OVERVIEW
1. As a new protest movement for social and economic justice sweeps New York City and the country, the Police Department of the City of New York (NYPD) has engaged in an unconstitutional effort to disrupt and suppress the ability of the people to come together and advocate for social change using the time-honored methods of mass assembly and collective action.
2. On October 1,2011, the NYPD engaged in a premeditated, planned, scripted and calculated effort to sweep the streets of protestors and disrupt a growing protest movement in New York. This lawsuit seeks to stop the NYPD from taking illegal actions against mass assembly protest.
3. As seen in the movements for social change in the Middle East and Europe, all movements for social justice, jobs, and democracy need room to breathe and grow and it is imperative that there be a halt to law enforcement actions used to shut down mass assembly and free expression of the people seeking to redress grievances.
4. On October 1,2011, the NYPD engaged in a mass false arrest of approximately 700 persons who participated in, or were in proximity to, a demonstration and march crossing over the Brooklyn Bridge.
S. After escorting and leading a group of demonstrators and others well out onto the Brooklyn Bridge roadway, the NYPD suddenly and without warning curtailed further forward movement, blocked the ability of persons to leave the Bridge from the rear, and arrested hundreds of protestors in the absence of probable cause. This was a form of entrapment, both illegal and physical.
6. That the trap and detain mass arrestwas a command-level-driven intentional and calculated police operation is evidenced by the fact that the law enforcement officials who led the demonstration across the bridge were command officials, known as "white shirts."
7. That the trap and detain mass arrest was an intentional and calculated police operation is also evidenced by the charade the police conducted - and themselves duly videotaped -- of speaking inaudibly into a bullhorn that could not be heard mere feet away from the officer, given the ambient noise.
8. The NYPD knew no audible communication was given. The NYPD also knew that the Constitution requires that any ostensible command must be heard by those who are expected to be bound by it.
9. Instead, the NYPD engaged in a performance, videotaped it, and sprang their trap. They then set their PR machine into motion, distributing widely edited videos of events to spin a false narrative of events to the public and media.
10. The NYPD, as a matter of policy and practice, engages in unconstitutional tactics to disturb, disrupt, penalize, infringe upon and criminalize constitutionally protected speech and assembly.
11. The NYPD's trap and detain actions interfere with freedom of association, assembly, speech and free movement.
12. The NYPD employs unconstitutional tactics to trap protesters, and others in physical proximity, on all sides, seize, detain and arrest those trapped/seized. These actions are accomplished through force and threat of force in order to deprive, interfere with, and deter the exercise of constitutionally protected rights.
13. The conduct challenged herein is neither aberrational nor the consequence of overzealous but well-intentioned law enforcement. It is the implementation of a plan to disrupt political assembly and activities.
14. When a named plaintiff asked why the group was being arrested, one officer explained that they were being arrested because otherwise "you'd go right back down there." When the arrestee responded that it was not illegal to be demonstrating as part of Occupy Wall Street, the officer said that if it was up to her she would not have arrested them, but "if we let you go you will just keep protesting."
15. When another named plaintiff was at the precinct being processed for release, an officer stated, "next time you'll think twice about going out to protest."
16. The NYPD not only falsely arrested hundreds in a mass violation of Fourth Amendment rights, it illegally terminated demonstration activities in a mass violation of First Amendment rights.
17. The NYPD took a spirited and moving demonstration and sought to extinguish it. A protest march is moveable demonstration engaging with the public as it proceeds, in a pristine and classic form of democratic grassroots action and assembly. As a march continues it collects energy, collects participants, absorbing those who see it and hear it going by, who are moved by the political message and want to make common cause and join in.
18. The march from Wall Street was a spirited action, moving its message through New York into Brooklyn to communicate with and join with working people on the other side of the bridge.
19. The NYPD terminated the march, the message, the opportunity to communicate, and the opportunity for the people of New York to join together at that moment. The NYPD conducted a mass false arrest and extinguished the demonstration activity in an attempt to stop and prohibit further growing democratic and political collective action.
20. These unconstitutional actions also send a threatening message to the public that may be interested in making common cause with the political actions. That message is that free speech activities are criminalized by the police department and that joining in lawful First Amendment protected activities comes at the risk of police violence and false arrest.
21. These unconstitutional actions create a substantial chilling effect and deterrent to First Amendment protected activity as they burden free speech activities with the risk of arrest, of being wrongfully subject to the criminal process of the city, of being threatened with physical harm by the police, being bound with handcuffs and having one's identification and association with a demonstration be collected and recorded by the police and transferred to federal and other law enforcement authorities for data warehousing and collection.
22. This police conduct is anathema to democracy. These blatantly unconstitutional tactics have been ratified by the highest policy makers from the Chief of Police to the Mayor of New York City. Mayor Michael Bloomberg stated of the October 1 mass arrest, "The police did exactly what they were supposed to do."
23. This complaint seeks, in addition to monetary compensation, injunctive relief enjoining defendants from engaging in the challenged conduct in the future, an order nullifying the arrests, and expunging all arrest records.
