Title: Racially Biased Policing: A Principled Response
1Racially Biased Policing A Principled Response
- Lorie A. Fridell, Ph.D.
- Director of Research
- PERF
-
2Presented at the National Symposium on Racial
Profiling and Traffic Stops
- Sponsored by the Northwestern University
- Center for Public Safety
- September 30-October 2, 2001
3 PERF Report
- PURPOSE Provide guidance to law enforcement
agency executives in their response to RBP and
perceptions of RBP - FUNDING COPS Office
- AVAILABILITY www.policeforum.org
- Softbound copies available by calling
- 1-888-202-4563
-
4Chapters
Introduction
Police and Citizen Perceptions
Supervision and Accountability
Data Collection
Anti-Biased Policing Policy
Minority Community Outreach
Recruitment and Selection
Training and Education
5 - Dont claim to have solved 150 year old problem
- Didnt identify THE silver bullet
- Hopefully, put LE out of the Wheel Creating
business
6Information Collection
- 15 focus groups
- National survey of 1,087 agency executives
- The major purpose of the survey Identify
promising practices - Review of documents from 250 agencies
- Subject matter experts .
7Advisory Board
- Agency executives (local and state)
- Representatives from NOBLE, ACLU, Urban League,
Academia, Minority Advocacy Groups, a police
union, COPS Office, other DOJ.
8Core Team/Authors
- Lorie Fridell
- Bob Lunney
- Drew Diamond
- Assistance on individual chapters from
- Michael Scott
- Colleen Laing
- Bruce Kubu
9Report Represents the Views of the Authors
- Authors were the last word after receiving much
input, advice, information. - Content does not necessarily represent the views
of - The members of the advisory board
- PERF per se or its members
- The COPS Office or DOJ as a whole.
10Today
- Selective information from each chapter
- With the most depth on policy and data collection
11 - Many of the recos are simple and uncontroversial
- e.g., Supervision/Accountability
- Lots of conventional recos that promote good
management . pertinent to any issue - Key Question Are all these recos in place in
your department? (PERF TA)
12No handouts, but
- Will post this PowerPoint slide show to our web
site - (Under Racial Profiling Related Links)
13Ch. 1 Defining/Labeling the Problem
14PERF Chose Racially Biased Policinginstead
of Racial Profiling
15Why RBP?
- RP does not capture the concerns of police and
community members - RP is a small subset of Racially Biased Policing
- Solely definitions are too narrow in their
characterization of the problem - Community members and police are speaking past
each other.
16Our working definition of Racially Biased
Policing
- Racially biased policing occurs when the police
inappropriately consider race or ethnicity in
deciding with whom and how to intervene in an
enforcement capacity
17Racially Biased Policing
- This definition is spelled out in our policy
chapter - Appropriate use Legally relevant
- Inappropriate use Based on biases/stereotypes.
18Chapter 2
- Included results from the national survey of law
enforcement executives
19Executives Views of the Problem
- 60 believe that racial profiling/stereotyping
is not a problem in their jurisdictions -
20 - Item Have the current events related to racial
profiling led directly to any of the following
activities in your department? Check all that
apply.
21Overall
22Variations by Agency Size
23Chapter 3Accountability and Supervision
- Key roles of chief, mid-management and line
supervisors in promoting and enforcing impartial
policing
24Chief Executive
- Challenges chief executives to provide leadership
- And to think about and respond to the various
potential manifestations of RBP - How to deal with bad apples
- How to guide/lead well-meaning officers
- How to ID and fix institutional factors that
contribute to the problem.
25Bad Apples(Racist Officers)
- Unlikely to be significantly impacted by policy
and training - If they were acting within current policy .
wouldnt be bad apples. - Some methods
- Early Warning Systems
- Effective Supervision
- Accountability through discipline
26Well-Meaning Officers
- Likely many are not fully cognizant of the extent
to which race/ethnicity are used in their
decision-making - Policy to guide them on when race/ethnicity are
and are not appropriate to use - Training
- In that policy
- That facilitates an analytical understanding of
RBP to promote correct behavior.
27Institutional factors that contribute to the
problem
- What policies, procedures, hiring/promotional
activities, etc. might be contributing to RBP (or
perceptions)? - e.g., Chapter recommends Human Rights Audit of
above
28Other Recommendations (Targeting Chiefs and/or
Supervisors) Address
- Sound/receptive complaint system
- Personnel evaluations that address impartial law
enforcement, respect for all community members,
etc. - Quality assurance checks (e.g., early warning
systems).
29Chapter 5Recruitment and Hiring
30Whom do we want to Hire?
- Persons who can perform in an unbiased manner
- People who collectively reflect the diversity of
our communities
31Hiring persons who can police in an unbiased
manner
- No saliva test!
- Careful evaluation of an applicants character,
reputation, documented history related to
racially biased attitudes and behavior
32Hiring people who reflect the diversity of the
community
- Importance of diversity
- Recommendations regarding methods for recruiting
minority applicants - Reco audit of the selection process to ensure
valid/fair standards that dont
unjustly/inadvertently hinder minority hiring.
33Chapter 6Training and Education
34OUR FOCUS
- Emphasizing the importance of human rights
- Facilitating an understanding of RBP to promote
correct BEHAVIOR. - Tough to change attitudes!
35 Individual/human rights
- Not presented as restrictions on police ability
to do their jobs. - But as values that form the underpinnings of
democratic policing - Infused throughout academy and in-service
training.
36Understanding RBP
- Nature and extent of problem
- Impact of RBP on community members,
police-community trust, police effectiveness - Key Decision Points where biased policing or
disproportionate impact can occur (incident and
strategic levels) - Scenario-based training in policy that clarifies
when race can be used as one factor in making LE
decisions - Reducing perceptions of biased policing.
37Chapter 7Engaging Minority Communities
38We outline how agencies can reach out to
minority communities
- On the topic of RBP
- As well as more generally
39Engaging Communities on the Topic of RBP
- Recommend police-community task forces
- 15-25 persons
- Community members concerned with RBP
- All levels of department personnel
- Collaborate with the executive to analyze the
problem and identify how the jurisdiction will
respond to issues of RBP and perceptions - Advisory to the Executive.
40Police-Community Task Force Collaborative
Problem-Solving Mode
- Scanning What is the nature of the problem (TF
discussion, community surveys, focus groups with
citizens/officers) - Analysis What is promoting RBP or perceptions?
(hiring practices, lack of training, lack of
policy, lack of professionalism in traffic stops) - Response Develop cooperative responses to
problem (using PERF report as guide) - Assessment Assess effectiveness of responses
41Other DialogueProject Video
- Tool for facilitating policy-community dialogue
on issue of RBP and perceptions of RBP - For police-community forums
- Sets out the issues and areas in which responses
might occur - Leads to dialogue geared toward joint action
42Community Outreach to Diverse Communities
Generally (Not focused on race issues, per se)
- Report discusses (and provides examples of)
Practices for five categories of outreach - Dialogue
- Soliciting Feedback
- Services/Visibility
- Immigrant Outreach/Education
- Participation
43Chapter 4 Anti-Biased Policing Policy
44Survey Policies Adopted Nationwide
- 19 of responding agencies had adopted new
policies - 31 of largest agencies
45Need Policies to Guide Officers in the Use of
Race/Ethnicity in Making Decisions
- Survey Fewer than 4 reported policies that
specify when race can be used as one factor
among several to make policing decisions
(training) - Focus Groups Different views among personnel
within same agency regarding whether/how
race/ethnicity can/should be used to make
decisions - This ambiguity creates great risk of biased
policing activities. - Recommend policy AND training.
46Returning to our definition
- Racially biased policing occurs when the police
inappropriately consider race or ethnicity in
deciding with whom and how to intervene in an
enforcement capacity.
47Find the line ..
Inappropriate Use of Race Based on
stereotypes, biases, etc.
Appropriate Use of Race Legally relevant
Appropriate Use of Race Legally relevant
48Three Major Models
- Anti-Racial Profiling Policies
- PERF Report Policy
- Suspect-specific policies
49From most restrictive to least
50Anti-RP Policies
- Reviewed 150 or more department policies
- Mostly Anti-RP Do not intervene (stop,
arrest, search) solely on the basis of race - Positive Convey a message
- But do not provide new guidance to personnel
51 - Surely officers knew before such policies were
adopted that they could not intervene in a law
enforcement capacity SOLELY on basis of race. -
52Must provide more meaningful guidance.
- Again, 95 of departments surveyed reported that
they did not provide this guidance in policy.
53PERF Policy Compared toSuspect-Specific Policies
54Suspect-Specific Policies
- Officers may not consider race or ethnicity of a
person in the course of any law enforcement
action - UNLESS the officer is seeking to detain,
apprehend, or otherwise be on the lookout for - a SPECIFIC SUSPECT sought in connection with a
SPECIFIC CRIME who has been identified or
described in part by race or ethnicity
55Suspect-Specific Policies (Cont.)
- Key A specific suspect sought for a specific
crime has been described in terms of
race/ethnicity - Example If looking for a suspect--reliable
information indicates he is 58, lean,
long-haired and ASIAN - ASIAN can be considered (along with the other
demographics, evidence) in developing RS or PC to
detain/arrest.
56PERF Report Policy
- Encompasses the Suspect-Specific provision
- But allows for additional uses of race beyond
- specific suspect
- specific crime.
57Has both 4th and 14th Amendment provisions
584th Amendment Provision
- Officers shall not consider race/ethnicity to
establish reasonable suspicion or probable cause
EXCEPT ..
59Exception
- Officers may take into account the reported
race/ethnicity of a potential suspect(s) based on
trustworthy, locally-relevant information that
links a person or persons of a specific
race/ethnicity to a particular unlawful
incident(s).
60This policy we propose
- Disallows race used as a general indicator for
criminal behavior - Disallows use of stereotypes/biases
- Allows for the consideration of race AS ONE
FACTOR in making law enforcement decisions IF - trustworthy and locally relevant information
- links specific suspected unlawful activity to a
person or persons of a particular race/ethnicity.
61Trustworthy and Locally Relevant
- Trustworthy Worthy of confidence.
- Same standard officers should apply to any
information they use as a basis for intruding
upon the liberty of individuals. - Locally Relevant Information is relevant to
local conditions - Cannot rely on stereotypes or e.g., national
statistics). - Recognizes cross-jurisdictional nature of crime.
62Links specific suspected unlawful activity to a
person or persons of a particular race/ethnicity.
- The information must pertain to a specific crime
type - e.g., a commercial robberies, hijacking or
- Pertain to a category of crimes
- e.g., drug production, distribution.
63Similarity between S-S and PERF Report Policy
Only talking about using race/ethnicity as ONE
factor among multiple factors in establishing RS
or PC
64Difference as applied to recent events
- Suspect-Specific Policies
- Middle-Eastern descent can be used (as one factor
in a set of factors) to establish RS/PC - when seeking a particular suspect involved in the
terrorism - if reliable information indicates the particular
suspect being sought is of Middle-Eastern
descent. - Looking for Person A. (Or looking for A, B and
C.) Information indicates A is of Middle-Eastern
descent.
65PERF Report Policy Application
- Middle Eastern descent can be used (as one factor
in a set of factors) to establish RS/PC - when seeking potential suspects (NOT NECESSARILY
PARTICULAR ONES) involved in the terrorism - IF reliable information links persons of M-E
descent to this particular unlawful incident(s).
- Looking for A,B,C, and ?????.
66Example Continued
- Suspect-Specific If looking for Suspect A and
police have reliable information indicating
Suspect A is of Middle Eastern descent, can use
this factor as ONE . - PERF REPORT If looking for potential suspects
and police have reliable information indicating
the suspects are of Middle Eastern descent, can
use this factor as ONE..
67Applying the PERF Provisions
- Trustworthy Information Numerous and reliable
sources point to involvement of persons of Middle
Eastern Descent - Locally Relevant Information Does not have to
be locally BASED/GENERATED, but it must
reasonable to believe that it is relevant to the
local area. - Multi-site attack on 9/11
- Reasonable concerns in many cities
68Link to specific suspected unlawful activity
- That is, cannot use Middle Eastern descent as a
factor if investigating e.g., home burglaries - There is no trustworthy, locally-relevant
information linking persons of this descent to
such crimes.
69Applying PERF Policy
Other possible factors to establish Reasonable
Suspicion One-way ticket across country
Paid with cash Box Cutter Suspicious
Behavior
70Aside Do we NEED race/ethnicity to establish
RS/PC in the examples?
- Examples have been tough to come up with in light
of variations in the application of RS/PC across
(and even within) jurisdictions - Dont get bogged down in the specific examples
- For purposes of analyzing policy think of having
95 RS/PC and then focus on whether
race/ethnicity can add to the totality of the
circumstances.
71The Principles Underlying PERF Report Policy
72Principle Race/ethnicity should be treated like
other demographic descriptors
-
- Police can use race/ethnicity as one factor in
the same way that they use age, gender, etc. to
establish RS/PC.
73Opposing ArgumentRace/Ethnicity Are Different
- Race/ethnicity are among a group of factors that
have heightened constitutional protection (others
include, e.g., religion, gender) - Does this mean we should also give gender this
special status in guiding police behavior? ..
74Race/Ethnicity are Different(Cont.)
- No, race/ethnicity are different, because
- We have heightened community concern about the
use of race/ethnicity (not gender). - We have prejudices in society vis a vis
race/ethnicity (not gender) that provide for the
potential abuse. - Relatedly, we have a history of actual abuse
and/or perceived abuse on the part of police vis
a vis race/ethnicity (not gender).
75Race/Ethnicity are Different(Cont.)
- Perfectly valid arguments!
- If you think race should be treated differently
from other demographics - then you would adopt suspect-specific policy
76Principle We use (or should use) demographic
information in policing in the manner articulated
in the PERF Policy
- That is, the parameters on the use of
race/ethnicity are the same ones that do (or
should) apply to other demographics (e.g.,
gender, age).
77That is
- Information on Demographic A (e.g., age) can be
considered as one factor - IF trustworthy, locally relevant information
- Links specific suspected unlawful activity to a
person or persons who manifest Demographic A
(e.g., age).
78Opposing Argument
- We should focus only on behavior, not
demographics - (At least outside of a suspect-specific
description.)
79Supporting Example
- Graffiti problem at particular location
- Credible witnesses describe several perpetrators
- 54 white male juvenile, red hair, blue
sweatshirt and khakis, tattoo - 53 black female juvenile, black hair, jeans and
red t-shirt - 5 1 Asian male juvenile, tattoo, Redskins
jacket and jeans - Etc
80Example (Cont.)
- Officer is charged with stopping this behavior
- She will use multiple factors to establish
reasonable suspicion prior to any detention - Is juvenile relevant to her activity??
- PERF Report Policy Yes
81Multiple factors and juvenile can be one of
them..
82Because, we have
- Trustworthy, locally relevant information
(witnesses) - that links a person or persons of a specific
demographic (juvenile) - to particular unlawful incidents (graffiti).
83Which policy is for you?
- Do you think police personnel need more guidance
regarding how race/ethnicity can be used to make
law enforcement decisions? - If yes Either suspect-specific or PERF Report
models
84Which policy is for you? (Cont.)
- Should race/ethnicity be treated like any other
demographic? - No, race is different
- Suspect-specific policy
- Yes
- PERF policy--If you believe it articulates how
police use (or should use) demographic info
generally.
85Selecting a Policy
Â
Â
Â
Â
86More on the PERF Report Policy
- Thus far, we have focused on the 4th Amendment
provision of the policy - Indicating when police can use race as one factor
in a set of factors to establish RS or PC.
87 There is also a 14th Amendment (equal
protection) provision
- The 4th Amendment provision does not go far
enough. - While it restricts the use of race/ethnicity as
information to develop RS/PC - It does not prohibit officers from misusing
race/ethnicity in other decisions that they make.
- That is, the 4th amendment provision is
necessary, but not sufficient.
8814th Amendment Provision
- Except as provided above, race/ethnicity shall
not be motivating factors in making law
enforcement decisions.
89We need this second provision to prohibit, for
instance
- Disproportionately arresting minorities (but not
non-minorities) for noise violations because of
their race/ethnicity - Disproportionately targeting minorities for Whren
stops, because of their race/ethnicity - Treating persons with disrespect because of their
race/ethnicity.
90 - Again it reads Except as provided above,
race/ethnicity shall not be motivating factors in
making law enforcement decisions. - The Except as provided above references the
ability to use race/ethnicity if trustworthy etc.
etc.
91Sets up the but for test for officers
- Would I be engaging this particular person but
for the fact that this person is white? - Would I be asking this question of this person
but for the fact that this person is African
American?
92Recommend that agencies add this provision to the
93Recommendation
- Please strongly consider adopting a policy that
guides your officers in the use of race/ethnicity
to make law enforcement decisions - Make it at least as restrictive as PERFs or go
further and adopt the suspect-specific model.
94Chapter 8DATA COLLECTION SYSTEMS
95PERF Recommendation Regarding Data Collection
- PERF is neither for nor against data collection
per se - There are positive and negative aspects of data
collection - We are in favor of INFORMED (local) decisions
that consider the potential and the constraints
of this form of response.
96Major Argument For Data Collection
- Helps agencies convey a commitment to unbiased
policing shows accountability
97MAJOR CAVEAT
- Challenges associated with interpreting those
data to provide valid answers. - Issue If we find that 25 of all vehicle stops
involve Hispanics what does that mean? What
percentage indicates RBP? - Need hypothetical comparison groups benchmarks
to help us determine what percentage indicates a
problem - Lacking valid benchmarks leads to legitimate
concerns regarding irresponsible use against
departments and officers. -
98This is relevant to key arguments put forth in
favor of Data Collection
- Before you can determine whether and how to
respond to RBP, you should understand the nature
and extent of the problem. - Good management is based on information. I need
RP data to manage the problem.
99Response
- A agree with both of these in principle
- But, the question remains Do cost effective
methods exist that can produce valid information?
- Yes, good management is based on information.
- There is only one thing worse than managing
without information and thats managing with
invalid information.
100The key if collecting data for purposes of
determining nature/extent of RBP
- Quality Analysis/Interpretation
101For agencies that decide to or are required to
collect data we provide recommendations
- Regarding which activities to target
- Regarding data elements to collect
- ALSO Preliminary guidance on analysis/interpreta
tion (benchmarking issue).
102Our Recommendations Based On
- Review of existing literature/reports
- In particular, A Resource Guide on Racial
Profiling Data Collection (Available thru PERF
web site) - Examination of nearly 150 data collection
protocols from police agencies - Discussions with social scientists, executives,
supervisors, line officers.
103On what law enforcement activities should data be
collected?
- Citations
- Traffic Stops
- Vehicle Stops
- Detentions
104Decision-making Factors Balance to Achieve
- Balance need for information on
high-discretion/low-visibility stops - Trying to to assess whether officers misuse their
discretion. - Want to target activities in which RBP or
perceptions of RBP are most likely - Balance above against Considerations of time,
officer safety, convenience, community priorities
and resources.
105Stops Resulting in Citations
- Advantages Can rely on existing forms, relative
simple data collection - Major Disadvantage
- Does not tap into stops of individuals that do
not result in citations - While this may include fortunate drivers who
could have been issued tickets but were not - Could just as well include drivers for which
there were no legally justifiable reasons for the
stops. (Might minorities be over represented
here?)
106Traffic Stops
- Arguments for
- Much of discussion of RBP has focused on traffic
stops - Because of great frequency, hold greatest
potential for RBP (or perceptions of it) - Likely to represent the greatest number of
pretext stops - May be a representative sample of police
behavior - Easiest to benchmark
- Caveat Data are not collected for other, less
visible, high-officer-discretion encounters
107Vehicle Stops (traffic investigative stops of
motorists)
- Arguments for
- Superior to traffic stops because includes
investigative stops (with great potential for RBP
or perceptions) - Caveats
- Additional logistics, staff time and costs
- Increases challenges associated with identifying
appropriate benchmarks for purposes of analysis
108Detentions (traffic investigative stops of
motorists and pedestrians)
- Basically, increases the advantages and
disadvantages discussed above - Arguments for
- Includes activities with great potential for RBP
or perceptions - Pedestrian stops, in particular, are high-officer
discretion, low-visibility activities - Potential for grave civil rights abuses
- Extends data collection to officers who do not
conduct vehicle stops - Caveats
- Logistics, time, costs, benchmarking challenges
109PERF Report Recommends Vehicle Stops
- For many agencies, this would reflect an
appropriate balance between resources and
desirability of collecting data on high
discretion/low visibility stops.
110Other Options
- Not unreasonable to collect data on
- Traffic stops
- All detentions
- Not advisable Targeting only vehicle stops that
result in citations
111Data Elements to Collect
112Again Requires a Balance Between
- Need for Information
- If too few data elements, may produce system that
is essentially worthless - Time, convenience, etc.
- Dont want a system that is so cumbersome even
your best officers think twice about engaging in
the targeted activities
113Key to selecting data elements
- Measure whom police are engaging
- Also the circumstances and context of the stop
- Trying to collect circumstantial data to tell
us the real reasons individuals are being stopped - Trying to assess officer motivations
114Time, Date, Location
- Driving behavior can be expected to vary across
these variables - Drivers can be expected in specific areas on
specific days - e.g., factory workers traveling to and from work
mornings and evenings, college students driving
to football game
115Age and Gender
- These characteristics correlate with allegations
of greater police abuse of power and with driving
behavior - e.g., young black males are the frequent
targets of racial profiling - e.g., young drivers are associated with more
aggressive driving behavior
116Race and Ethnicity
- Suggest separate variables to retain the option
of comparing stop data with census data - Race White, Black/AA, Asian/Pacific Islander,
Native American/Eskimo/Aleut, Middle Eastern/East
Indian - Hispanic/Latino Yes/No
117Big Issue How to Measure Race/Ethnicity
- Social science issues raised, as well as
political/moral ones - Two major options
- Race/ethnicity gauged by officers perceptions
- Information from drivers licenses
- (Asking people to self-report may be offensive,
escalate tensions)
118Argument for Perceptions
- This reflects appropriate measure from social
science standpoint (which is what this endeavor
is) - Assumes research question is
- Are officers using race/ethnicity inappropriately
in deciding with whom to engage?..
119Perceptions (Cont.)
- To the extent that officers are make stopping
decisions based on race/ethnicity, they do so
based on their perceptions of race/ethnicity, not
on the basis of DLs info they havent seen - That these perceptions are likely erroneous in
some unknown number of incidents does not negate
fact that perceptions are the valid measure in
light of the research question being addressed.
120Arguments for Using Drivers License Information
- Officers should not be put in the position of
making this sensitive distinction (and states
should put race/ethnicity back on DLs) - Drivers license information is a more accurate
measure of the race/ethnicity of the person
stopped.
121Reason for the Stop
- Ramirez, McDevitt and Farrell, 2000 Refer to
this as one of the most important pieces of info
that will be collected
122Need to Measure Degree Of Officer Discretion
-
- Greatest potential for for RBP occurs in
high-discretion stops
123Level of Discretion (Cont.)
- For instance
- Officers have and exercise great discretion in
deciding whether to pull someone over for failing
to signal - They have little or no discretion deciding with
whom to engage if responding to call for service - We need to be able to differentiate for purposes
of analysis the high versus low discretion stops. -
124Reason for the Stop(To capture high, medium and
low discretion)
- Reactive (e.g., call for service, special detail)
v. Self-initiated (e.g., proactive
vehicle/pedestrian stop) - Reason for the Stop
- Vehicle Code Violation (with 10 listed)
- Penal Code Violation (4 listed)
- Violation of Local Ordinance
- BOLO/Person Wanted
- Suspicious Circumstances
125Disposition of Stops
- Additional potential measure of equitable v.
disparate treatment - Beyond data collection on whom police stop,
another question whether they treat those they
stop differently based on race/ethnicity
126 - Disposition
- Arrest
- Ticket/Citation
- Verbal Warning
- Written Warning
- No Action
127Verbal Warnings
- Several departments Changed policies to
discontinue verbal warnings - Did this to deter unnecessary stops and to
facilitate use of existing forms for data
collection (i.e., forms existed for every other
dispo)
128No Action or No Disposition
- Pay attention to stops that do not result in
official sanction - Again May be fortunate drivers who could have
been ticketed . Or could be drivers that should
not have been stopped in the first place. - At least one department requires that all no
dispo stops pass through an extra level of
review.
129Other
- Length of stop
- Were individuals characteristics observable
before stop? Y/N - Comment
- Employee ID or smallest next unit.
130Regarding Employee ID
- Controversial Linking data to individual
officers - Argument to include ID If, in fact, as officers
told us, RP is committed by a small number of
officers need to find out who these persons
are. - Caveat All the concerns associated with our
ability to analyze/interpret these data to
produce valid results regarding departments
applies to individuals, as well.
131If data are linked to individual employees
- Results indicating RBP should NOT be considered
definitive and NOT directly linked to
disciplinary action! - Cannot rule out all competing hypotheses that
might explain why data for an officer indicates
disproportionate stops of racial/ethnic
minorities - Should be considered one indicator prompting
further review, at best.
132Searches
- Again, not just WHOM police engage, but what
happens during the engagement. - Some studies have identified even greater racial
disparities with regard to who is searched than
with who is stopped
133Search Variables
- Was a search conducted?
- What was searched?
- Authority to search (e.g., consent, incident to
arrest) - Search results (positive, negative)
- What was recovered (5 listed)?
134Key to Data Collection System
- Quality analysis/interpretation
- In todays lingo Benchmarking the data
- Departments can produce relatively valid data to
answer the question What percent of the
persons we stop are Hispanic? - The challenge is determining What percentage
indicates racial profiling?
135Benchmarks Being Used
- Problems Census (alone) and UCR (particularly
arrests) - Some possibilities People with Drivers
licenses, Accidents, Internal benchmarking,
community surveys - Promising (if can be made affordable, yet
generalizeable) Observations
136Second Project Try to identify best practices
for the analysis/interpretation of data
- COPS Funded
- Several working group sessions
- Social scientists
- Department RD types
- Chiefs
- Develop models, guidelines
- Test in sites
137Conclusions
- Many areas for police to consider in responding
to the issue of racially biased policing - Supervision/Accountability
- Policy
- Recruitment/Hiring
- Training/Education
- Community Outreach
- Data Collection
138- Involving community members in deciding on
appropriate responses is an important part of
trust-building, accountability - Responses should address both RBP and the
perceptions of it.
139Racially Biased Policing A Principled Response