October 9, 2025
Last week, NYPD raided the homes of three people in connection with a July vandalism action on the New York Times offices. Three people were arrested and had many of their possessions confiscated, after which they were arraigned on felony charges. The following is an excerpt — with sensitive details redacted — from the police report on one of the accused persons. It reveals some concrete details about how NYPD investigates actions of this nature, including the extensive capacity of security cameras as well as the use of the MTA OMNY and Metrocard systems as a mass surveillance tool. This may not be the full extent of the techniques used — just what was necessary to include in the report.
Deponent/address Detective ——— ——— Shield —— of the NYPD Bias Incident Investigations Unit
Occurrence Date, Time
Occurrence Location
7/30/2025 , 03:57:00
in front of 620 8th Avenue;, NEW YORK
Language
Statutory Language the defendant intentionally damaged property of another in an amount exceeding one thousand and five hundred dollars while having no right to do so nor any reasonable ground to believe that he had such a right;
Complaint
Language
I reviewed surveillance footage from July 30, 2025, at approximately 4:00 AM, depicting a group of individuals using various containers of red paint to spray and pour red paint on the New York Times building in midtown, Manhattan. This surveillance footage further depicted the following message left in white, capital letters on one of the glass windows of the New York Times building: “NYT LIES; GAZA DIES.” I observed leaflets left behind outside the New York Times building, which were titled, “THE NEW YORK TIMES IS STARVING GAZA.” The leaflets included a cartoon of two pigs painting pieces of paper in red lettering. The leaflets also read, in part, “THE NYT IS AN ACTIVE ACCOMPLICE IN THE ONGOING GENOCIDE.”
As part of my review of the above-described surveillance footage, I observed an individual spraying or pouring cans of paint on the sidewalk directly outside the New York Times building. The individual was dressed in all black clothing, wearing a face mask.
I additionally reviewed surveillance footage depicting 8th Avenue and 38th Street on July 30, 2025 at approximately 3:59 AM, two minutes after the above-mentioned individual poured or sprayed the paint. This footage portrayed said individual heading southbound on 8th Avenue. This footage additionally depicted said individual removing [a] black outer layer, thus leaving only a white tank top. I additionally reviewed video surveillance footage depicting 8th Avenue and 36th Street on July 30, 2025 at approximately 4:01 AM. This footage portrayed the above-mentioned individual wearing the above-mentioned white tank top, still walking southbound on 8th Avenue. In this video, said individual appeared to walk next to another…individual who was wearing black…I additionally reviewed video surveillance footage depicting the 34th Street Penn Station subway stop at the A-C-E train entrance on July 30, 2025 at approximately 4:03 AM. This footage portrayed the two above-mentioned individuals entering the subway platform at the turnstiles.
I reviewed subway fare information for the above date, time, and location to identify the OMNY cards that swiped into the station. Via the above-described review, I identified the OMNY card with serial number ——-
I proceeded to review OMNY card transaction history for the card with the above-mentioned serial number, and the card was purchased on July 29, 2025 at approximately 11:25 PM at the ——- subway station in ———, New York.
I reviewed video footage of the ——— subway station, depicting activities from July 29, 2025 at approximately 11:25 PM, and I observed an individual with the same build as the above-described individual appear to purchase an OMNY card at a machine. I followed that individual via video, and observed that same individual inside of [a retail business], located at ——— on July 29, 2025, at approximately 11:27 PM, purchasing an item without wearing a mask, and wearing a graphic t-shirt bearing a logo that read, ———. Said t-shirt was recovered from the defendant’s residence, pursuant to a search warrant. I followed this individual via video, and observed —- enter and exit a residential building in ———, both before and after 11:27 PM.
I am informed by State Trooper —— ———- , Shield No. ——, that after he conducted an investigation, he believed that the above-described individual is the defendant. I am further informed by Informant 1, a company representative known to the District Attorney’s Office, that an individual by the name of the defendant lives at the address at which the above-described individual was depicted on surveillance footage entering and exiting.
I am informed by a representative of the New York Times that he is a custodian of the above-described property, and that the defendant did not have permission or authority to damage said property.
Representatives of the New York Times shared invoices with me reflecting the costs incurred to fix the damage. I am informed by the above-mentioned invoices that the total cost required to fix the damage amounted to $107,599.54, consisting of $28,587.40 in cleanup costs, $7,154.64 in mag lock repair costs, and $71, 857.50 in façade repairs.
We hope that folks will develop their own takeaways, cross-referenced with other revelations about NYPD investigative practices, to develop more thorough understandings of tactical weak points of actions within NYC. We want to note that while police saw some success here, there have been countless actions of this kind in recent memory where nobody was identified. Most techniques of the state can be creatively juked. We have to believe that it is always possible to slip under the wire.
Submitted anonymously.
