The victims themselves here are more or less part of the downtrodden caste. Some of them might not be living in the USA with legal authorization. They probably don't feel like the city is interested in protecting them, and it seems like in some cases they are already familiar with "protecting themselves" in organized groups. So with a lack of political interest in their case, banding together makes perfect sense.
Robbery of delivery workers has long been a problem in the city complicated by the fact that many of them don't trust/don't feel safe going to the police.
My first time on jury duty in nyc the case was armed robbery of a delivery worker to steal his cell phone - this was pre smart phone era, so let's say the phone's value was <$200.
Was a very depressing case tbh. One person at risk of death and another at risk of a long prison term for what was really petty theft (armed robbery makes the punishment much much worse than just petty theft would be).
Indeed. Maybe the part that's most depressing to me is that the long prison sentence clearly isn't enough of a disincentive against robbing another working-class person. How fucked up and bleak would your world have to be in order to do such a thing?
Harsher sentences can actually be detrimental. It's not so bleak that someone would be willing to spend years in prison for a $200 phone.
Similarly, I didn't actually believe it was worth more than $125 to be a few seconds earlier to work this morning, which would be a rational, economic justification for a $125 traffic ticket. Instead, I've driven some 250,000 miles in the past 10 years (thankfully done with the long highway commute that caused most of them), I'd say about half of them were at 5mph over, and I've never received a ticket. I traded a 1:100,000 chance of a ticket against keeping up with the rest of traffic who were also uniformly breaking the law; I'm pretty adept with numbers but I find it difficult to comprehend that scale.
They're trading a tiny, tiny chance of prison time against a $200 phone. The actual percentage of enforcement is irrelevant compared to the justified, reinforced belief that they won't be caught or punished. OP mentioned that as a juror they were depressed at the apparent mandate to sentence someone to years in prison for the petty theft, instead, consistent enforcement of an appropriate penalty would be far better at changing behaviors.
There's no way it's this simple. Looking at a map of NYC, it seems that this must be a fairly major bridge (southernmost connection from the Bronx to Manhattan) for all kinds of traffic. I'd expect plenty of average people not involved in delivery gangs (??) to cross there, too, and have issues with the roving bandits.
If this is a known crime hotspot, shouldn't police just be hanging out there?
My point is that there must be people who aren't involved in criminal gangs or deliveries crossing this bridge, too, so there should be a general interest in keeping it safe.
It seemed like these were targeted attacks- specific time window, specific target group. Most people crossing won't have something worth thousands of dollars on them, which can conveniently act as its own getaway vehicle, and which can then be fenced through what sounded like an established pipeline for this particular item
