Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.

Claim: While he was mayor of NYC, Bloomberg cut stop-and-frisk by 95% because they were doing too many.

Q1: When was Bloomberg mayor of NYC?
A1: He was the 108th Mayor of New York City for three terms from 2002 to 2013

Q2: What are the stop-and frisk stats for 2002-2013?
A2: The NYPD stopped and interrogated people 684,330 times in 2011, by far the highest total since the Police Department began collecting data on its troubling stop-and-frisk program in 2002. This represents a 603 percent increase in stop-and-frisks since that year, the first year of the Bloomberg administration, when there were only 97,296 stops.

Q3: Was the stop-and-frisk policy challenged?
A3: Yes, because In 2012 the NYCLU sued the NYPD over stop-and-frisk abuse at private residential buildings, and in January 2013 a federal court found widespread constitutional violations. In August 2013 the court found similar violations in a much broader case brought by the Center for Constitutional Rights challenging street stops generally.

Q4: Does Bloomberg support the stop-and-frisk policy?
A4: Yes, because Bloomberg made it clear that he absolutely supported stop-and-frisk, and dismissed critics as a vocal minority

Q5: Did Bloomberg cut the stop and frisk checking to 95 % ?
A5: The reduction Bloomberg touted is based on a comparison of data from the beginning of 2012 and the end of 2013, the end of his time in office. 

But as Bloomberg himself acknowledged, stop and frisks had ballooned before that period under his watch. The declines toward the end of his tenure came as the city faced public criticism over the policy and a lawsuit that questioned the legality of the police behavior and its impact on minorities. So while there was ultimately a sharp decline, Bloomberg had presided over a sharp increase in stop and frisks for most of his time as mayor.
He did actually reduce stop & frisk to a great extent. Si I rate this claim as refuted.
user
justification: The reduction Bloomberg touted is based on a comparison of data from the beginning of 2012 and the end of 2013, the end of his time in office. 

verdict: 'Refuted'
assistant