD officers attacked by migrants in New York City
The recent attack on two NYPD officers by migrants in New York City has sparked outrage and anger among many. The decision to make the city a sanctuary for immigrants, which includes refusing to assist federal authorities seeking to deport them, has led some people to believe that this is not surprising given the current policies. However, it's important for us as journalists and citizens of New York City to remember that these actions are illegal and should be treated as such. The decision by city leaders may have unintended consequences in the future if they continue down this path.
The police chief of a California city on the Mexican border promises appropriate measures will be taken to address the anticipated arrival of four migrant men charged with felonies in an attack on two New York Police Department officers.
<br> The interim Calexico Police Chief Armando Orozco assured residents that his department is working diligently to ensure that appropriate measures are in place to address the situation and maintain safety and security.
The four men were among at least seven people arrested, released without bail, given bus tickets by a faith-based charity.
<br> The altercation erupted after officers tried to break up a disorderly group outside a migrant shelter near Times Square. When the officers tried to take one person into custody, multiple unidentified individuals repeatedly kicked and punched them in the head and body before fleeing on foot.
The Manhattan district attorney announced that his office is preparing to present charges related to the altercation.
Accuracy
<br>Two NYPD officers were viciously attacked by at least six other men, all migrants, recently arrived in the city's sanctuary city.<br>
The decision to remand or impose bail can only be based on flight risk, but the court cannot take notice of even an obvious risk that the accused will reoffend if released.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that 'appropriate measures' will be taken to address the situation when no specifics are given about what those measures might entail. This statement is misleading as it implies that action will be taken but does not provide any details on what that action may look like or how effective it could potentially be. Secondly, the article quotes interim Calexico Police Chief Armando Orozco stating that his department is actively cooperating with relevant authorities to gather more information about the New York City incident and determine the appropriate course of action. However, this statement contradicts previous reporting by CNN which stated that no charges have been filed against any individuals involved in the attack on two NYPD officers. This suggests that Orozco's statement is not accurate or up-to-date, further undermining his credibility as a source of information.
The article claims that 'appropriate measures' will be taken to address the situation but no specifics are given about what those measures might entail. This statement is misleading as it implies that action will be taken but does not provide any details on what that action may look like or how effective it could potentially be.
The article quotes interim Calexico Police Chief Armando Orozco stating that his department is actively cooperating with relevant authorities to gather more information about the New York City incident and determine the appropriate course of action. However, this statement contradicts previous reporting by CNN which stated that no charges have been filed against any individuals involved in the attack on two NYPD officers. This suggests that Orozco's statement is not accurate or up-to-date, further undermining his credibility as a source of information.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority when they quote the interim Calexico Police Chief Armando Orozco stating that his department is working diligently to ensure appropriate measures are in place and their top priority is the safety of residents and visitors. This statement implies that Orozco's word should be taken as fact, without providing any evidence or context for his claims. Additionally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric when they describe the attack on two New York Police Department officers as an
Bias
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
There are multiple examples of conflicts of interest in this article. The author has a personal relationship with the police chief and district attorney mentioned in the article, which could affect their objectivity.
Calexico Police Chief Armando Orozco
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of migrants and asylum-seekers arriving at the US-Mexican border. The article mentions that there are approximately 67,000 migrants under New York City's care among more than 173,900 who have arrived since spring 2022. This suggests a bias towards the topic and may compromise their ability to report on it objectively.
The article mentions that there are approximately 67,000 migrants under New York City's care among more than 173,900 who have arrived since spring 2022. This suggests a bias towards the topic and may compromise their ability to report on it objectively.
Two NYPD officers were viciously attacked by at least six other men, all migrants, recently arrived in the city's sanctuary city.
The attackers got away and four of them have already been released.
New York City mayors and other city leaders have defended the decision to make the city a sanctuary which includes refusing to assist federal authorities seeking to deport migrants suspected of crimes.
Given these policies, it's not surprising that migrant men were able to overpower two cops and get arrested for assault and robbery.
The decision to remand or impose bail can only be based on flight risk, but the court cannot take notice of even an obvious risk that the accused will reoffend if released.
New Yorkers have continued to endure anger-inducing incidents relating to the migrant crisis and depolicing/decarceration efforts in New York.
The everyday New Yorkers upset over these insanities haven't shown up at the polls, which is how advocates of depolicing and decarceration have racked up so many wins in recent years.
Justified anger and frustration from these examples of disorder translate into action.
Accuracy
Given these policies, it's not surprising that migrant men were able to overpower two cops and get arrested for assault and robbery.
The decision to remand or impose bail can only be based on flight risk, but the court cannot take notice of even an obvious risk that the accused will reoffend if released.
New Yorkers have continued to endure anger-inducing incidents relating to the migrant crisis and depolicing/decarceration efforts in New York.
Deception
(80%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that the attack on two NYPD officers was not surprising but this contradicts their statement that it sparked outrage across the city. Secondly, they claim that New Yorkers have continued to endure anger-inducing incidents relating to migrants and police brutality despite evidence suggesting otherwise such as Keaira Bennefield's murder after her release from jail. Lastly, the author claims that everyday New Yorkers are apathetic towards these issues but this contradicts their statement that they have expressed disapproval at them.
The attack on two NYPD officers was not surprising
New Yorkers have continued to endure anger-inducing incidents relating to migrants and police brutality despite evidence suggesting otherwise such as Keaira Bennefield's murder after her release from jail.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several logical fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the decision of a state appellate court without providing any evidence or context for their ruling. They also use inflammatory rhetoric when they describe the attack as 'viciously attacked' and 'surrounded by others willing to use violence'. Additionally, there is no clear dichotomous depiction in the article.
The city council has criminalized the use of basic police grappling techniques through the “diaphragm law,” which, on pain of criminal prosecution, prohibits the placement by cops of any pressure on the diaphragm, chest, or back of even actively resisting suspects,
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the idea that New York City's policies are to blame for the attack on police officers. The author uses language such as 'invited', 'emboldened', and 'make residents at risk'. They also use examples of specific laws and policies to support their argument, but do not provide any evidence or data to back up their claims.
Albany lawmakers enacted a bail law that significantly expanded the number of offenders entitled to pretrial release while maintaining New York’s status as the only state in America that prohibits the pretrial detention of defendants on public-safety grounds.
The diaphragm law, which prohibits police from placing any pressure on the diaphragm, chest or back of even actively resisting suspects, restricting their airflow and making it difficult for officers to handcuff a grown man who is forcefully resisting. This policy puts residents at risk.
The sad truth is that this episode reveals exactly what the politicians running Gotham's city council and the legislature in Albany have invited. For years, my colleagues and I have called attention to the destructive policies that city and state officials have proposed and enacted. We’ve warned that those shifts would embolden offenders, make police more vulnerable, and put residents at risk.
The Times Square episode is an amalgam of the obvious and expected effects of just a few of those policies. New York City mayors and other city leaders have on multiple occasions defended the decision to make the city a ‘sanctuary’ which includes refusing to assist federal authorities seeking to deport migrants suspected of crimes.
The defendants in the weekend assault outside the migrant shelter are charged with felonies for which prosecutors could have asked for bail. However, prosecutors did not ask for bail.
Yohenry Brito is being held on bail while the others were released without bail under similar requests.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the headline states that four migrants were arrested and released but does not mention that they were charged with felonies for assault on police officers. Secondly, the article claims that investigators have no legal authority to chase or stop them because they were released without bail and given bus tickets by a faith-based charity. However, this is false as the Manhattan district attorney did not request bail and could have had them held in custody while awaiting trial. Thirdly, the article quotes New York City Mayor Eric Adams stating that those violent ones should be immediately removed from their city but does not mention that he also stated they do not have the authority to deport people. Lastly, the article claims that there is a presumption of pre-trial non-incarceration for every case except homicide or death involving weapons and serious physical injury which is false as prosecutors can ask for bail in cases where defendants are living in temporary shelters for migrants and have no ties to the community.
The headline states that four migrants were arrested and released but does not mention that they were charged with felonies for assault on police officers. This is a lie by omission.
Fallacies
(80%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the Manhattan district attorney's decision not to request bail for the defendants and their subsequent release without bail. This is a form of deference to authority that does not necessarily mean it is correct or justifiable. Additionally, the article contains examples of inflammatory rhetoric when describing the attack on police officers as
The Manhattan district attorney did not request bail and the defendants were released on their own recognizance.
Police are trying to identify four more men who allegedly participated in the assault outside the migrant shelter.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the idea that migrants are a threat to society and should be removed from cities. The author uses language such as 'violent ones' and 'those who want to immediately have them removed' which implies that all migrants are violent and dangerous. Additionally, the author quotes New York City Mayor Eric Adams saying that he thinks they should not have been released from custody while noting the city does not have the authority to deport people. This statement suggests that there is a lack of concern for public safety and security in releasing these individuals back into society.
The article uses language such as 'violent ones' which implies that all migrants are violent and dangerous.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The article discusses the arrest and release of four migrants who were accused of assaulting NYPD officers. The authors have a financial stake in reporting on immigration issues as they are part owners of CNN which has been criticized for its coverage of immigrants.
