Transcript: Mayor de Blasio Holds Media Availability Following Police-Involved Shooting

October 19, 2016

Mayor Bill de Blasio: I want to speak to you about the shooting in the Bronx last night. First, I want speak about the family that has lost a loved one. A few minutes ago, I spoke with Deborah Danner’s sister, Jennifer, and she was heartbroken, she was still in shock, she had literally been in the hallway as this incident unfolded. She was ready to go with the police and with her sister to the hospital, trying to address challenges that her sister faced. She had spent decades trying to help her sister. She told me Deborah’s mental health problems had emerged during college and that literally, for all those decades since, Jennifer had tried to help her sister in a very, very difficult situation. She says she was standing there in the hallway ready to go to the hospital, meet the doctors, and see what they could do. And she told me she did not in any way expect to hear gunshots ring out – very painful conversation, to say the least. 

I told her how sorry I was. I told her that we would be there for her in this very, very difficult time. She asked – and I want to please ask you to honor this – she asked that her privacy be respected. She is going through a lot right now. But she emphasized to me, despite her pain, that why she was standing there in the hallway, with the guardianship papers for her sister in her hand, was because there had been several other times when the NYPD was called to that building. And in those other instances the NYPD successfully removed Deborah from the apartment and they went off to the hospital. She emphasized to me that she had seen it done the right way and expected it to be done that way this time as well. You can only imagine the pain she feels having had to stand there and hear the shots fired and the recognition coming over her that she had lost her sister. 

Many New Yorkers are feeling that same pain right now. They are upset, they’re angry, and they want answers, and we will provide those answers as quickly as we can and as well as we can. Last night, I met with Commissioner O’Neill and his team here at City Hall to discuss this incident. And I have been additionally briefed by the Commissioner in the last hour. And I will only reiterate a few of the facts that you have heard already from the Commissioner this morning. And I want to commend him for his forthrightness and his clarity in all he said to you. Deborah Danner, 66 years old, and known to the NYPD as someone who suffered from mental illness. And the shooting of Deborah Danner is tragic and it is unacceptable. It should have never had happened – it’s as simple as that, it should have never happened. 

The NYPD’s job is to protect life. That’s what all the training our officers receive – that is what the training tells them, that’s what the values of the NYPD tell them – protect life. And the overwhelming majority of our officers do that every single day in this City and do it very, very well. And this Department has dealt with many, many challenges when it comes to people with mental illness. And we say the phrase emotionally disturbed person. We look at how many times the NYPD is called to address a problem related to an emotionally disturbed person – this year to date, 2016, 128,781 calls to the NYPD related to an emotionally disturbed person. And our officers, again, in the overwhelming majority of instances handle those situations very well, with tremendous skill, with tremendous sensitivity. That’s why this tragedy is so shocking because it veers so clearly away from what we have seen so often from members of the NYPD.

It’s quite clear that our officers are supposed to use deadly force only when faced with a dire situation, and it is very hard for any of us to see that that standard was met here. The sergeant involved last night had the training; he had the tools to deal with this situation in a different manner. Commissioner O’Neill made this very clear earlier this morning. It was certainly protocol that called for deferring to the Emergency Services Unit – that that was not followed. There was obviously the option of using a taser – that was not employed. We will fully investigate this situation and we will cooperate fully with any prosecutorial agencies. But we need to know why this officer did not follow his training and did not follow those protocols. We are determined to get to the bottom of this incident. We are determined to seek justice and we are determined to ensure that a tragedy like this never happens again in our City. I want to take questions on this incident and then we’ll talk about other matters thereafter.

Questions about this?

Question: [Inaudible] the officer participated in de-escalation training back in 2014?

Mayor: I can’t confirm the date, but the sergeant was trained as part of the new training regiment, and that does include de-escalation. I discussed that with the Commissioner last night.

Yes?

Question: Even if he was trained, does that call into question any of your efforts to essentially repair police-community relations through retraining?

Mayor: I understand that question. I think a lot of New Yorkers are going to ask that question. I want to reiterate what I fundamentally believe. Retraining is necessary. It is working in the vast majority of situations and those numbers I gave you before speak volumes. There are so many situations where our officers do follow their training and result is very, very different. Again, even Jennifer Danner said to me just in the last hour, the officers came previously, handled a very tough situation – no shots were fired. Her sister was taken to the hospital. They did everything the way they were supposed to do. Something went horribly wrong here. So, I think this is about a very individual situation. I think it makes the point of why training is so necessary – why we have to keep doing it constantly and it will be an every-year phenomenon in the NYPD. Our officers will be constantly retrained. It will be updated all the time. And as with any part of human life we have to make very clear the must follow their training, they must follow the protocols that are dictated and we need to know why that didn’t happen here.

Question: I believe the sergeant involved in this incident might have been the subject of two complaints about excessive force. What can you tell us about his training and his record prior to last night?

Mayor: What I know to-date – and I will be the first to say I don’t have an exhaustive account of all of his career and I would urge you to follow up with NYPD on this – but what I know to-date does not include such disciplinary concerns. But I know for a fact that he experienced some of the new training, again, that does – all of it includes de-escalation. And this is a situation – and from what we know so far – and I want to say very clearly when there is an investigation underway we’re going to keep learning new things. So, I am not here to tell you I have all the facts, but the initial information suggests there was an initial de-escalation attempt by the sergeant and that it was successful in terms of getting Ms. Danner to put down what I think were a pair of scissors. But why the rest of the protocol wasn’t followed is what we don’t understand – most essentially, waiting for Emergency Services Unit, which is specifically trained to deal with a situation where someone’s inside their home and acting erratically or potentially violently. As Commissioner O’Neill said to me there is also the option of bringing in a hostage negotiator. Hostage negotiators are trained very specifically in how to deal with sensitive situations and enclosed spaces. There was obviously other options here.

Question: Mayor, what do you say to New Yorkers who simply look at this case and may use it as a situation where it adds to more distrust for the NYPD?

Mayor: I think that people are hurting right now all over the city, and I understand that, and we will gain more and more trust as we stop these kind of things from happening. But one reason I think people should have some faith right now is because our Police Commissioner came forward immediately and told the people of this city exactly what he believed happened and exactly how wrong it was. We are going to respect all elements of due process here whether it’s by prosecutors or any internal departmental procedures. But our Commissioner very forthrightly told the people of this city what he saw and how it violated the protocols that are in place.

I think that is an important statement of transparency and accountability. And I think it’s very important to note that the commissioner took immediate action in modifying the sergeant – taking away his gun and badge.

So, it’s a very, very painful moment but I think the people of this city can see that there is accountability.

Going all the way to the back – first, Dean and then we’ll go –

Question: Can you talk a little bit [inaudible] to those family members who have individuals in their families who have mental illness, because we can look at a number of cases [inaudible] this happened and then people are afraid to call the police because they fear something like this will happen because of a mentally ill –

Mayor: I understand that 100 percent. And Dean, a couple of things – we are all human beings, we all feel these tragedies deeply, and they take – they loom very large in our minds. But that number – numbers matter too – 128,000 calls involving EDPs – emotionally disturbed people – this year. This is the first time we’re having a press conference like this, this year. So, I think it’s obvious, in the vast, vast majority of cases. If you fear that someone may be a threat to themselves or to others, of course you should call the NYPD. How many times this year alone has the NYPD stopped someone from committing suicide? Or interrupted an incident with an emotionally disturbed person where others could have been grievously harmed? It is necessary to call the NYPD.

Now, we’re going to keep working constantly to make sure our officers are best prepared to handle the situation, and we’re going to deepen everything we do around mental health. You know we have a citywide mental health plan that is being implemented as we speak, which has never been a part of the equation previously. I think it’s going to help because we’re going to take the pressure off our officers of finding a lot of these problems earlier, and addressing them with the kind of treatment people need. We’re also training more and more of our officers specifically in how to deal with emotionally disturbed people. I think about 5,000 officers have gotten that training. More will get it.

So, the answer to your question is – do not hesitate. Even in this moment of pain, I can say, do not hesitate because so many times our officers save lives.

In the back –

Question: It’s been 18 hours since this tragedy occurred, and you just said that you have not yet received a full briefing on the history of this individual – you have not seen his full record. I don’t see how that can be possible. You’re the Mayor, you’re in charge –

Mayor: Willie, I, again –

Question: [Inaudible] the Police Commissioner is not here –

Mayor: Willie, I would urge you to just listen –

Question: [Inaudible] lack of coordination or a rift between yourself in the Police Department?

Mayor: Nice try – and absolutely inaccurate. This is a very serious moment, Willie, I would urge you to ask more serious questions.

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: The Commissioner and I are fully coordinated here. I said moments ago, we met last night until 11:00 pm. I spoke to him several times in the last hour. We are totally coordinated. I have seen elements of the record of this officer but not the full picture yet. It is still being developed. This is all normal for this kind of timeframe and a lot more will come out.

Yes?

Question: Training, training, and more training failed in this tragic [inaudible]. What more could possibly be done to prevent another situation like –

Mayor: I think the training protocols – you remember – many of them begun in the wake of the death of Eric Garner. And that was a decision that Commissioner Bratton and I made in the aftermath of the Eric Garner tragedy. It took some time to be implemented. More and more of our officers are receiving the training. But this is something we’ve talked about before, and I’m going to keep emphasizing this – I believe the people of this city are very smart and very discerning, and they understand that major changes take some time. So, a number of our officers have received one time or several times. They’re going to receive it throughout their career and as with anything any of us experiences in life, each additional opportunity to be trained helps. I always make the point – airline pilots are constantly retrained for a reason. And people who do anything sensitive are retrained constantly.

So, more training and more, you know – the reiteration, the constant reiteration of the message helps in figuring out what people need that will help them to live up to the training is a constant effort by supervisors as well. It’s what they do – make sure their men and women can live up to the training.

So, I think this – this does not, in my mind, fundamentally does not change our commitment to training or our belief that more is better and more will have an impact over time.

What’s so striking here is why this split-second decision was made in such a manner, again, where there was a protocol – wait for ESU – where there was another option of a taser, where there was a contained situation, where she was not a threat to others – that’s what the investigation will come to.

Let me come over to this side of the room – Marcia?

Question: Mr. Mayor, it’s a two-part question. Number one – as the Mayor who has made training such a cornerstone of your administration, I wonder how you felt when you found out the details and the fact that this particular officer had been trained, and what you felt [inaudible]. And the second – I just wonder if you draw any parallel to the Eleanor Bumpur case in 1984 where another Bronx woman who was shot –

Mayor: Yes. Marcia, I was very, very disturbed when I heard the details because this didn’t have to happen and, when you hear the details of the case, it’s quite obvious there were other options. It never shocks me that people make individual decisions and, you know, some make the wrong decisions. The vast, vast majority of our officers are making the right decisions every single day. And again, we should celebrate them when they save someone from committing suicide. We should celebrate them when they disarm an EPD who might be a harm to others.

This kind of tragedy gets us, and it gets me, because it shouldn’t happen. So, it doesn’t change my commitment to the reforms we’re making. We’re going to just continue to deepen those reforms.

But, you know, Deborah Danner should be alive right now. Period.

Yes, there’s a parallel to Eleanor Bumpur’s. The fact is, the department made a lot of changes after Eleanor Bumpur’s and we’re going to continue to look at how to do things better. But one thing that’s very different is that the kind of protocols that are in place now did not exist back then. If the protocols had been followed she would be alive. It’s as simple as that.

Yes?

Question: Mr. Mayor, the Police Commissioner mentioned that Ms. Danner has previous contact with the police and you also mentioned that the sister that was trying to get to care. I’m wondering if she had any contact and what kind of care she might have been receiving from the mental health system, and if the EMT’s who were present for the shooting mentioned her as any type of threat? 

Mayor: I don’t know that last part – obviously, ask NYPD and FDNY about that. On the first part, I won’t go into too much detail about my conversation with Jennifer, but to say it is quite clear that is has been a very, very difficult road for in terms of trying to help her sister. And this is not something I’m unfamiliar with, having studied mental health challenges – that many times the person in deep need resists help because they’re in a painful reality and it’s not about reasoning. It’s about – they’re afflicted by a disease that keeps them from reasoning.

So, Jennifer had tried for decades to help Deborah but it was not an easy path. And I think – again, I won’t speak for Jennifer, but I will say I got the strong impression from the conversation that she was continuing to try to find the way to get her the care she needed. But it was very, very challenging for reasons of their relationship alone. But what we can say is – one, we have to fundamentally change our approach to mental health across the board.

We’re trying to do that here but it has to be done on a State and federal level as well.

Two – that if we have information – and this is something that I believe neighborhood policing will help us with – if we have information that there’s a pattern – there have been a number of calls from the same apartment – it should help our officers to know what they’re getting into. And that’s something I think we can do better on, going forward.

Question: [Inaudible] from the City after [inaudible].

Mayor: I don’t know the answer. It’s a very good question. Whether there was a specific mental health plan. I don’t know the answer. I do know, with what we’re going to announce soon as part of the next wave of our mental health plan – Thrive NYC – that there will be easier to the next steps in care for people who want to take advantage of care.

But I’m also cautioning you – there are people with mental illnesses who choose not to take advantage of care and that becomes a huge challenge.

Question: Do you know if any of the other officers that responded, if they had tasers? And also, if any of the responding officers, like through their smartphones or through questioning, knew they were going to a house where had been EDP reports –

Mayor: Do not know on any of those – happy to work with you to get those answers.

Yes?

Question: Mayor, how long it took for ESU to get there – maybe why the sergeant felt he couldn’t wait?

Mayor: I don’t know the answer to that. That’s something we want to investigate. But the protocol was clear that ESU should have been deferred too. And there, from everything we know so far – and again, I will always put the asterisk on pending a full investigation but I’m following exactly what Commissioner O’Neill said publicly earlier and the many conversations he and I have had since last night – that there was time.

From everything we know so far, there was time to wait for ESU. There was an opportunity to slow things down here and wait to get everything set up the right way to maximize a peaceful outcome.

Yes?

Question: Mr. Mayor, I’m sure a lot of people will be happy about how the [inaudible] the City is being about this incident so quickly after it happened. Just wondering if there’s any concern on the other side about a rush to judgement and maybe an extenuating circumstance that’s not out in the open yet [inaudible]?

Mayor: We always look very carefully because we have to respect due process. We have to respect how difficult the work of our officers is. But in this instance I am listening very carefully to my Police Commissioner who knows more about policing in this town that anyone and has lived it all. And he is quite clear that it is time to say out loud some of these important truths. And they are not debatable. There’s more to learn. That’s a fair statement.

But some of these dynamics are just not debatable. The protocol says wait for ESU. The protocol says use a taser if you have the option, and clearly the sergeant had a taser.

Rich?

Question: Mr. Mayor, the accounts we read say that this woman picked up a bat after she dropped the scissors [inaudible] information? And also, those of us who have been a while – when an EDP came over the police radio, it was nicknamed a “net-job.” They used to have nets that they threw over people to control the situation. [Inaudible] discussion about the effectiveness of that or –

Mayor: I think – I’m not an expert on this, Rich. I think in the past they were used. I think Tasers are one of the modern tools that were considered to be more effective. And again – a whole different approach to training. And I have – you know, you have to look at how extraordinary our officers are when they follow their training. You may remember that incident – someone help me – whether it was 2015 or ’14. I think it was 2015. In, I think it was the basement of a synagogue or a religious building in Crown Heights, there was one individual with a weapon menacing people. And the way the officers kept positioning around the individual to make sure he did not cause harm to others and to minimize the amount of violent force they had to use. And there is video of it. It is absolutely extraordinary. And there are many situations like this every day in New York City where our officers do amazing things based on their training to use the least possible force. So, I don’t know about all of the approaches, but I do know the tactical training gives officers options. And that is what is so important to recognize here. They are trained to maximize their options.

Go ahead.

Question: The [inaudible] do you know whether that is accurate?

Mayor: I don’t want to get into the specifics because I want to be very, very careful. I’m not 100 percent sure of whether it was a bat or some other kind of implement, but, again, I’m taking everything I am saying here from conversations with Commissioner O’Neill. And from what we know, it does not change the outcome that there should have been a different approach.

Yes?

Question: [Inaudible] the training that the sergeant got specifically – the CIT training. And also, I know you said 5,000 officers have been trained in CIT. Originally, the goal was to train 10,000 [inaudible].

Mayor: Yes. More will be trained for sure. That is ongoing. I will say this with some qualification because I am waiting to hear all of the details. To the best of my knowledge, he did not receive that training, but I know for a fact he did receive training that involved de-escalation that would have been very pertinent to the situation.

Question: Mr. Mayor, the Sergeant’s Union is upset with the statement [inaudible] they feel that saying – the Police Commissioner saying that the Department failed [inaudible] denying the officer due process. I wonder if you’d like to comment.

Mayor: I’m happy to talk about it. We did fail and we need to say it out loud and the people deserve to hear it and there will be due process. There is no contradiction. We owe it to the people of this City – when we know something went wrong to say it went wrong and to be transparent about it. There will be a full investigation. And that investigation will yield facts and those facts will determine all of the judicial and other outcomes. But people are hurting right now – they deserve the truth and they deserve that which we know for sure. There are other facts that will emerge, but there are somethings we know for sure.

David?

Question: Very quickly, two questions – were there any other people in the room besides Deborah Danner and the officer that fired, do you know?

Mayor: To the best of my understanding, again, I’ll put this in the category of areas we’re all waiting for more detail on. But to the best of my understanding only the sergeant and Deborah Danner were in the immediate –

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: Well, there were other officers farther back and Jennifer Danner in the hallway, but I can’t give you – again, that is pending more information. I can’t give you the exact layout of everything.

Question: 128,000 ED calls that you mentioned, in the past the police department has talked about 80,000 to 90,000 a year. You’re talking almost 130,000 so far this year and we’re only in October.

Mayor: I don’t know that history, David. I am happy to get you the comparison, but this is the number I received today from the Police Department. It’s all types of EDP calls. So, obviously, some involve potential violence, others don’t. But just to give you a sense of magnitude. And again, the overwhelming majority of the time they are handled well and carefully.

Question: My question is, [inaudible] that is an almost 50 percent increase –

Mayor: I don’t know because I don’t know the history – let me speak in a lawyerly fashion, even though I am not a lawyer. I don’t even know if your question is right, with all due respect to you. I just don’t have those annual statistics to be able to respond to the question. I don’t want to immediately infer that the frame is correct. So, this is the number I have as of today. We will happily get you a break down on that number and put it in historical perspective.

In the back?

Question: Given Ed Mullins’ angry reaction simply to the sergeant being modified, is it possible that the Commissioner is not here with you because of concerns about police unions overreacting or charging him with having sided with you rather than –

Mayor: No. The Commissioner, as you know, had a speaking engagement this morning – was planning to speak to the media after it. So, we just let that happen and I wanted to speak to you all and this was the right opportunity to do it.

Go ahead.

Question: Just to clarify what Azi asked about earlier, were you briefed this morning on the two prior lawsuits against this officer?

Mayor: No.

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: No. It’s an ongoing briefing. We are covering lots of ground. What my concern was last night and today to make sure the initial actions of the Police Department made sense and to make sure I could speak to you about a number of matters here. And this is obviously going to be an ongoing discussion in this City – more to come.

Question: [Inaudible] that was filed against the sergeant was settled for $25,000 and yet this officer – this was several years ago – the officer doesn’t have any disciplinary records?

Mayor: Again, I can’t speak to it until I have more information.

Question: Do you know if the sergeant or any of the other responding officers were wearing body cameras that might provide –

Mayor: I have not heard that.  I could, obviously, get more information, but to the best of my knowledge, no.

Question: It happened within the 43rd precinct, which has a Neighborhood Coordination Officer program. Does this warrant a reexamination of the NCO program or re-tweaking of the program?

Mayor: No, I think it is an example of why we need neighborhood policing to deepen. Neighborhood policing is very new. And again, I never – I never misunderstand the impulse to want instant results for anything we start. But we’re talking about a huge organization, soon to be 36,000 officers with a very long history and a lot that we wanted to address in terms of changing approaches and the culture of the place and the strategies. And that is what Commissioner Bratton and Commissioner O’Neill have been adamantly and consistently doing. Change takes time. So, yes there is neighborhood policing in that precinct, which is a very good thing. But neighborhood policing is not universal yet. And this is a situation where the most important part of the equation was the part that did not happen. Meaning, that the Emergency Services Unit had been given the opportunity to do what they are specially trained to do I am very certain there would have been a different outcome. And that is separate from neighborhood policing. Emergency Services Unit, as I think you know, is a specialized unit. This was a case of just holding on until the specialist arrived who knew how to do this right. And that is what didn’t happen here.

Yes?

Question: You mentioned that you were sort of looking at this officer [inaudible] this incident uniquely. Is art of the review going to be looking at the training that officers [inaudible]? Or is it your view that the training in place is adequate to deal with the kind of scenarios as they arrive?

Mayor: I think the proof is in the overall reality, Azi. Tens of thousands of officers have received the training. In the overwhelming majority of cases involving emotionally disturbed people they have handled those cases very well. It’s really tough work for our officers to do and look at the outcomes; the vast majority of the time they are handling them very, very well. And there are some times in a huge organization when an individual does not follow their instructions; does not follow their training or their protocols. We always want to know if there is some larger meaning in that. Sometimes people just do something wrong and our job is to try to in everything we do minimize the chance that could happen. But – that’s why I keep coming back to this ESU point. There was a real, simple thing to do here – defer to the experts, just wait for them. That is what the Commissioner said very, very clearly.

Yes?

Question: I was wondering if they arrived by the time he shot her or they arrived after?

Mayor: To the best of my knowledge, no, but I want to check that. Let’s get you the specific timeline on that.

Question: Were all these officers in uniform. And to your knowledge is there any indication that [inaudible]?

Mayor: I do not know the answer on either of those questions because I again have not gotten the full briefing of the physical layout – and I do know there were additional officers there. And again, I can’t speak to the previous disciplinary history – nothing that I know of.

Question: [Inaudible] when a 9-1-1 call comes in that call does not get routed directly to those officers [inaudible]. Why not do that?

Mayor: Again, I think it a very fair question to say should we be training more officers in the CIT, which is the ability to handle mental health challenges – yes we are. We have done 5,000. We are going to do lot more. Second, should we maximally employee them in these situations, of course. But I want you to hear the sort of frontline logic here. The folks who had the training to handle a situation like this were available and they should have been deferred to. That is the point about ESU because it is not just about emotionally disturbed folks in that training. It’s the physical reality etcetera – even to the point as I said bringing in a hostage negotiator if someone was refusing to come out of their house. There are ways of dealing with this. And the previous instance per Jennifer Danner who was there for the previous instances NYPD did the right thing – got her sister out of her apartment, got her to the hospital. There was no violence. So, yes we’re going to deepen the training and yes we should maximize the use of those situations – those trained officers and we’ll look at that, but in this case I think the answer goes more to why the specialist unit that could have handled this situation wasn’t deferred to.

Let’s see if there is anything else on this before we go to other topics.

Question: The Police Commissioner said we failed. Do you think that maybe the mental health network also failed because this seems like a revolving door? She needs treatment, call the police, police take her to the hospital [inaudible] repeat the process.

Mayor: I think it is even more complicated – it’s the sad truth. And again, I am going to respect the Danner family’s privacy. I am only going to give you an inference from the conversation I had with her sister, but I think this one is another example of how the mental health challenges are particularly troubling because when they grow overtime and go untreated it gets very hard. This is a 66-year-old woman who had been experiencing mental health challenges for most of 50 years. And so, I don’t think it is as simple as why weren’t there an easy connection to treatment. I think, you know, it sounds like she was not overly willing to participate in treatment at that point in her life. And that makes it so much more complicated.

I think there is a very important point here about the fact that we have to reoriented our approach as a society and as a government to reaching people at the first manifestation of a mental health challenge, particularly young people and getting them treatment then when they might be particularly receptive to it. So, you know, in a different reality – the one we’re trying to create – let’s say the same exact scenario happens someone who is college age had not manifested a mental health challenge previously now did. If we had been able to provide support right then, I think we would have had a chance because you know it’s the classic situation; someone is supposed to take meds and they go off their meds because of their illness they choose not to take their meds. Once they don’t take their meds it is very hard to get them to engage another kind of treatment. That is the kind of – again, without going into any detail unfortunately that is the kind of scenario we are dealing with here.

Yes?

Question: Mr. Mayor, You said several times that the police officer should have waited for ESU, which the people in that unit are specially trained to deal with EDP’s. I’m wondering, do you think that they should have waited for ESU to arrive before they entered the apartment or once they were in the apartment when she grabbed a baseball bat should they have left?

Mayor: These are very fair tactical questions and I want to defer them to Commissioner O’Neill and the NYPD. Commissioner O’Neill as he spoke about earlier today talked about the situation as it unfolded. I think you’re asking a very important question; was there another approach to begin with? But from the moment – in the moments previous to the decision to shoot, that is what the Commissioner spoke to; that that is when there was an opportunity to hang back and wait for the ESU or obviously potentially to use a taser as an alternative.

On all other scenario questions I want to defer that to NYPD.

Question: So, if you have a situation where this woman had a history [inaudible]. Would it have been wiser to just wait for the specialist to get there?

Mayor: A very fair question – very fair question. I want to defer to the Commissioner because I think the challenge always is you need to know what is going in if she might be a threat to other people, for example. What they found by going there was no she was not based on everything we know now – full investigation to come. So, I will keep emphasizing – I’m telling you what I know based on what we have right now. So, I think there is a fair assumption in policing that you have to get eyes on a situation to know where the situation is going and if there might larger threats. I think there is also an opportunity at any given point to slow things down and defer to specialized units.

Yes?

Question: [Inaudible] did not hit him with the bat.

Mayor: Say that again?

Question: Are we sure that Deborah didn’t hit him with the bat?

Mayor: I do not know that.

Go ahead.

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: I want to get to you the very specific number – I’m going to use the phrase a handful because that gives me the numbers I believe it to be somewhere in the three, four range – not this year, over the last few years, but let’s  get you that specific fact.

David?

Question: In the past when you’ve held police-related press conferences you appeared with members of the Police Department. Why did you decide not to appear with any of them today?

Mayor: Again, this is very specific situation today. Commissioner was going to be speaking at the event this morning and was going to be speaking to the media. We just made the decision that made sense and I would go behind it as we got more information.

Question: [Inaudible] after rebuilding your relationship with the sergeants and the Police Department after the deaths of Liu and Ramos and other incidents that – as forthright as you’re being today, that might somehow deteriorate –

Mayor: I want to believe that anybody who cares about New York City wants us to be honest about this situation – that we need it for the good of our City. A lot of people are hurting right no. A lot of people are confused right now and angry and want to hear answers. That is my responsibility – thinking about eight-and-a-half million people. And I want to believe that even though I understand union leaders have specific interest to promote that they would see there is a larger reality here that we have to protect the good of our City. And I think what we are saying here is fair. And the person who first laid it out to you is the most experienced police officer in this City – who is our Commissioner. And he was adamant that these things needed to be said.

Way in the back.

Question: Mayor, back in July you were asked about the Eric Garner, Rhamarley Graham, [inaudible] and you said there was an important chronology point – those were all horrible incidents that shouldn’t have happened. On the other hand [inaudible] before the NCO program and the retraining.

Mayor: Yes.

Question: What would have to happen – how many of these would have to happen to give [inaudible]?

Mayor: I think this is an incident where we very strongly believe – I think I have repeated it enough times – I’m going to do it again. There are very particular factors here and there were decisions made that should have been made differently by someone who was a sergeant, who had a higher level responsibility. It’s not for lack of training; it’s not for lack of familiarity with the protocols. It’s not the fact that there wasn’t an ESU available. So, I understand the question, but I think this one clearly points to something very particular and not a systemic reality. That doesn’t mean we’re not going to keep trying to improve.

Question: [Inaudible] that maybe [inaudible] incentive against any kind of use of force –

Mayor: Again, look at the history of this Department right now. Her own sister said they came in and they did it the right way in the previous times. So, clearly a lot of officers know how to do it the right way. They do it every single day. And I think our officers are doing an extraordinary job of balancing. Here’s a fact for last year – it is an amazing fact – adversarial situations, meaning takeaway anything that was short of another individual having an adversarial dynamic with an NYPD officer like them putting aside pit bulls for example – adversarial situations [inaudible] between other people and the NYPD where an NYPD officer shot his gun – 2015, all of New York City, 8.5 million people, 36,000 officers – there were 31 times when that happened. The level of restraint that our officers exercise is absolutely outstanding and so we are going to keep deepening that. And I think our officers are – obviously, by everything you are seeing in terms of reduction of crime – getting more guns off the streets, they are doing their jobs, doing their jobs well, doing their jobs assertively. This situation could have been so different.

Question: It is really about bad apples and the way you are thinking about –

Mayor: Or bad decisions

Question: How do you think about dealing with that? That they are – I know you want to save every life you can.

Mayor: We do want to save every life we can and that’s why I think we recognize how heartfelt Commissioner O’Neill’s comments were this morning. I think he was personally pained by it. He believes in his profession so deeply, he believes in the NYPD and it pained him. We are dealing with human beings, human beings sometimes make mistakes. Our job is to keep those mistakes as minimal as possible. I don’t have enough evidence yet that there is any pattern previously that could have told us that there was a particular challenge. There is a systemic effort within the NYPD to look for any situation where an officer may not be living up to our standards, and both Commissioner Bratton and Commissioner O’Neill have been very clear about that – that they have a systemic approach, ongoing approach constantly looking for where an officer may need additional help or may not be suited to the force. I don’t have enough detail here but I also have no specific reason to believe this was the case in this situation.

Question: What do you want to see happen to this officer?

Mayor: Again, I just want justice to be served. It’s not my place to speak for the justice system. Right now, we are awaiting a decision about whether this is going to be looked at by the State Attorney General or the Bronx District Attorney and that will be the first part of the process. But, I think Commissioner O’Neill did the right thing in the first instance – took away the badge and gun and told the truth as he knew it. Now we have to go in to the much rigorous work of the prosecutorial process.

Question: [Inaudible

Mayor: I don’t know of one, so I don’t want to comment on something I don’t know about. 

Question: Has he been interviewed?

Mayor: I don’t know, I don’t know.

Question: The City Council, in response to this incident for the Black, Latino, and Asian Caucus, said they would like you to return to the previous policy of disclosing disciplinary records or information about officers and they’re using this incident as their latest reason [inaudible]. I am wondering if that sort of insight might help you in looking at this case?

Mayor: We fundamentally believe that law is very clear. So, you know, anyone can give their own personal rendition of the law. I have an obligation to follow the law. I have a corporation counsel, Zachary Carter, who is highly respected. He used to be U.S. Attorney. He is – and obviously someone who cares very deeply about justice and matters of police-community relations – led the prosecution in the Abner Louima case. He is adamant and the reasons are quite clear – that we are not in a position to reals that information. The law was built to inhibit the release of that information. We think it’s an unfair law and we want to fix it. I think there’s going to be a lot of energy in Albany to fix this law in this moment in our history, in American history. So, we are hopeful that we can get that done quickly, and then we’ll be in a position to realize that kind of information. 

Alright, let’s go to other topics.

Question: Forgive me for going straight to this, but what were you doing in Brooklyn right before you got on the helicopter? 

Mayor: David, I’m going to answer it in my own way. This is governed by a specific decision of the Conflict of Interest Board – we can get you a copy – and by the decision of the NYPD by the Intelligence Division. I very rarely use a helicopter. I think it’s on average three or four times a year – don’t have any plans to change that, and I really don’t quite understand what this is all about but I very simply say there’s a governing policy. We have followed that policy to the letter.

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: We’ll get you a copy. It says, essentially, you treat it the same way you would the car and there’s a decision made when, for whatever reason, it is the smarter option to use.

Question: Why is it an appropriate use of City parks to be used as the helipad for the [inaudible]? 

Mayor: Again, this is determined by the NYPD – long standing. My predecessors used the helicopter. They used City parks to land. That’s where you land in many instances unless there’s another obvious helipad. This is – we’ll get you plenty of chapter and verses. This has happened for decades. And the governing dynamics about the situations used and determined by the NYPD Intelligence Division and governed by a Conflict Interest board ruling from years ago.

Yes?

Question: One the same issue – the trip to the debate seems to be a slightly different instance. Other dignitaries, Governor Cuomo for one, took the –

Mayor: It’s the same answer.

Question: [inaudible] vehicles –

Mayor: It’s the same answer.

Question: Why did you – why did you use a helicopter?

Mayor: Again, in the situations that present themselves, the Intelligence Division decides if they want to use that option. And that has everything to do with the logistics, the dynamics, the timing, everything, and it is absolutely consistent under the rules of this city that it is supposed to be used the same you use any other form of transportation. And it’s at the discretion of the Intelligence Division.

And it’s – the thing I find so interesting here is we’re talking about a handful of times a year. My predecessor’s obviously used it a lot more. But we’re talking about a handful times in a year. That’s just all there is to it.

Question: The Daily News, today, had a story about the Nuisance Abatement legislation that’s coming through. I’m wondering if you have a position on that. Were you aware that [inaudible] wanted to reform this?

Mayor: I have not seen the legislation. I certainly will talk to the Council about it. We have said, and the NYPD has said, that we can and will and are making improvements in some of the due process issues, but we still believe that there is an appropriate use of this strategy.  So, we’ve made some improvements of our own and some reforms of our own – certainly happy to talk to Council about what they think.

Question: [Inaudible] people are really pushing for the eliminate the [inaudible] which would mean that both sides would have to be there. Do you have a position on that? 

Mayor: I have to see the legislation. I can’t speak to it until I do.

Question: With the election coming up, I mean, do you feel as though this is something that you are – people who are criminal justice advocates and looking for reform – do you feel like this is an important issue?

Mayor: Well, I think it’s an issue that needs to be seen, first, in the light of why we do it to begin with. We do it when there’s an ongoing problem – people selling drugs and endangering young people or violent enterprises or criminal enterprises. This is done for very specific reasons. And I think it’s a legitimate tool. I think there’s been very fair questions raised about how to hone it and use it in a better manner. We’re agreeing with some of that. We’ve obviously made some of those changes.

So, I think people – a number of people are interested in knowing how it can best be done. But I will tell you, when I talk to neighborhood residents all over the city and they tell me about the drug dealing location or they tell me about a place where criminals are acting out of – they want us to deal with it. They expect us to deal with it. And we have to have all the tools, obviously, within constitutional limits to be able to address crime and keep people safe.

Yes.

Question: [Inaudible] discussion about the election being “rigged.” I’m sure you’ve –

Mayor: I have heard that allegation.

Question: One of the people speaking out against that is the head of the New York City Board of Elections. Is he the right person to be talking about that given questions about missing ballots and difficulty in counting for absentees in the past and trouble counting? How would you sort of put that in perspective?

Mayor: I think its apples and oranges, I really do. I have a lot of problems with our Board of Elections and I would love to have control over it because I would sweep it clean right away. And I wish the State of New York would make the kinds of reforms we need. The State of New York has a horrible record on electoral reform. And we’re going to be very, very active on this with a lot of allies. You met some of them the other day, a lot of the good government groups.

I assure you, a lot of people who supported Bernie Sanders will get involved in this effort. There’s going to be a very strong push to, once and for all, change the laws of New York State – early voting, same-day registration, etcetera.

But I’ve also supported legislation to empower the executive director of the Board of Elections to be professional and make professional decisions. I think the current executive director is a capable person who wants to update the agency. I’ve offered him $20 million to do it. His board won’t agree to it because it comes with a guarantee of reforms.

But I think he is someone who can help us move forward. I don’t think there’s anything about what happened in the presidential primary in this city that was about the system being rigged. I think the system is broken. It’s a different point.

Question: [Inaudible] Phil Walzak leaving City Hall to work for the campaign – one, will seek guidance or have you already on classifying him under that same outside advisor classification where you’re interactions with him will be shielded –

Mayor: It’s a different situation. He is – because he is going to be on a leave from City Hall – obviously in a position to keep communicating with us. We haven’t talked about that specific matter that you’re referring to. What we obviously were dealing with in the past with people I had long, long history with who were very close to me and personal advisors. This is someone who has been an employee at City Hall, now going on leave. We will seek guidance, of course, as to how to handle anything in terms of disclosure, etcetera.

Question: [Inaudible] your press secretary, communications advisor – you’ve said over the last couple of years a few times that one of your biggest challenges has been communication. I think, you know, at the end of your second year you said that was, you know, one of the things you really wanted improve upon. So, do you feel that in his time at City Hall he served you well as press secretary and communications advisor? And what do you attribute those challenges to?

Mayor: I absolutely think he served me well. And his role grew overtime as you saw. And I am very, very happy that he is going to be leading the charge in terms of our message and our communications on the campaign side because, as you know, our campaign cycle is already happening obviously, but it will be fully engaged by the people of this city in just a couple of weeks. So we wanted to get him over there and get that work going. Look, I will always try and be better. I take the first responsibility on myself in all things. I think we’ve done a lot of good. I think some of it has gotten through better than others and I got to do better all the time as a communicator and the team has to do better. But, I think Phil did a really fine job. 

Question: [Inaudible] 

Mayor: Right now the group we have, I think, is able to continue doing the work well and we’ll stick with the group we have.

Yes –

Question: [Inaudible] Walzak is taking a leave of absence so there is some implication that he might come back, but, while he is gone, he is going to be engaged in campaigning, which as you know sometimes can be a very confrontational –

Mayor: What?

Question: [Inaudible] 

Mayor: I’ve never heard that before.

Question: Is there any concern you have about someone leaving and engaging in sort of adversarial campaign tactics [inaudible] and then coming back into government and working with some of [inaudible] you deal with on the battleground?

Mayor: No, people have done it for decades and decades. I don’t see any problem.

Question: So with regards to Commissioner Schulkin and Councilmember [inaudible].

Mayor: I’m sorry, Commissioner Schulkin and the second was –?

Question: Councilmember Joe Borelli – in regards to these voter fraud claims, you said that these claims are an urban legend. What do you think is their motivation for bringing it up right now even though [inaudible] are coinciding with the upcoming election, there are virtually no contested [inaudible] in the City here this year and New York isn’t a swing state, so why do you think they are bringing it up now?

Mayor: I think the Councilman’s case – I respect the Councilman but he’s very, very partisan – obviously, a very strong Trump supporter. So, he’s following the company line. And I think in Schulkin’s case it’s inexplicable to me why anyone would suggest something that is just factually, so vividly untrue. There is no evidence. People look to this issue over and over as the Republicans attempted to inhibit voting rights all over the country. This issue obviously was very carefully studied around the country. There is just no evidence of any meaningful voter fraud in America at this point. That’s just a fact.

Please –

Question: Mr. Schulkin said that there is no intent for him to resign in response to your calls for him to resign that he said that in you don’t control the Board of Elections.

Mayor: That’s a true statement. I wish I did because he’d be gone. And I think what he said was ridiculous and it’s without factual basis and he should be ashamed of himself.

Question: Do you have any response or reaction to this class action lawsuit that was filed against A&E real estate. I know that they’ve gotten tax breaks from this administration.

Mayor: I am waiting for an assessment of it. I have not seen the details and I don’t know a lot about what the history has been with them. So I am looking for answers myself and I will be happy to share them when I get them.

Question: [Inaudible] can you give us what your strategy is going to be in the next few months of getting the campaign kicked off and starting the [inaudible] of what is going to be a crazy and long year for everyone – all of us here – everyone included? So, what’s your plan for the next few months?

Mayor: I am not going to go into a lot of detail. I have been to this rodeo many times. We are going to take a very aggressive approach and it’s the simplest way to say it. Phil’s going over there to start the communications engine up strong. And you are going to see a very energetic campaign and a very grassroots approach. And we are thrilled to have our friends from Revolution on our team, who are going to help us really hone a grassroots approach I believe in but really modernize it too. So, you are going to see an activist campaign.

Question: Do you expect a serious challenge of [inaudible]?

Mayor: I always expect serious challenges as a strategic matter. I always assume there will be a – you know, strong challenges and we have to be prepared. In the back –?

Question: Mr. Mayor, are you under the impression that they are building a new jail facility on Rikers or not?

Mayor: No. All issues related to the future of Rikers in any major way will be looked at in two venues: One – our 10-year capital plan, and, two, through our discussions with Judge Whitman and Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito on their ongoing effort. And again, I will get you chapter and verse but there have been ongoing efforts made around existing buildings and temporary needs – on one thing or another. Just this, talk about urban legend, there’s just not a whole new facility being built on Rikers. We have to make that decision for the future.

Question: Well, in 2013 the Bloomberg administration broke ground on a $594 million new facility on Rikers, and when I emailed DEC in February they told me that they were in phase one of construction on that –

Mayor: That’s a previous piece. The inference of your question, I’ve had it asked by other people. Are we starting something brand new?

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: Things that were already – anything that was booked before we got here and moving, but that’s a different question. The bigger decision about the future of Rikers – again, I am not – I will get you all the chapter and verse because I don’t have exactly which buildings are doing what but the bottom line is –

Question: Now they are saying that the building is on hold, but the construction is –

Mayor: Yes, we will get you the details.

Question: You have been part of any discussion –

Mayor: We’ll get you the details. 

Thank you.