Eyes are on a Manhattan courtroom after a controversial decision to release a group of migrants accused of scuffling with police in Times Square last month. A judge will again face a decision on Friday about whether to hold five people indicted in the case while their cases are pending.
Three of the suspects are currently in custody and are expected to be brought to court by authorities — two are detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on unrelated civil violations, and one is jailed after he was rearrested on a minor charge in Queens. One has been on supervised release and another was released from jail after posting bail.
After a video showing a group grabbing and kicking two NYPD officers outside a migrant shelter on 42nd Street last month went viral, a judge’s decision to initially release four of those charged fueled an already fiery debate about how to address the growing number of migrants coming to New York City.
The incident garnered national attention, and law-and-order conservatives viewed it as an example of criminal activity by migrants and lax bail laws. Even Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, criticized the releases. Whether the freed individuals, Yohenry Brito and Yorman Reveron, show up to court at all on Friday could have larger political implications.
Gothamist put together this explainer about the intersection of federal immigration policy, state criminal laws, and local politics swirling around the incident.
Why were some people initially released after they were arrested?
In this case, everyone charged was accused of crimes serious enough that acting state Supreme Court Justice Marisol Martinez Alonso could have set bail when they first appeared in court. But she initially chose to hold only one person in jail on $15,000 bail. Four were released without any conditions set.
Police officials said those four got on a bus to California after their release. But the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which has faced criticism for not…
Read the full article here
Leave a Reply