Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s support for ‘stop and frisk’ policing to stem the soaring murder rate in Chicago was the subject of a completely one-sided, adversarial report on Univision.
In the report, correspondent Viviana Ávila solely featured the voices of activist opponents of the policing measure, including a Democrat city council member bashing “stop-and-frisk” as racist, and another saying the answer to the violence in the Windy City is, yes, more gun control!
Though Ávila did cite the drop in murders in New York City during the years “stop and frisk” policing was the norm in that city, she failed to include the perspective of law enforcement authorities, much less any other supporters of “stop and frisk” who live in Chicago.
VIVIANA ÁVILA, CORRESPONDENT, UNIVISION: During the application of “stop-and-frisk” in New York, the level of violence dropped to the same level as other cities in the country, but also statistics from authorities in New York indicate that less than one percent of those detained carried firearms. The practice was declared unconstitutional in the Big Apple in 2013 for attacking minorities.
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Because, how are you going to detain people only because you’re going to check them? Right? Greater measures are needed for greater gun control.
As usual at Univision, the report included a call for greater gun control, despite the Windy City already having enacted some of the toughest gun control laws in the country. Go figure.
The practice of “stop and frisk” is also known as a “Terry stop”, based on the U.S Supreme Court decision Terry v. Ohio that held it as constitutional in 1968 in an 8-1 vote. The 2013 ruling that Ávila cites is not from the U.S. Supreme Court, but by U.S District Court judge Shira Scheindlin. That ruling found that the amount of stops focused on African-Americans made the application of that policy unconstitutional, but not the practice in general. The ruling only applied to the New York Police Department and could have been overturned if Mayor Bill DiBlasio hadn’t dropped the appeal.
<<< Please consider helping NewsBusters financially with your tax-deductible contribution today >>>
There’s also the matter of that statistic Ávila used, where she said that less than one percent of those detained had firearms. Her single focus on firearms completely omitted the 5,000 other weapons seized, like knives, for example.
Ávila’s report did not do even a modicum of justice to the substantial support for “stop and frisk” in the law enforcement community, as well as in the community at large. The report also botched the translation of what Donald Trump actually said on the subject, during last week’s presidential debate.
Below is the transcript of the cited report broadcast on the September 28 edition of Noticiero Univision: Edición Nocturna:
UNIVISION
NOTICIERO UNIVISION
9/28/16
11:38:53 PM - 11:41:17 PM EST | 2 MIN 24 SEC
ILIA CALDERÓN, ANCHOR, UNIVISION: Donald Trump visited the state of Illinois today to insist in his plan to combat violence in Chicago, a plan that was rejected some time ago by the community of New York for attacking minorities. They call it “stop and frisk”, in Spanish “parar y registrar.” From Chicago, Viviana Ávila has reactions to the proposal from Donald Trump.
VIVIANA ÁVILA, CORRESPONDENT, UNIVISION: Donald Trump returned to Chicago two days after saying in his first presidential debate that to reduce violence Chicago should resort to the practice of “detener y registrar”, known in English as “stop and frisk”, which consists in detaining people at random on the street under suspicion of criminal activity.
DONALD TRUMP, REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Now, whether or not in a place like Chicago you do “stop and frisk”, which worked very well, Mayor Giuliani is here, it worked very well in New York. It brought the crime rate way down. But you take the gun away from criminals that shouldn’t be having it.
VIVIANA ÁVILA, CORRESPONDENT, UNIVISION: His proposal to return to this practice was not welcomed by some of the Latino councilmembers in Chicago.
RICARDO MUÑOZ, DEMOCRAT COUNCILMAN, CITY OF CHICAGO: This stop and frisk program is what they call in English "racial profiling." It's profiling young people just because they are African Americans, or for being Latinos. "Oh, they look like gang members, let's stop them and check them."
VIVIANA ÁVILA, CORRESPONDENT, UNIVISION: During the application of “stop and frisk” in New York, the level of violence dropped to the same level as other cities in the country, but also statistics from authorities in New York indicate that less than one percent of those detained carried firearms. The practice was declared unconstitutional in the Big Apple in 2013 for attacking minorities.
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Because, how are you going to detain people only because you’re going to check them, right? Greater measures are needed for gun control.
VIVIANA ÁVILA, CORRESPONDENT, UNIVISION: Meanwhile, the American Civil Liberties Union in Illinois indicated that the policy of “stop and frisk” has already been implemented in Chicago and that it has not been able to reduce the violence that has been documented in the streets of the city. Pro-immigrant groups insist that the violence in Chicago, which as of today has registered more than 500 dead so far this year, will not decrease simply by applying this method.
ARTEMIO ARREOLA, POLITICAL DIRECTOR, IL COALITION FOR IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS: The only way to have safety in our communities is for the police and the community to collaborate in order to denounce crimes and also guarantee that only and exclusively thugs are in jail, and that there are no victims involved.
