Category: Subway Security

  • New York Attorney General to lead inquiry into subway policing practices

    After a year of debate about cops in the subway, NY Attorney General Letitia James is investigating NYPD fare evasion enforcement.

    Following a year of increased attention focused on the way the NYPD and MTA police patrol the subways, New York State Attorney General Leticia James announced an investigation into those policing practices last week. James said her office will examine whether the NYPD had been specifically targeting New York City’s “communities of color through its enforcement of the ‘theft of services’ law and the Metropolitan Transit Authority’s (MTA) ‘fare evasion’ regulations,” according to a release her office sent out.

    “We’ve all read the stories and seen the disturbing videos of men, women, and children being harassed, dragged away, and arrested by officers in our city’s subway system, which is why we are launching an investigation into this deeply troublesome conduct,” James said in a statement. “If groups of New Yorkers have been unfairly targeted because of the color of their skin, my office will not hesitate to take legal action. While we are hopeful that the NYPD will cooperate thoroughly with this investigation, we will not hesitate to use every investigative tool at our disposal to protect subway riders and the people of this city.”

    James’ investigation caps off a year of an increased focus on the role of policing in the subway systems as the MTA Board grappled with a call by politicians to add 500 more cops to the subways and buses. Last fall, I examined the shifting rationale and tense debate, and in late December, the MTA Board approved the budget that included funding for the additional police. These officers will fall under the MTA umbrella, and not the NYPD, but this is a distinction lost on all but the most attuned New Yorkers. Thus, while MTA sources tell me they feel MTA officers will be more accountable and better managed by the transit agency, community activists fear that state (rather than city) oversight and a lack of body cameras on the officers will lead to different kinds of abuses.

    With this discussion looming large, James’ office’s involvement also grew out of a recent New York Times article that explored how NYPD claimed in sworn affidavits that they had been pressured to target minority groups for low-level violations in the subway. Although NYPD officers claim they stopped this practice, James alleges otherwise. “Newly-published data indicates that this alleged policy may still continue today,” her office noted. “Between October 2017 and June 2019, black and Hispanic New Yorkers received almost 70-percent of all civil summonses for fare evasion, even though they only account for slightly more than half of the city’s population. During that same period, they made up nearly 90-percent of arrests for fare evasion.”

    In announcing the investigation, James also released a letter she sent to the new police commissioner Dermot Shea asking for data the NYPD was supposed to make public [pdf]. Among other things, the letter requests accounting for all officers assigned to the subway, records and agreements with the MTA on fare evasion enforcement and detailed demographics break downs on fare evasion summonses and arrests. This is information the MTA Board has long requested of the NYPD and information the NYPD has been reluctant to release. James expects all documents by February 10.

    The Attorney General’s press release contains a veritable who’s-who of New York politicians angling for higher office expressing support for the investigation. Scott Stringer, Corey Johnson and Eric Adams, all potential contenders in the 2021 mayoral race, lent their voices to the release, as did Public Advocate Jumaane Williams and State Senators Alessandra Biaggi and Julie Salazar. (Adams, though, seems to want to have his cake and eat it too as the former cop-turned-Brooklyn Borough President recently endorsed the decision to add 500 additional officers to the 2500 who already patrol the subways.)

    Sources within the MTA have told me they welcome James’ intervention and that it does not undercut the argument for hiring more officers. The MTA has, as I mentioned, long pressed the NYPD to provide more detailed accounting of their fare enforcement activities, but as with many city-state divides, the local cops have resisted these requests. As the 500 new cops will be MTA officers, MTA sources feel they can better manage deployment practices and enforcement without being beholden to NYPD practices. As focus has shifted from fare evasion to misdemeanor numbers, some MTA officials are hoping the new officers will focus on stations and trains rather than simply congregating en masse at fare control. Whether this type of cultural shift can happen effectively will be something to watch as hiring increases over the next few weeks and months.

  • It’s not just about the Churro Ladies

    In what was, in hindsight, the unavoidable result of an ill-conceived plan to unleash 500 cops into the subways with little guidance and nearly no oversight, a video of NYPD officers handcuffing a churro vendor in the Broadway Junction subway station went viral over the weekend. You’ll see why when you watch the video.

    For the past few days, the city of New York has spent countless hours defending the churro vendors and generally arguing over the under-the-table food vendors who can’t navigate the city’s labyrinthian and expensive permitting process. We’ve heard calls for the city to loosen permitting regulations and for the cops who are cracking down on this type of vending in the subway (even while serving as the churro ladies’ loyal customers) to scale back aggressive anti-churro enforcement. But it’s not just about the churro ladies.

    Earlier this year, for reasons that I still haven’t quite worked out, Gov. Andrew Cuomo got the idea planted in his head that Something Had To Be Done About The Subways™. Too many people, he claimed, were evading the fare, and the subways just weren’t safe, the governor argued. The current coterie of cops wasn’t sufficient, and instead, despite major felony rates at just over 1 per 1 million riders and crime at near-record lows, the city and MTA absolutely had to add 500 additional officers.

    Perhaps someone once again grabbed him by the lapels. Perhaps his spokespeople, who continue to insist, despite all evidence to the contrary, that the subways are not safe yet, as Dani Lever did to The Times just last week, have been whispering sweet nothings into the Governor’s ear. But whatever the reason, the governor went to great pains to herald the arrival of 500 new cops, first on loan from the NYPD and eventually hired by the MTA as new officers. The June press release is important and instructive, a mash-up of reasons, excuses and tensions that come through and have been laid bare in recent weeks.

    Cuomo’s release talks about three reasons for the increased police presence. Notably and unfortunately, assaults on transit workers have increased by 15% since 2013; fare evasion has spiked to supposedly a $240 million problem; and there “problems of public safety,” an open-ended sweeping claim. Said the governor, “The MTA is still plagued by problems of public safety, attacks against transit workers and persistent fare evasion – issues that have only worsened in recent years. This new multi-pronged effort will improve safety on the system overall, protect workers from these incomprehensible assaults, and deter fare evasion by deploying 500 new uniformed officers on our subways and buses.”

    The mayor, a willing participant in this effort, echoed the governor’s statements. “The additional officers we’re deploying to the subway system will protect riders, prevent fare evasion and respond in emergencies,” Bill de Blasio said. The governor hasn’t ridden the subway since 2016, and the mayor has taken no more than a few token rides over the past year and change.

    The statement I find most intriguing from the press release is from the outgoing NYPD Commissioner. “In 1990, there were nearly 17,500 transit crimes, compared to 2018, where there were 2,500 transit crimes, which is approximately one crime for every million riders,” James O’Neill said. “These additional officers will help us continue to reduce crime past already record lows, work with our partners to solve problems, and provide increased visibility to deter theft-of-service – all while preventing crime and disorder from occurring in the first place.”

    But the rest of the release is a bit of a mess. It notes, without offering any evidence, that “the MTA fare evasion problem coupled with the growing reports of assaults on MTA workers has led to concern among many riders who believe there is a greater need for police presence in the subway and transit system.” And while the release discusses the real problem of assaults general harassment against transit workers, the bulk of the initiative is clearly focused around fare enforcement.

    And so with this carte blanche permission to take over the subways, 500 NYPD officers have descended into the subway with predictable results. They gather at turnstiles; they tackle teenagers selling candy; they’ve been filmed attacking riders (and have been subsequently sued for $5 million or 1.8 million subway fares); they’ve harassed people sitting on benches. In each case, cops claim after the fact that subjects were failing to cooperate and obstructing governmental administration, excuses that legally act to excuse a wide range of otherwise socially unacceptable police behavior. In a city still smarting from years of a very controversial stop-and-frisk policy, nothing we’ve seen unfold comes as any sort of surprise, and this litany of incidents is barely scratching the surface.

    At this point, the dialogue has moved far beyond protecting transit workers, and even the cops, standing around bored and playing with their phones at Canal St., have admitted they’re focused on amorphous quality-of-life offense and fare evasion.

    Imagine my surprise then when Edwin Delatorre, the NYPD’s Chief of Transit, sat in front of the MTA Board this week and said, “I also want to make clear, there is no NYPD crackdown on fare evasion.” Simply put, that’s a lie. That’s a lie based on Cuomo’s press release; that’s a lie based on what the cops themselves say; and that’s a lie based upon the lived experiences of every New Yorker who’s ridden the subway since June.

    Now, the case for 500 new MTA cops has never been a compelling one, and the obfuscation around the problems that have arisen has made everything worse. Rachael Fauss penned an extensive takedown of the rationales behind the push for more cops for Gotham Gazette. The non-partisan Citizens Budget Commission has detailed how adding 500 new MTA police officers will cost the cash-strapped MTA nearly $900 million over the next ten years, dollars that will come out of the budget in the form of fare hikes or service cuts. Meanwhile, the MTA’s own inspector general has noted that the agency’s fare evasion numbers seem unreliable at best, and TransitCenter has raised similar concerns. For its part, the MTA has never bothered to baseline an acceptable rate of fare evasion or issue a cost-benefit analysis explaining how much it costs to capture lost fare revenue on a dollar-to-dollar basis. Eventually, it costs more than the captured fares to push evasion down to zero, and every transit agency accepts some amount of fare bleed. And what of the transit workers? Their assaults have nearly vanished as cops have seemingly focused everywhere other than there.

    Predictably, the governor and mayor have each doubled down on defending this plan. The governor simply repeated his unfounded claims that the subways aren’t safe (a claim O’Neill recently took to the pages of The Post to dispute in print) while the mayor claimed 75 out 100 subway riders are simply clamoring for more cops.

    In a vacuum, the mayor’s statement may not be wrong, but should those cops come without limits? Should they come at the expense of investment in service? Should they come with the videos that have made the rounds lately and the conflicts that are emerging between New Yorkers, and especially minority communities, and the police who seem intent on picking on them on the subways? Council Member Antonio Reynoso summed up the problems in a statement:

    “The recent incidents of excessive use of force and broken windows policing are a predictable outcome of unleashing an additional five hundred officers into the MTA system at a time when we have record low crime rates in the City of New York. This is all the more concerning when the governor has explicitly stated that these officers have been deployed specifically to combat fare beating, an offense that very often stems directly from poverty. The recent arrests of women selling churros in the subway is a particularly egregious example of enforcement targeting vulnerable members of our society for offenses that stem from economic insecurity.

    This all seems to be building to a head, and earlier this week, Cuomo, who started this whole thing, accidentally stumbled into something when he said during a NY1 interview that “the real issue is the relationship between the police and the community, and that’s what has to be fixed here.” That’s right, but that was also right five months ago before Cuomo decided to unleash the cops into the subways, and that’s something that should have been considered by the MTA and the governor and mayor before this exploded into general unrest and increased tensions across the transit network.

    So where does the city go from here? One path leads New York into a dark place where the lessons of Fruitvale Station and the death of Oscar Grant are learned anew in a different city under different circumstances. The other involves a reset and pullback from the current situation. It involves maturity and a recognition by the governor and mayor and MTA Board that this was handled poorly from the start. It involves reducing the purview of this crackdown to true quality-of-life offenses. It involves prioritizing the safety of transit workers, and especially of those on buses where most assaults occur, first, and homeless outreach second, before Churro Ladies, candy vendors and people sitting on benches come under the microscope. It involves honesty in the fare hike debate, and an enforcement effort that’s rational with real goals and with a real commitment by the city to expand Fair Fares and redesign fare control areas to increase accessibility while incorporating best-in-class designs that include taller and wider fare gates and fewer unstaffed emergency exits. It involves a recognition that maintaining quality of life in the subways is important, but it also involves an acceptance that the MTA’s current summons-based enforcement, rather than criminalizing trivial acts that aren’t arrest-worthy offenses, should be sufficient.

    It’s not hard to get this right so that vulnerable communities don’t feel unfairly targeted and so that our politicians aren’t constantly trying to convince the public, despite all evidence to the contrary, that the subways aren’t safe. It requires two stubborn leaders to admit they weren’t right in the first place, and it requires honesty about the NYPD’s relationship with the people it’s supposed to protect. It’s not in the end just about the churro ladies, and it’s not too late to get it right. But without a political reckoning, it sure is getting late early.

  • Quick Hits: Gothamist on subway slashings; City Journal on Port Authority reform

    The post-Super Bowl party clean-up got the best of me on Sunday. So I didn’t have time to write up a full post with additional reaction to the Brooklyn-Queens Streetcar and the realpolitik behind the mayor’s developer-backed initiative. As you might guess, that’s coming later tonight. In the meantime, two links for you to browse today.

    Gothamist takes on subway slashings

    If you listen to NYPD brass talk about the subway, it’s a dangerous place where too many riders are creating unsafe conditions because they keep jostling each other and also it’s not crowded enough at certain times. In other words, none of it makes much sense, and the contradictions are laid bare in this unsigned editorial that relies on anecdotes from unnamed police officers to make it sound like the subways are more dangerous than ever. They’re not, and in fact, despite a spate of recent slashings, the subways are safer than they’ve ever been. A small uptick in crime numbers this year and last hasn’t kept pace with massive ridership gains, and the crime rate underground is at a record low.

    As I wrote last week, the NYPD refuses to get serious about sexual assault underground and instead are using slashing as a scare tactic. Over at Gothamist, Jake Dobkin tried to do away with this argument once and for all. As Dobkin notes, nearly all of the subway slashings have come about as a result of an argument between two passengers. These aren’t random attacks but rather avoidable incidents that shouldn’t be treated as a symptom of danger. Prior to another incident this weekend that arose from a fight between two passengers, he writes:

    Sure, I understand that it’s annoying to get screamed at by a crazy person, but you have to be pretty stupid, insecure, or insane yourself to get upset by it. Take a deep breath, summon up some sympathy for the poor, afflicted soul who’s causing the trouble, and then feel lucky that you had the presence of mind to avoid a preventable altercation. Seven out of ten of this year’s subway stabbings and slashings happened because people ignored this advice! Don’t let that happen to you…Our subways and our streets are safer now than at any time in the last forty years.

    By promoting the idea that the subways are somehow unsafe when they are not, the NYPD is, intentionally or not, undercutting public support for a vibrant subway system. That’s a dangerous, dangerous game to play.

    City Journal takes on the Port Authority

    For your weekly dose of Port Authority hate, check out Seth Barron’s magnum opus on the agency’s incompetence and corruption. For those who have followed over the years, Barron’s piece treads familiar ground: no accountability on either side of the Hudson, no ability to set priorities or control costs, and no real long-term vision all plague the Port Authority as it has deviated from its core mission. Barron toys with dismantling the Port Authority entirely but realizes there are considerable obstacles to such a plan. But no politician has an appetite for reform. It’s as close to an intractable problem as the region’s transportation structure has right now.

  • Quick Hits: Cashless tolling; transit enforcement amidst an NYPD slowdown; GCT protests

    A few updates for you tonight, some concerning hot-button political issues of the day. You had to know it would be hard for the MTA to escape these.

    Ironing out the challenges of cashless tolling

    It’s hard to believe that it’s been nearly four years since the MTA introduced cashless tolling on the Henry Hudson Parkway, but here we are. While I had originally hoped this would do away with a major objection to congestion pricing, the MTA hasn’t yet expanded this long-running pilot beyond the bridge over the Spuyten Duyvil. Now we learn why.

    In a piece illustrative of the zany deals the MTA has to strike with states to which it provides various services, Andrew Tangel explores how gaps in enforcement, particularly with respect to Connecticut drivers, is slowing the process. The MTA, you say, is barred by deals it has with Connecticut from sending collections agencies after drivers who do not pay bills they receive. Although the vast majority have E-ZPasses, Connecticut drivers owe the MTA half a million dollars.

    Admittedly, this is small change for one river crossing, but it’s holding up implementation at more crowded spots such as the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel and the Verrazano Bridge. “Until we have legislation in place, it really doesn’t make a lot of sense to do it out at the larger facilities,” Don Spero, MTA Bridge & Tunnel CFO, said to The Journal.

    The MTA is working to change these arrangements, but Board members are getting restless. “It’s stupid that we’re not doing this,” Staten Island’s Allen Cappelli said. “To have to sit there because you’re using antiquated equipment is insulting.” The pilot meanwhile has been a marked success as 99 percent of cars now travel across the bridge at speeds of 30 mph or more.

    Transit and the NYPD slowdown

    As the NYPD rank-and-file enter their third week of their unorganized-but-somehow-coordinated enforcement slowdown, transit riders seem to be shouldering the effects of the precipitous decline of “Broken Windows”-style police work. Crime isn’t up underground; in fact, subway crime — as with all city crime — is at a low. But while cops aren’t eying law-abiding New Yorkers these days, they’re also not pursuing those breaking the rules.

    Vivian Yee of The Times has this:

    Below ground, the slowdown has been even more profound.

    Police Commissioner William J. Bratton urges officers to target minor offenses that could be preludes to more serious crimes. Last week, however, besides the lax enforcement of turnstile-jumping, a highly visible emblem of urban disorder, officers made only one arrest in the subway system in the category of “peddler/panhandler”; none for unsafe riding (down from 68 for the same period last year); none for narcotics (down from 23); and one for a knife or other cutting instrument (down from 18).

    Drivers think they’ve died and gone to heaven as well as they can now park with impunity. These numbers, and the relative lack of anarchism I’ve seen in New York City lately, raise questions of what exactly constitutes the appropriate level of police work, but that’s part of a larger dialogue. As temperatures drop into the single digits this week, crime is at a low anyway. I’ll keep an eye on this story as it relates to transit riders.

    MTA kills GCT ‘Die-In’ protests

    It is, apparently, against MTA rules — wherever they may be posted — to lie down in Grand Central, but for the past month, the MTA has not enforced this regulation. As protesters have staged nightly “Die-Ins” to voice their displeasure with the Eric Garner Grand Jury decision, the MTA has not made a move to clear out those who choose to lie down. Now, according to The Journal, the MTA will enforce their rules, and the Die-Ins must stop.

    The MTA says they’ve reassessed this decision when protestors started placing placards on the ground, but the protestors aren’t convinced. One way or another, I’m surprised at this decision as it seems to be another First Amendment beehive into which the MTA is sticking its hand. I’m no expert on right-to-assembly jurisprudence, but the MTA has lost nearly every free speech case it has faced recently. We’ll see if this goes anyway. On Tuesday, the protesters were still in Grand Central but fewer opted to lie down.

  • Officials rush to assure ‘no credible threat’ to NYC’s subways

    Gov. Cuomo actually got on a moving subway to assure New Yorkers all was OK underground. (Photo: Marc A. Hermann / MTA New York City Transit)

    While waiting for a train to take me back to Brooklyn from the Upper West Side on Thursday afternoon, I scrolled through the latest news and came upon word of a security threat to the New York City subway. The concern had its origins in brief remarks Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi made at the U.N. He noted “accurate reports” from Baghdad that Islamic State terrorists were going to plan attacks against the New York and Paris subways.

    New York officials know the subway remains an open target, and having seen international systems suffer attacks, they sprang to action. By the end of the day, four New York higher-ups had determined that, in the words of NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton, “no credible threat” existed to the subways, and everyone is itching to get more information out of al-Abadi. Still, security will be beefed up through the city over the next few days, weeks and months.

    To assuage concerns, Governor Andrew Cuomo and MTA Chairman Tom Prendergast hopped an E train from World Trade Center up to Penn Station and spoke of recent security improvements. The governor had previously announced a new set of anti-terrorism initiatives with New Jersey. For the MTA, this will, for better or worse, include an increase in uniformed police officer sat high volume stations by 30-50 percent, more random bag checks, additional perimeter and curbside sweeps and video of high profile locations.

    “Our administration has been coordinating at a high level with local, state and federal partners. I want to assure the people of New York that we are monitoring these reports closely and are in close communication with officials in Washington,” Cuomo said.

    The safety of the New York City subway has always been one of those things no one likes to ponder. We’ve seen images from Moscow and London and Madrid and countless other cities, but we’ve relied on the fact that anti-terrorism officials have stopped attacks in the planning stages (or before). For now, it seems there is in fact no credible threat, and New Yorkers can keep riding the subways as they do everyday.

  • Subway-surface air flow tests begin today

    In an effort to assess the way air flows between the subway and the surface, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Brookhaven National Laboratory and the NYPD launched the first day of the Subway-Surface Air Flow Exchange today. The tests involve air sampling throughout the city’s subway system and the release and tracking of harmless gases called perfluorocarbons. The gases were dispersed this morning during the rush hour commute, and the air sampling is expected to wrap by 3 p.m. today.

    The S-SAFE study has been funded through a Department of Homeland Security grant and is designed to better prepare the city for a potential gas attack. “The NYPD works for the best but plans for the worst when it comes to potentially catastrophic attacks such as ones employing radiological contaminants or weaponized anthrax,” Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said in a statement about the program. “This field study with Brookhaven’s outstanding expertise will help prepare and safeguard the city’s population in the event of an actual attack.”

    According to the MTA, this study is the largest one focused ever urban airflow ever conducted and will help researchers “better understand the risks posed by airborne contaminants.” In the past, researchers have determined that air quality is ostensibly the same below ground as it is above, but the way air is dispersed throughout the city — through the push and pull of trains — has yet to be studied. I doubt the S-SAFE results will be made public, but the findings would make for an interesting look at how air or gases from the Rockaways could reach Times Square in an hour.

  • Reminder: Problem Solves on transit security tomorrow

    My long-standing series at the Transit Museum continues tomorrow, Wednesday, June 5, and this time, I’ll be talking transit security with Joseph Nugent, the liaison between New York City Transit and the New York Police Department. In the aftermath of the Boston bombings, Nugent and I will be discussing the extensive security measures — some visible, some not — in place to protect transit riders in New York. It’s not an easy task as the system is open 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and unmanned access points exist throughout the five boroughs.

    Some background on my guest: Nugent is the interagency liaison between the New York Police Department and New York City Transit. He began his career as an officer with the NYC Transit Police Department in 1985, and was promoted to sergeant in 1993. In 2002, he became a lieutenant with the NYPD, retiring in July 2005. Before starting in his current position, he worked as an NYCT investigator in employee misconduct and workplace violence, and later as counterterrorism liaison. He received a B.S. in Business Management from St. Francis College in 2000, and a Masters in Public Administration from Marist College in 2009.

    As always, Problem Solvers takes place at the Transit Museum in Downtown Brooklyn, and the program starts at 6:30 p.m. with doors at 6. Admission is free, but the Museum asks that you kindly RSVP right here. See you then.

  • Event: Problem Solvers tackles transit security on June 5

    My long-standing series at the Transit Museum continues next Wednesday, June 5, and this time, I’ll be talking transit security with Joseph Nugent, the liaison between New York City Transit and the New York Police Department. In the aftermath of the Boston bombings, Nugent and I will be discussing the extensive security measures — some visible, some not — in place to protect transit riders in New York. It’s not an easy task as the system is open 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and unmanned access points exist throughout the five boroughs.

    Some background on my guest: Nugent is the interagency liaison between the New York Police Department and New York City Transit. He began his career as an officer with the NYC Transit Police Department in 1985, and was promoted to sergeant in 1993. In 2002, he became a lieutenant with the NYPD, retiring in July 2005. Before starting in his current position, he worked as an NYCT investigator in employee misconduct and workplace violence, and later as counterterrorism liaison. He received a B.S. in Business Management from St. Francis College in 2000, and a Masters in Public Administration from Marist College in 2009.

    As always, Problem Solvers takes place at the Transit Museum in Downtown Brooklyn, and the program starts at 6:30 p.m. with doors at 6. Admission is free, but the Museum asks that you kindly RSVP right here. See you on Wednesday.

  • Link: The anxiety of a subway groping attack

    As part of its ongoing look at anxiety and the way we live, The New York Times has published a piece by Kimberly Matus about being a subway groping victim, and it is a must-read for New Yorkers. While the focus on underground crime tends to coalesce around reported thefts of electronics and handheld devices, groping is a far bigger concern for many law enforcement officials as these crimes are rampant and often go unreported.

    Matus, in her piece, discusses her experiences on a very crowded train, how undercover officers spotted the groping and were able to arrest the perp and how the incident left her fearful of future subway rides. It’s not always as clean and simple as that. From those who flash women in the subways to lewd comments to inappropriate touching, this behavior is rampant and unacceptable. It can lead to concerns over personal safety and fears over riding the subway. Absent an aggressive targeted campaign of enforcement efforts, the subways remain a hotbed for these types of sexual assaults. [The New York Times]

  • Link: Tracking a stolen iPhone on the 7 train

    Let’s take a familiar conceit from The French Connection and revise it for the 21st Century: What if Jimmy Doyle’s foil had a stolen iPhone? That is the premise of this New York Times Crime Scene article in which one Queens woman goes from unlucky to lucky thanks to Apple’s “Find My iPhone” app.

    As Michael Wilson relates, a woman, like so many New Yorkers these days, found her phone unceremoniously snatched from her hands while walking in Queens. When she flagged down a cop and called up her phone’s location, the blue dot revealed a perp on 7 train crossing the borough above. Officers tried to spot the thief but finally had to ask Transit to halt the train. A well-timed phone call revealed the stolen phone, and victim and technology were soon reunited.

    This tale at least has a happy ending, but most of these stories do not. Thefts of devices, especially from subway cars, has pushed crime totals up over the last few years, and most pick-pockets aren’t quite so foolish as to leave that phone turned on. So just think of this as a modern-day chase beneath the city’s looming elevated trains but without so much of the dramatic tension.