skip to main |
skip to sidebar
By Gamal Hennessy
On February 25, 2006, Imette St. Gullien left the Falls Bar with Darryl Littlejohn. Two days later her body was found. She had been beaten, raped, murdered and dumped on the side of a road in Brooklyn. Her killer was convicted late last week, but the shockwaves from her death are still being felt in the industry. The creation of the CEI and the passage of Imette’s Law are directly tied to Ms. St. Guillen’s death and have permanently altered the nightlife landscape in New York.
The Sean Bell Connection
The Club Enforcement Initiative (CEI) was set up by the New York City Police Department shortly after the Ms. St. Gullien was killed. Fourteen officers were recruited out of the vice and narcotics squads and sent into clubs undercover where they would investigate drug sales, prostitution and other alleged crimes. The officers were allowed a two drink minimum to help them blend into the venue and they would take deliberate steps not to reveal their identity once they were in the club.
Unfortunately, the police of the CEI were themselves accused of nightlife violence shortly after the unit was created. In November of 2006, Sean Bell and his friends left a strip club called Club Kalua in Queens after his bachelor party. Believing Mr. Bell to be armed and the suspect of a crime, the CEI proceeded to follow Bell’s car. Police reports indicate that after the car hit one of the officers and slammed into an unmarked police van, members of the CEI fired 50 rounds into Sean Bell’s car, killing him and wounding two of his friends. It was later discovered that Bell was not armed and was not guilty of any crime. This incident touched off heated debate within the city about police brutality and racism within the department.
The Best Practices Connection
On the other side of the coin, the murder of Imette also led to increased cooperation between operators and the NYPD. In 2007 a Nightlife Summit was held to discuss the issue of crime and violence within nightlife. City Council Speaker Christine Quinn organized the summit that brought together Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, David Rabin, the current president of New York Nightlife Association and other various club owners.
The result of that summit was the 58 measures of the Nightlife Best Practices which were supposed give club owners incentive to call the police if trouble occurs. In theory, the call would not raise the specter of disorderly premises citations that interfere with liquor licenses and the ability to stay open. Shortly after the summit, the New York State Assembly’s passed Imette’s Law which required video surveillance in clubs and stronger background checks for security staff
Unfortunately, not every measure discussed during the summit translated into policy. The operators at the Summit also called for finding ways to get more cops to patrol outside clubs and bars, increasing accountablility for teens that use fake IDs, targetting the makers and sellers of fake IDs, raising the admittance age for venues from 16 to 18 or 21, and fostering a better relationship among club owners, the NYPD and the SLA. Unfortunately, these measures have yet to be been implemented. Even though they could have improved safety from all types of crime and violence these recommendations were pushed aside for a quick fix at the operator’s expense. A chance to support nightlife was rejected for a one sided demand for operators to assist a police investigation after a crime as taken place.
A camera can record who goes into a club, who leaves, when they leave and who they leave with. If a person like Ms. St. Guillen leaves with a murder like Mr. Littlejohn, then the homicide division will be able to look at the tapes and compare them to criminal profiles once the body turns up bound and asphyxiated. But if there were police patrolling the club areas, criminals might decide to not commit their crimes at that point. If there were Paid Detail officers standing outside of The Falls then perhaps Ms. St. Guillen would have had other options on how to get home instead of walking away with someone she never met. Maybe nothing would have changed, but even the likelihood that nightlife could be safer should be enough of an incentive to take up the Summit’s recommendations.
Littlejohn has been convicted of murder, the lawsuits against the operators of the club are still pending and operators and patrons socialize under the new guidelines. Although violent death is extremely rare in New York nightlife, the steps left on the table during the Nightlife Summit could make nightlife even safer. Hopefully more political action on the nightlife issue will lead to more progress in the wake of Ms. St. Guillen’s death.
Gamal
By Gamal Hennessy
We go out to have a good time. We want to forget the recession, the housing slump, the credit crisis and the soft job market. We want to drink, dance and seduce each other for a few hours before reality sets in again. The last thing we need is for thieves, pickpockets and scam artists to invade our refuge and make us even poorer than we were before by stealing our wallets, clothing or purses. But that’s what’s happening and this is what people are trying to do about it.
The NYPD recently approached the New York Nightlife Association with an educational campaign to help patrons guard against petty crime in the clubs. While most of the advice is common sense and straight forward, a little prevention can go a long way. Patrons are in a vulnerable spot. They are often intoxicated, literally in the dark and focused on everything except their personal belongings. Operators can only watch and do so much (like coat check or to a certain extent security guards) to prevent theft. This gives predators space to operate. Ultimately, we are responsible for our own stuff, but the NYPD flyers can make us a little more vigilant on the dance floor.
The underlying dynamic to this situation is threefold. First, there is a historical tendency for different types of crime in nightlife to rise in a down market. The city is trying to reverse that trend in an attempt to maintain its reputation as a safe city for tourism. Second, nightlife itself doesn’t need the negative publicity of higher crime in a time when patron spending is already down. Any steps taken to make the public feel safer are helpful for the bottom line. Finally this gesture between the police and nightlife comes at a time when relations have been slightly strained. The safety flyers might not settle the allegations of phony drugs busts and potential law suits but like the crisis in the Middle East, any steps toward reconciliation have to be taken with cautious optimism. If the NYPD and the NYNA continue to focus on the well being of patrons instead of attacking each other, then thieves and scam artists will have less room to maneuver and we can escape in relative peace.
Have fun.
G
What’s your opinion? We’d like to know.
By Gamal Hennessy
There is a famous saying in entertainment that "any press is good press." If you don't believe that concept, just look at Paris Hilton. But nightlife operators might not agree with that statement. The past two weeks has produced one missing woman and a shooting associated with local venues. How can clubs maintain safety without sacrificing the party or their autonomy?
Nightlife is often associated with crime, even if the operators and the venue are not at fault or even involved in the actual incident. Plaxico Burress shoots himself in the leg with his illegal gun at LQ. Jennifer Garza disappears after spending time with a sex offender at Marquee. While these events could have happened anywhere, the stories frequently mention the clubs. It’s too early to tell if these incidents will hurt attendance at these venues in the long term, but previous violence with P. Diddy at Club New York was a contributing factor in its demise. Of course, mentioning where a story took place answers one of the basic questions of journalism (who, what, when, where and why) but it isn't hard to imagine that the nightclub angle is played up to 'sex up' the story and perpetuate the concept that nightlife is inherently dangerous.
The past two weeks have been something of an aberration. Compared with the number of people in New York clubs every year (the 2004 estimate is 65 million entries), the number of high profile incidents is low. Reasonable behavior from nightlife natives, a watchful eye by club security and a stiff police presence in some neighborhoods keep serious crime down. This fact is rarely reported outside of New York Nights. Stories like Burress and Garza stay in the public consciousness.
This perception creates a potential threat to the nightlife industry. If negative stories are all that are reported or remembered then that is the image that is going to stick, no matter how infrequent the incidents are. This can lead to liquor licenses being unjustly revoked, abrupt closings and ultimately fewer quality venues in the city.
Operators have to do several things to be successful. They need to attract people to their venue, provide hospitality service, entertain their patrons, make a profit and provide a safe environment. There is a limit to what they can do. They can't keep track of sex offenders who come to the club, they can't control things that go on outside the club and they are forced to tread lightly when it comes to celebrity.
But there are things that are done. Why don't we hear about that? Can the industry show that millions of patrons aren't injured when we go out? It might be helpful for the industry to show the public what is done to keep them safe. Not just after a clumsy athlete shoots himself, but on a constant basis. That way we have a balanced image of nightlife safety, not just the bad news.
Have fun.
Gamal
Posts
