The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial ProfilingProfiling Volume 1 - Disparate Impact Analysis CitizenshCitizenshipip and Racial Profiling
Merelyn Bates-Mims, PhD – Principal Investigator Sharon Davies, JD – Principal Investigator Campuses Eric Abercrumbie, PhD; Prince Brown, PhD; Gary Boyle, PPC; Charles O. Dillard, MD; William B. Lawson, MD, PhD; Brandon Abdullah Powell, BFA; Thomas Rudd, MS; Melvin C. Washington, PhD; Tyrone Williams, PhD
Unjust law law is is no no law law at atall. all. Where there there is is no no law, law, neither neither is there is there violation violation. .
A Research Project – March 2014
Foreword The Right Reverend Thomas E. Breidenthal, D. Phil., Bishop The Diocese of Southern Ohio Convener of the Task Force on Racial Profiling
Almost two years have passed since we learned of the death of Trayvon Martin. There can be no question that racial profiling was a factor in this tragedy. This connects Trayvon's death to the experience of countless African-Americans of all ages, especially African-American males, who continue to be suspected of criminal intent at every turn. Of course, racial profiling of any group implies racial profiling of everybody: people who look Mexican or Central American are profiled as illegal immigrants, while people of European descent are profiled as law-abiding. Yet in this country it falls to men of African descent to be profiled as dangerous.
This is as true within the church as outside of it. We are taught as followers of Jesus to see Christ in the face of everyone we meet. But the first thing we see is race, and then whatever we pin on race, whether positive or negative. That means that whenever we encounter someone we don't already know well, we are making assumptions about who he or she is. That means, in turn, that we are a long way from seeing the real person that stands before us as a fellow child of God. That's a problem, because the church cannot convey good news to anyone if its members are not able to leap past stereotypes to unprejudiced and trustworthy engagement, person to person. We often say that we no longer deal in stereotypes, but that is simply not the case.
I understand that moving beyond profiling is easier said then done. We are probably programmed to sort people out in ways that obstruct or delay our capacity to see them for who they are as individuals. But then it is incumbent on us, as people of religious faith, to correct that programming. We must practice spiritual disciplines that help us to short-circuit automatic profiling.
One such spiritual practice is witness. We usually think of witness as telling stories about how God has helped us, and that is right. But at its heart witness is testimony to the truth, so that God comes into it by way of God's being part of our truth-telling. So witness may be testimony about the mercy of God, but it may also be truth-telling about what we have suffered at the hands of others. Listening to the testimony of people who have suffered negative profiling day in and day out can help us break the cycle of profiling. It helps profilers stop doing it, and it helps those who are habitually negatively profiled to push back.
This is why I am so grateful for this study. There have been many reports on the frequency and scope of racial profiling. But this study stands out in how it links statistical analysis to personal witness. Story after story of being profiled has been collected here, from victims and perpetrators, from adolescents and successful professionals, from churchgoers of various denominational stripes. I have been moved to hear some of these stories firsthand: young men followed every step of the way around a store; senior professors pulled over on the freeway and searched for drugs.
Words cannot express my admiration for Dr. Merelyn Bates-Mims a parishioner of the Episcopal cathedral in Cincinnati, who answered my publicly-expressed dismay about the death of Trayvon Martin with a challenge to do something about it. The fact is, she raised the challenge and then addressed it herself. This study has been her work from beginning to end. It is my privilege to endorse it. Racial profiling is the next challenge in the struggle to overcome racism. I commend this study to the attention of the church, of all faith communities, and all people of good will.
2 | P a g e
The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, called the ‘sleeping giant’ of civil rights law addresses a “huge array of injustices: from environmental racism to discriminatory profiling…to inequalities in transportation, housing, and education.” -The Governor’s Task Force on Racial Profiling - Wisconsin 2000
Task Force Membership: Convener – The Rt. Rev. Thomas E. Breidenthal, D. Phil., Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio Chair – The Reverend Richard Burnett, M. Div., Rector, Trinity Episcopal on Capitol Square Columbus, Ohio The Very Rev. Gail E. Greenwell, M. Div., Dean, Christ Church Cathedral, Cincinnati The Rt. Rev. Michael Curry, M. Div., Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of North Carolina The Rev. Wallace C. Smith, D. Min., M.Div., Pastor, Shiloh Baptist Church, Washington, DC The Rev. Otis Moss, Jr., D. Min., M.Div., Pastor Emeritus, Olivet Institutional Baptist Church, Cleveland, Ohio The Rev. Damon Lynch, Doctor of Humane Letters, Pastor, New Jerusalem Baptist Church, Cincinnati The Rev. Frederick A. Wright, D. Min., M. Div., Pastor, Quinn Chapel A.M.E Church, Forest Park, Ohio The Rt. Rev. Kirk Stevan Smith, PhD, Honorary Doctor of Divinity, Bishop of the Diocese of Arizona The Rev. Iva Carruthers, PhD, MTS; Secretary-General of the Samuel Dewitt Proctor Conference The Rt. Rev. Mark Hollingsworth, M. Div., Bishop of the Diocese of Ohio The Rt. Rev. Duncan Montgomery Gray, III, Honorary Doctor of Divinity, M. Div.; Diocese of Mississippi The Rev. James H. Cantrell, M. Div.; Pastor, Zion Baptist Church, Cincinnati Tom Kent, Executive Director; Elementz Hip-Hop Youth Arts Center, Cincinnati Walter T. Bowers, MD, Practicing Physician, Cincinnati Cheryl D. Grant, JD, M. Div., Judge, Hamilton County Municipal Court, Ohio H. Lee Thompson, JD, Managing Attorney, Founder, The Thompson Law Firm, Columbus, Ohio James L. Stowe, BA, Director, the Montgomery County Office of Human Rights, Rockville, MD
Research Team Merelyn Bates-Mims, PhD - Principal Researcher, Fulbright Research Scholar; Comparative-Historical Linguistics Sharon L. Davies, JD – Principal Researcher, Multi-Campus Surveys John C. Elam/Vorys Sater Professor of Law, Moritz College of Law; Director, Kirwan Institute OSU Prince Brown, PhD - Research Associate Professor Emeritus, Northern Kentucky University Thomas Rudd, Master of Science - Research Associate Lead Researcher, Emeritus, The Kirwan Institute The Ohio State University William B. Lawson, MD, PhD, DLFAPA, Professor and Chair, Howard University and Health Sciences, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Director, Howard University Medical Center and the Department of Psychiatry Charles O. Dillard, MD, Internal Medicine Physician – Research Associate Cincinnati Member, The Boulé of African-American Professionals Melvin C. Washington, PhD – Research Associate Assistant Professor, College of Business, Howard University Brandon Abdullah Powell, BFA – Research Associate Program Director, Elementz Hip Hop Arts Center Gary Boyle, PPC - Research Associate Cincinnati State Community and Technical College, Student Development Counselor. Eric Abercrumbie, PhD - Research Associate University of Cincinnati Ethnic Programs & Services. SA; African-American Culture and Research. Tyrone Williams, PhD - Research Associate Professor, English Department, College of Arts & Sciences, Xavier University Cincinnati Acknowledgements Tamar M. Forrest, PhD Gail L. Lowe, MSW Susan Colbert, PhD Jennifer E. Williams, Ed.D Cynthia Pinchback Heinz, PhD Laurie Althaus Erika King-Betts, Ph Judy Conley Christopher G. Bates, MA Susan B. Russell Earl Yates Jacqueline Bates Rivera, BA Lynnette Heard Robert E. Bates 3 | P a g e
On Moral Voice The Rev. Richard A. Burnett, Chair of the Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling. Trinity Episcopal Church, Columbus, Ohio 2nd Sunday of Advent, December 8, 2013
As the sun sets on a day of deep and powerful remembrance of a great world leader, a champion for democracy and human rights, and an inspiration for a new generation of activists, we attempt to say a simple word about Moral Voice in the light of the witness and legacy of Nelson Mandela (1918-2013).
In our prayers and our meditations today, we spoke of Mandela remembered as "valiant." His courage met death with trust and confidence. His humanity led him to a profound respect for all people, and his honor sought the goodness of all with whom he came in contact in the world. As a friend of mine recently wrote of President Mandela, "Those of us, who were blessed to be in his presence, if only from a distance, can testify to the sense of promise that surrounded this man. It was infectious. It made us different, and not just for a moment, but forever."
This seems to be is a good start in describing Moral Voice, suggested in this study of racial profiling and prejudice in our day and in our society. Moral Voice is an expression of a life lived "valiantly." Moral Voice renders the foundational virtue of courage in a way that invites, transforms, and renews others. Moral Voice merges compassion and hope in a bold commitment to all humanity. How this Moral Voice is offered, and how it will be received, are not easily predicted. But, as the Rev. Dr. Cornell West insists, "all we can do is bear witness."
Articulating a Moral Voice in our time and in our social setting is, finally, the community of faith "bearing witness." We bear witness to justice for all people, we bear witness to transcendence and transformation imagined in hope, we bear witness above all else to love - a love that can not be conquered by death and bids us to follow it to new life.
The Rev. Otis Moss, Jr., D. Min., M.Div.; Member, Task Force on Racial Profiling Pastor Emeritus, Olivet Institutional Baptist Church, Cleveland, Ohio
In every age one of the greatest evils is the sin of silence in the presence of injustice. If I am silent in the face of injustice, my shameful silence is a vote of support for the act or acts and systems of wickedness. Thoreau was right: "Whoever can protest and does not is an accomplice in the act." Another thinker in centuries past was on mark when he said: "Sometimes one word can further the welfare of a nation when those whom it behooved to speak remained silent."
Every age needs a moral voice and each of us is called (I believe by eternal God) to be a part of that moral voice. Some may be a global voice like Gandhi, King and Mandela. Some may be a literary voice like Toni Morrison, Maya Angelou and James Baldwin. One may be a youthful voice like sixteen year old Malala of Pakistan, but each one of us can speak in our own time and space and make a difference by God's grace. [The Rev. Moss describes his profiling experience on page 38 of this report].
The Venerable Rev. Canon (Retired) Lorentho Wooden Cincinnati, Ohio
-The Cincinnati Enquirer January 13, 2001 Patrick Stack. Dr. King's birth, life to be celebrated in a variety of Tristate events. More than 125 people gathered Wednesday night at the Episcopal Church of the Redeemer in Hyde Park to pray for the community. They heard a passionate homily by the Rev. Lorentho Wooden, a retired Episcopal priest who lives downtown and is African-American. Poverty, he said, is the first level of violence, and we don't know how to relate to the poor. The Rev. Lorentho Wooden challenged the crowd to speak out against injustice, to connect with a troubled child or even their own children. “We have forgotten what (Jesus) did and who he touched and where he walked.” He said he and members of his family have been victims of racial profiling while driving cars and, in the instance of one of his daughters, while riding a bicycle. 4 | P a g e
1898 - Military service provided the most obvious means for Negroes to display their loyalty to the flag. Source: Willard B. Gatewood, Jr. Virginia’s Negro Regiment in the Spanish-American War: The Sixth Virginia Volunteers.
Volume 1 - Disparate Impact Citizenship and Racial Profiling: A comparative analysis.
The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling Executive Summary
ABSTRACT The Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio, The Right Reverend Thomas E. Breidenthal, in signed partnership agreement with Dr. Sharon Davies, Director, Kirwan Institute, The Ohio State University and in collaboration with academic and legal and other scholars and interfaith leaders across the nation, commissioned a research study examining the disparate impact of Stand Your Ground laws on certain citizen groups. The research simultaneously creates disparate treatment collections of narratives from disaggregated populations of respondents. Together, disparate impact coupled with disparate treatment, the collections of individual stories, meet the evidence standards probative of discrimination theory; in this case, specifically a challenge against Stand Your Ground states’ law discrimination. The report educates congregations and the general public concerning incarceration, racial profiling and myriad of interrelated social justice issues–simultaneously constructing evidence probative of making a case against legal profiling. Thus, the Task Force Research on Racial Profiling divides the report into two sections: 1) Disparate Treatment Statistics; and 2) Disparate Treatment individual stories of Racial Profiling Experiences (RPEs). The Reverend Richard A. Burnett, Rector, Trinity Episcopal Church on Capitol Square in Columbus OH, serves as chair of the Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling.
Internal Review Board – The Ohio State University On 12 December 2012, the OSU Behavioral & Social Sciences Institutional Review Board, The Office of Responsible Research Practices, by expedited review issued approval for the Bishop’s Study on Racial Profiling. The responsibility for the collection and archival of campus survey data falls under the direction of Dr. Sharon Davies and the OSU Moritz College of Law. The OSU FWA accords Individual Investigator status to Merelyn Bates-Mims, PhD related to Protocol Title: Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling – Campus Study. 06 December 2012. Tom Rudd (now retired), Director of Education and Emerging Research, The Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity, directed the activities of campus survey process and analyses of campus survey results.
Purpose of the Report The study examines three (3) basic postulations: “Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” “Is high professional achievement an effective hedge against being racially profiled?” “Is Stand Your Ground states’ law unjust for certain citizen groups?” So as to include respondent voices of citizens usually not heard, the design plan of the study disaggregates the collection of data into the following survey groups: Campus OSU, Columbus OH; Howard U., DC; U. of Cincinnati Urban Youth Elementz Hip Hop Youth Center, Cincinnati General Public Across U.S. States; OSU Innovations Center (Homeless persons) Accomplished Professionals Across U.S. States Congregations Across U.S. States; New Jerusalem Baptist Church, Cincinnati 5 | P a g e
Disaggregated data reveal the imbalances and inequities that ‘cry out’ for attention. To support disaggregation of the responses, individual electronic collectors were created, all housed at OSU Kirwan Institute on-campus database for the recording and archiving of respondent information. The electronic results are reported by totals appearing in numerical counts and percentages. Some are evaluated in both crosstab and non-crosstab formats. The research conclusions are formed through comparative analyses of disaggregation occurring within groups: General Public (GP) and (GP-A) Homeless; Congregations (C) and (C-A); Urban Hip-Hop Youth and Accomplished Professionals. Copyrighted materials in this report are used in accordance with Fair Use Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, used here to advance understanding of social justice issues. Here are the final counts for each category. SURVEY DISAGGREGATED COUNT – ALL CATEGORIES - Total Survey Count 2,962 CAMPUS 794 GENERAL PUBLIC 219 GENERAL PUBLIC-A [HOMELESS] 102 ACCOMPLISHED PROFESSIONALS 141 URBAN HIP-HOP YOUTH 29 CONGREGATIONS [TEC] 1,518 CONGREGATION-A [NJBC HIST. BLACK] 159 2,962 Guide to Report Components PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Introduction Surveys: Disparate Impact Analyses Part I General Public (GP) and General Public-A (GP-A) 26 Part II Accomplished Professionals & Urban Youth 38 Part III Congregations (C) and Congregations-A (C-A) 45 Part IV Supplementary Scrutiny: A Compendium 56 “Cash for Kids” Life Imprisonment 59 A Case Study – Mandatory Minimums 62 “Driven by Perception” 63 “Stop and Frisk” 67 Criminalizing routine school discipline 68 Homicides Ruled Justified SYG/Non SYG States 70 Part V Who’s At-Risk Measurements 72 Part VI Task Force Conclusions & Recommendations 78 Think Tank Next-Steps Recommendation #7 79 Disparate Impact and Discussion Topics Reference 1: End Racial Profiling Act 2013 80 Reference 2: SYG laws: “No duty to retreat?” 80 Reference 3: The War on Drugs 82 Reference 4: The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 83 Reference 5: Criminal Justice Fact Sheet 86 Reference 6: School to Prison Pipeline 88 Reference 7: The Poverty Defense 94 Reference 8: Psychological effects of racial bias 97 Reference 9: Title VI 601, 602, 603 100 Reference 10: Ohio Self Defense H.B. 203 101 Reference 11: U.S. Voting Rights Laws 103 Reference 12: Ohio Voting Rights H.B. 13 106 Bibliography 108 Appendix: Beard v. United States, 158 U.S. 550 (1895) 110 Terry v. Ohio 392 U.S. 1 (1968) 117 Rethinking School Discipline 120 Slavery and the American Economy 124 How Profiling Works 128 Ecumenical Think Tank on Racial Profiling 137 2014 Education Summit Morehouse College 141 The Diocese of Southern Ohio 412 Sycamore Street Cincinnati OH 45202-4179
6 | P a g e
The ‘At-Risk’ Peril “Some argue that the proper standard is the number of persons who are "at risk" of shooting incident.” -Walker and Katz. The Police in America.
The First Battalion of Virginia’s “colored infantry” was organized in 1876 with headquarters in Richmond. Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985). The Supreme Court of the United States held that under the Fourth Amendment, a law enforcement officer in pursuit of a fleeing suspect may use deadly force only to prevent escape if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. Are citizens posing as law enforcement officer exempt from such prohibition?
Current research has shown that the use of deadly force contributes little to the deterrence of crime or the protection of the public. On the basis of the facts in Tennessee v. Garner found by the district court, police officer Hymon had no reason to believe that the fleeing suspect, Garner, was armed or dangerous.
The Police in America. Samuel Walker, University of Nebraska and Charles M. Katz, Arizona State University propose in their study that the greatest disparity occurring between whites and blacks falls under unarmed persons category-usually defined as "fleeing felon.” Since 1960s-early 1970s, the overall number of police shootings has declined; many departments use the restrictive defense-of-life rule.
One majorly important question is whether the current disparity between blacks and whites represents:
Systematic discrimination Contextual discrimination Individual discrimination
The 1985 Court ruled "fleeing felon" law unconstitutional, as the use of deadly force against a subject is the most intrusive type of seizure possible, because it deprives the suspect of his life. Source: highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/007241497x/student_view0/part3/chapter9/chapter_outline.html
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF FINDINGS I. General Public Survey Instruments GP Survey = 219 total respondents GP-A Survey = 102 total respondents [Homeless populations] SUMMARY N=321 total respondents
General Public Survey instruments incorporate respondent voices usually not heard, i.e., GP-A Homeless populations.
General Public Survey=219 total respondents. General Public-A Survey=102 respondents. Total respondents = 321. Pg. 26
General Public (GP) was distributed electronically via emails passed on by individuals to other individuals. Pg. 26
General Public–A (GP-A) was produced in a one-page paper handout version of the instrument. The collections stem from an invitation extended by Tamar Mott Forrest, PhD, and the Associate Director of the Research Core Centers for Innovation, The Ohio State University, to attend a monthly meeting with homeless providers. The paper data collections, directed by Gail L. Lowe, MSW, were entered into the electronic collector via the Manual Data Entry mechanism. Pg. 26
7 | P a g e
Q. #3. “I want good police protection in my community” generated a 99.2% average response. Pg. 27
Q. #6. “I believe everyone is entitled to life and liberty” generated a 98.0% average agreement between persons of GP and GP-A groups. Pg. 27
Q#13 ‘Yes.’ “Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups” stood at 83.7% agreement among GP-A homeless populations; 10.0% points higher than GP citizens (73.0) Pg. 29
Q. #17 - 68.6% of GP-A persons (homeless populations) earn $0-24,000. Pg. 30
The states of respondents’ residency include OH VT NC MO IN KY VA MI DC GA MD NC AR TX NY CA IL FLA WA AL VA NV. Pg. 31
Tables 2 and 2.a cross-tablulated examination showing a [green] 56.7% GP [n=146] upper income [$50,000-$124,999] agreement in contrast the [orange] 91.1% GP-A [n=77] lower income [$0-$49,000] agreement with the hypothesis Q. #13 that “Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups.” Pgs. 31-32
By Table 2.a analysis, the cross-tabulated GP-A lower income, homeless populations, reach 100% [n=77] agreement with question #3: “I want good police protection in my community” — 0.7% above GP higher-income populations. Pg.32
Lower economics GP-A population, though sharing equally with all others in citizenship responsibility, experience the highest comparative rates of profiling impediment, good citizenship practices notwithstanding: Suspicious (56.9%); Real Estate (30.6%); Traffic stops (48.6%); Job/school application (36.1%); Employment (51.4%); Medical care (22.2%); Guns (18.1%). Pg. 36-37
Findings
FINDING #1: “Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” NO.
Compare the 98.03% closeness in overall average among GP and GP-A survey respondents, the ‘sameness’ pertaining to ‘citizenship’ and the ‘good life’ at questions #1-6. Pg. 27-28 Compare also the disparity in racial profiling experiences (RPEs) of those populations, GP and GP-A (67.1%). Pg.30
FINDING #2: “Is Stand Your Ground unjust for certain citizen groups?” YES.
‘YES’. 78.35% [78.4%] average non-crosstab agreement; Question #13. Pg. 29 Of the 100% non-crosstab [n=102] GP-A persons asked the Question #13 on ‘SYG unjust’, 83.7% (n=77) agree that SYG laws are unjust. Pg.29
FINDING #3: When it comes to societal treatment, the persons of GP and GP-A survey examinations are not similarly situated, i.e., sameness in problems and circumstances wherein the basic facts and legal issues are the same. Pg.37 The question is whether the treatment (RPEs) suffered by lower-income persons of GP-A survey population descriptions are generalizable to broader U.S. populations of American citizens also sharing GP-A characteristics, by race and income (see demographics, Page 30, and Disparate Treatment narratives GP and GP-A. 8 | P a g e
“Judges have sentenced children to extended stays in juvenile detention for offenses as minimal as mocking a principal on MySpace, trespassing in a vacant building, and shoplifting DVDs from Wal- Mart, says a February 24, 2009 CNN article titled “Pennsylvania rocked by 'jailing kids for cash' scandal.”
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
2. Accomplished Professionals and Urban Hip-Hop Youth Survey Instruments
Stand Your Ground Unjust – Non-Crosstab
“Is accomplished professional achievement an effective guard against being racially profiled?”
Accomplished Professionals Survey=141 total respondents. Youth Survey = 29 respondents Pg. 40
The demographics of the Urban Youth Survey column indicate White/Caucasian racial classification participation at 4.2% level; Black/African American at 83.3%. The median Youth household income: $0-24,999. Pg. 41
For Accomplished Professionals Survey column, Black/African Americans made up 72.3% of respondents. White/Caucasians 19.0% of respondents. For AP group, the median level of income was $75,000-99,999. Pg. 41
The states and territories of Accomplished Professionals respondents’ residences include IN, TN, OR. NC, NM, VT, COL, CA, FLA, KY, MD, VA, AL, LA, AK, TX, MS, MI, NY, VA, PA, DC, MI, AZ, IL, GA, KY, MD, OH, Virgin Island, Canada. Urban Youth respondents are local to Ohio. Pg. 41
Q. #9 “I want good police protection” garners a 100% agreement for Accomplished Professionals and 96.4% among Urban Youth at *Q. #4. Pg. 42
Urban Youth answer the propositions “I am a citizen of the United States” and “I have plans for the future” in 100% YES agreements. [Lower paragraph] Pg. 42
“I have college or further education in my life plans,” a 93.1% YES agreement. Pg. 42
“I believe anyone can achieve whatever they want to in America,” 89.7% YES agreement. Pg. 42
“I believe everyone is entitled to life and liberty.” 100% YES agreement. Pg. 42
Black Professionals and Urban Youth share 75.47% average (Q. #13-17 RPEs) agreement that racial profiling is an integral part of daily life experience. Pg. 42
Q. #16-17 ‘Safety rules” + “At risk” [85.35% average] express the enormity of their peril. Pg. 42
The two groups, Accomplished Professionals and Urban Youth alike, affirm at 84.9% combined agreement that they teach/follow special ‘safety rules.’ For at 85.8% combined awareness [Q. #17], they know that they themselves, or children, or grandchildren and other family and acquaintances are ever at-risk of profiling danger notwithstanding academic, professional, career, dollar earnings attainments or law-abiding morals and ethics. Pg. 42 9 | P a g e
Findings
FINDING #1: “Is high professional achievement a guard against being racially profiled?” NO. (AP Peril=83.5%) Pg.42
FINDING #2: Q. #12 “Stand Your Ground unjust for certain citizen groups?” YES. 86.4% of Professionals. Pg 42 [SYG question omitted from Youth survey instrument].
FINDING #3: At Racial Profiling Table 2 and Exhibit 2 Racial Profiling Experiences (RPEs), when it comes to societal treatment, the persons of both Accomplished Professional and Youth survey examinations are similarly situated, i.e., sameness in problems and circumstances wherein the basic facts and legal issues are the same. Pg. 43
www.illinoisreview.typepad.com
On Racial Profiling: Unexpected Genius J. Ernest Wilkins, Jr., often described as one of America’s most important contemporary mathematicians and nuclear physicists, at age 13 became the University of Chicago’s youngest student. Wilkins continued his studies there, earning bachelor, master, and doctorate degrees in mathematics. When Wilkins finished his Ph.D. at 19, he was hailed by the national press as a “negro genius.” His father, J. Ernest Wilkins, a prominent attorney, was assistant Secretary of Labor during the Dwight D. Eisenhower administration. As part of a widely varied and notable career, Wilkins contributed to the Manhattan Project (nuclear energy) during WWII, working in and conducting nuclear physics research in both academia and industry. During his studies and various careers he was affected by the prevalent racism that existed much of his life. Among his many published works included "Mean Number of Real Zeroes of a Random Trigonometric Polynomial. II,” in Topics in Polynomials of One or Several Variables and Their Applications, World Scientific Publishing, 1993. -Source: blackpast.org/aah/wilkins-jr-j-ernest-1923#sthash.fhsXPLPm.dpuf; and en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J. Ernest Wilkins, Jr.
10 | P a g e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
3. Congregations Survey Instruments
Stand Your Ground Unjust – Non-Crosstab C=1082/1415; C-A=132/140
Congregations Survey=1,518 total respondents. Congregations-A Survey = 159 respondents. Total respondents = 1,677. Pg. 47
Responses originated from 50 states: FL, MD, TX, NM, PA, GA, NE, OH, NC, MI, AL, NY, CT, IN, TN, NJ, CO ID, IO, WA, AZ, OR, CA, OK, ME, VA, VT, KY, MO, NC, AL, HI, MS, WI, LA, SC, NH, MA, IL, WV, WY, MD, MT, NV, RI, AR, DE, SD, SD, PR, VI; Canada; Rep. Korea (military); Germany (military); Rosebud Sioux reservation. Pg. 51 C-Survey C-A Survey Overall ‘YES’ % [Question #13; Page 49] 76.5% 94.3% (85.4% avg.) [1,082/333/103] [132/8/19] [‘yes’/ ‘no’ /skipped] [76.5% of the total C- respondents answered ‘Yes’ to Q. #13] [94.3% of the total C-A respondents answered ‘Yes’ to Q. #13]
Stand Your Ground Unjust – Crosstab C=1,082; C-A=132 From Table 2 SYG 100% cross-tab perspective, African-American C-A congregants [80.3% historically knowing themselves and their families to be at-risk of profiling abuse] resolve, therefore, to live life mindful of special safety rules 99.2%, especially during encounters with the police. Pg. 52
Citizens of Table 2, question #9; C and C-A groups, live life at 73.3% common awareness of ‘suspicion stops and/or threat’ of racial profiling; and a 47.0% gap in respondents’ fear of family ‘at-risk’ to profiling danger [Q. #11]. The “I know that I and my family are at-risk” by congregants of a historically black congregation, a 80.3% figure, underscores “The Talk”, i.e., the need to teach C-A youngsters self-safety behaviors in face of ‘stop and search’ everyday life reality. Again, C-A 99.2% affirm “I live my life mindful of special ‘safety’ rules.” Pg. 52
Table 2 answers the CROSS-TAB question: “Of the total number of congregant persons agreeing SYG is unjust, a total of 1,214 respondents, what number and percentage also share “I want good police protection” agreement? [C- and C-A both equally at 99.2%]; Question #3. Pg. 52
Of C-Survey cross-tab population, i.e., those believing SYG is unjust law, 70.9% of persons self- described as White/Caucasian; 22.3% African-American; and 6.8% other racial persons agree that SYG is unjust. Pg. 53; 54
Of cross-tab C-A Survey of historically black experience, i.e., those believing SYG is unjust law, 97.7% self-described as Black/African American. See the full array of race/ethnicity percentages at Question #14, Table 2.a. Pg. 53; 54
See also the FBI supplemental data at Exhibit 2 and 2.a (page 70) affirming that Stand Your Ground is unjust law, an outside verdict independent of the Bishop’s Task Force data. Pg. 70.
See the series of U.S. Bureau of Justice (BOJ) statistics (EXHIBITS; 1.c to 1.e; and Table C (pages 60-61), coupled with the work of other scholars like Pettit, Sykes and Western researchers (page 58), who calculate the number of children with a parent in prison. Page 59 describes Kids-for-Cash judiciary partnerships with privately-owned for-profit juvenile detention centers, mainly children without lawyers, mainly Black/African.
11 | P a g e
For C-congregations, Disparate Treatment stories were submitted by congregants across 50 states. For C-A congregation (Ohio), a total of 52 stories were submitted.
Findings
FINDING #1: At Table 1, Exhibit 1, in citizenship standing respondents are ‘similarly situated’; 98.55% shared agreement. Respondents to both C- and C-A congregations survey share an overall [non-crosstab] average of 98.55% ‘Yes’ agreement regarding: Citizenship (98.6%); Taxes (98.5%); Good police protection (99.3%); Future (97.65%); Good life 98.8%); Entitlement (98.5%). Pg. 48
FINDING #2: But when it comes to profiling, “I have experienced being unjustly profiled,” the citizens do not share majority similarly-situated status. (Q. #7; 47.25% avg.) Pg.49
FINDING #3: However, in observing whether Q. #13 – “Stand Your Ground is unjust for certain citizen groups,” non- crosstab average agreement, 85.4% among all congregants both C- and C-A say ‘YES’. Pg. 49; 51
FINDING #4: Having such disproportionality in citizen ‘unjustly profiled’ experience, the question “Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” commands a ‘NO’ response: 57.5% of C-A historically African-American congregants expressing ‘unjustly profiled’ experience; and 98.6% living life mindful of ‘safety rules’; and 94.3% observing that ‘SYG laws are unjust.’ Pg. 49
Making the Case: Stand Your Ground is Unjust Law ‘YES.’ 83% [Across five (5) survey instruments]. Summary of Findings N=1545 ‘YES’ response “Is Stand Your Ground unjust for certain citizen groups?” YES. 83% Average. [Total % averages ÷ by five]
‘YES.’ 83% Average Agreement 1,082/333/103 [1,415] reads: 1,082 persons responded ‘YES’ to ‘SYG Unjust’ question; 333 responded ‘NO’; 103 persons skipped SYG question altogether. 1,415 persons answered the question. Congregations C = 76.5% ‘yes’ [green] 1,082/333/103 [1,415] Congregation C-A Afr-Amer. = 94.3% ‘yes’ [purple] 132/8/19 [140] Accomplished Professionals = 86.4% ‘yes’ [gold] 108/17/16 [125] General Public Surveys GP = 73.0% ‘yes’ [blue] 146/54/19 [200] General Public GP-A Homeless = 83.7% ‘yes’ [gray] 77/15/10 [92] Source: Question #12 (AP Survey); #13 (C; C-A; GP; GP-A Surveys) (Hip-Hop Youth and Campus not asked ‘SYG Unjust’ Question).
These collections of data across five distinct populations of Americans recommend moral voice action toward rescission of Stand Your Ground laws. 12 | P a g e
Introduction “All other persons…”: Setting the Stage A More Perfect Union: The Creation of the U.S. Constitution May 25, 1787. Freshly spread dirt covered the cobblestone street in front of the Pennsylvania State House, protecting the men inside from the sound of passing carriages and carts. Guards stood at the entrances to ensure that the curious were kept at a distance. Robert Morris of Pennsylvania, the "financier" of the Revolution, opened the proceedings with a nomination—Gen. George Washington for the presidency of the Constitutional Convention. The vote was unanimous. The Great Compromise …Also crowding into this complicated and divisive discussion over representation was the North- South division over the method by which slaves were to be counted for purposes of taxation and representation. On July 12 Oliver Ellsworth proposed that representation for the lower house be based on the number of free persons and three- fifths of "all other persons," a euphemism for slaves. In the following week the members finally compromised, agreeing that direct taxation be according to representation and that the representation of the lower house be based on the white inhabitants and three-fifths of the "other people." With this compromise and with the growing realization that such compromise was necessary to avoid a complete breakdown of the convention, the members then approved Senate equality. Roger Sherman had remarked that it was the wish of the delegates "that some general government should be established." With the crisis over representation now settled, it began to look again as if this wish might be fulfilled. For the next few days the air in the City of Brotherly Love, although insufferably muggy and swarming with blue-bottle flies, had the clean scent of conciliation. In this period of welcome calm, the members decided to appoint a Committee of Detail to draw up a draft constitution. The convention would now at last have something on paper. Web version based on the Introduction by Roger A. Bruns to A More Perfect Union: The Creation of the United States Constitution. Washington, DC: Published for the National Archives and Records Administration by the National Archives Trust Fund Board, 1986. 33 p.
The “Other” Legally Defined Encarta Dictionary English (North America) gives a core meaning to the concept “Other” by defining it as a grammatical word used to show that a thing, person, or situation is additional or different. The word “other” is grammatical because it not only conforms to the accepted rules of syntax or sentence structure, it also conforms to the reality or phenomenon it represents. “The other” refers to a person or thing considered generically or universally, indicating shared experience of a culture, society, or community. “The other” is perceived as not belonging to the ‘established’ or ‘normal’ group; and when used before adjectives, the term refers generically to people of a particular type or class, i.e., “the unemployed”. The Other is a perpetual stranger and is perceived as not meeting the standardized or required level of achievement, resulting in mass agreement and expectations of inferiority and not having minimal legal rights, but having little intelligence and morality. In the case of the Atlantic Slave Trade and the Great Compromise in the writing of the U.S. Constitution, the “Other” legally and factually may be counted as a sub-human, a being that is a legal 3/5ths fraction of whole human, i.e., white and male. Argumentation on the rights of the “Other” in relationship to the rights reserved to the delegates at the May 25, 1787 Constitutional Convention, assembled at the Pennsylvania State House in Philadelphia, was significant to achieving conciliatory agreement on the topic of delegate representation in the houses of the Congress. Who are the historical ‘Other’—beings exterior to the ethnonationalism of the American Dream? Citizenship devoid of the possession of lawful rights and protections? In an online article titled “The Other”, the writer lists the following differences as characteristics of “otherness”. Race (White vs. non-White), Nationality (Anglo Saxon vs. Italian), Religion (Protestant vs. Catholic or Christian vs. Jewish), Social class (aristocrat vs. serf), Political ideology (capitalism vs. communism), Sexual orientation (hetero- vs. homosexual), Origin (native born vs. immigrant). Source: academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/cs6/other 13 | P a g e
“First call the person something…label the person. From there you may proceed. –mbm
Among the Greeks, all non-Greeks were labeled “barbarian”. Among the imperialist conquerors of Africa continent, all the nations of Africa were labeled “uncivilized.” What aftermaths and residuals of those old labeling rituals remain extant to 2014 world societies? Do remnants of their sting yet linger, antagonistic silhouettes sanctioned and perpetuated by unjust law tolerated by adversative or hostile social customs? What is propensity? Are certain human personalities prone toward condemning behaviors based on eye-sight personal judgment of other humans? Is the presumption of innocence yet reserved only to “whole” persons by the United States Constitution? Or, has the amendment language of that revered document—the 4th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution—constructed, in equity, safe haven to the “Whole” and the “Other” both alike?
“…Gallup data reveal a continuing divide by race in views of the fairness of the American justice system. This current divergence by race in views of bias in the justice system is broadly similar to attitudes measured in Gallup surveys conducted in 1993 and in 2008, although the percentage of white Americans who say the justice system is biased has dropped by eight percentage points over that time, while the percentage of blacks has stayed constant.” From another source, the black group insisted race is still a big issue in the United States, while the white group thought race is “talked about too much”. Source: ethnicmajority.com/wordpress/category/racial-profiling
These are notions basic to this research study on racial profiling commissioned by the Right Reverend Thomas E. Breidenthal, Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio in partnership with the Kirwan Institute, The Ohio State University. To ‘otherness’ in law and liberty is now added an examination of ‘identity’ and ‘role’ of ‘Other’ in religious history and practice.
The “Other” in Religious History and Practice “Silence is rarely good protection when the world is going all to hell.” -Sir Thomas More, Renaissance English writer and Catholic martyr, in the Tudor court of King Henry VIII.
DEFINITIONS Ethical, virtuous, righteous and noble are all synonyms of the term “moral”, which implies conforming to a standard of what is right and good. Moral implies conformity to established sanctioned codes or accepted notions of right and wrong, as in “the basic moral values of a community.” Ethical may suggest the involvement of more difficult or subtle questions of rightness, fairness, or equity, i.e., “committed to the highest ethical principles.” Virtuous implies moral excellence in character, i.e., “not a religious person but virtuous nevertheless.” Righteous stresses guiltlessness or blamelessness and often suggests the ‘sanctimonious’ or exaggerated show of holiness or superiority. Noble implies moral eminence and freedom from anything grudging, mean, or dubious in conduct and character. Citizen is one who is entitled to the rights and privileges of a freeman, both civic and civil. - www.merriam-webster.com Moral voice applies to that which is known to be right or just, as opposed to what is officially or outwardly declared to be right or just, as prescribed by the ceremonial tenets or precepts of law.
“Michel, arriving penniless [in 1896], started out as a peddler. He became a retail magnate. He died on an urban estate in Johannesburg with its arboretum and fish pond and aviary, surrounded by African houseboys and gold-inlaid bibelots, his black, fish-tailed Cadillac parked in the beautiful curving driveway.” -Roger Cohen. The Quest to Belong. The NYTimes. 2013-11-28 NB - 19th century Jews played a prominent role in the development of South Africa diamond and gold fields, i.e., Randlords. The 1913 Land Act prevented blacks from buying land outside the land reserves for indigenous south Africans.
EthnoNationalism: A matter of ‘belonging’ Who ‘belongs’ and who does not? Professor Walker Connor, in his 1994 book entitled “EthnoNationalism: The Quest for Understanding,” published by Princeton University Press, expresses his dismay with what he calls the chaos of terminology, the mélange of understandings of the word ‘nation’ as a nation, people, state, ethnic group and other seeming synonyms. Connor’s impatience
14 | P a g e springs from his observations that scholars combine conceptions of ‘nationalism’ and ‘ethnicity’ with the ‘myth of common ancestry’. In the end, he maintains, the term ‘ethnonationalism’ tends toward implied exclusivity—that some ethnics sharing specific cultural characteristics ‘belong’ to the nation while others do not. Belonging’, therefore, is synonymous with sentience which implies emotional rather than intellectual response to life. ‘Belonging’ is substantively a matter of personal perception.
“When trying to understand national sentiment,” Connor argues, “the key is not chronological or factual history, but sentient or felt history. National identity is based on the emotional psychology of perceived kinship ties – a sense of the nation as the fully extended family – and accordingly belongs to the realm of the subconscious and nonrational…” The components and characteristics of Connor’s ethnonationalism can be identified and drawn within combinations of descriptions: linguistic, cultural, historic, religious, and racial among them, the final product being that ‘minorities’ and indigènes can be excluded from 'national community' as defined by the majority group.
The Role of Religion in Racial Apartness Race and religion constitute one of the oldest combinations, one that has faithfully served the worldwide practice of hegemonic dominance of nations and peoples over others. In combined sentience, the emotional psychology or natural tendency for hasty expression of emotion devoid of reason or self-control, race and religion remain fundamental to majority opposition to civil, political, and economic advancements for minority populations. Historically race combined with religion has exerted rampant resistance against factual ‘freedom’ of participation in the nation (voting and other citizenship rights, as examples).
‘Nationalism’ implies a definition incorporating the notion of people living in a land under a single government, and sharing common ethnic origin, culture, historical tradition and language, united by a common interest and in the case of Noah, under advocation for the worshipping of one deity. By incorporation, the word ‘nationalism’ simultaneously fuels suspicion of the ‘other’, i.e., minorities, despite the longevity and rightful presence of indigenous persons in the land. Here, the native ‘perpetual stranger’ in the country of his ancestors daily lives out his life in separatism, in citizen apartness, i.e., Canaan peoples. For Connor, ‘nation’ as extended-family connotes a nonrational character or outlook based on bare illogic and sentience, irrational thinking and feelings.
What are some examples of sentient or felt history applied to ethnonationalism and its systems of racial apartness, pertinent to the foundational issues of this study on racial profiling and the theory that “It is not safe to be an African-American male in this country?” Born of the results of this research study on racial profiling, in our assessments across histories, geographies and populations of persons, will a shared ethnonationalistic opinion emerge—the assumption and felt history being that people of particular race have particular behavior and that dissimilar ‘others’ do not ‘belong’ to the extended or national family?
Mind and System: Canaan Primordialism and Modern Ethnicity
“The Hebrew language and poetic style were quite certainly Canaanite in origin…The Israelites did not leave Egypt en masse…Palestine remained within the Egyptian empire…(Dating between c.1525 and 1450B.C)..we know that the pantheon of the authors of the inscriptions consisted chiefly of a mixture of the old Semitic divinities with Egyptian deities.. William Albright. Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan: An Historical Analysis of Two Contrasting Faith. 1968 . In an email in 2005 the Rt. Reverend Alex Darkwah, a bishop visiting at Christ Church Episcopal Cathedral Cincinnati, replied to my query to him concerning the origins of the name 'Yahweh' and the earliest name for 'Canaan' as it existed among his people, the Akan of Ghana and Ivory Coast—the ancient 15 | P a g e weavers of the magnificent kenté cloth. My questions to him were in preparation for an op-ed article I was writing on ‘names for God' topic. Bishop Darkwah’s letter explains that English Bible translations make copious use of suffixes '-ites' and ’kites'—clouding the clear identity of ancient base-names, i.e., the Jebus are Canaan-descendant aboriginal founders of the city of Jerusalem (Genesis 10:15-16). English theologians that translated the Bible into English invented the name Canaanite to refer to the people that lived in Canaan in ancient times. (Darkwah; email 11 April 2005). Ultimately, King Solomon conscripted the Jebus to serve as slave laborers—setting a clear precedence for the enslavement and free-labor of descendant peoples.
Denkstil and its inventions “...[Truth] is not 'relatively' or even' subjective' in the popular sense of the word. It is always or almost always within a thinking style…” Ludwik Fleck labels this thought style Denkstil; ideas on philosophy of science. Fleck 1979, p. 84.
The ‘inventions’ outlined in Dr. Darkwah’s email are not unrelated to the Book of Genesis and biblical Noah’s maledictions against Canaan, one of the sons of Ham, which to this day remains a central concept to Christian and other nations’ world-wide pre- and post-Atlantic Slave Trade ‘separate and unequal’ propositions.
Orlando Patterson’s 1982 Cambridge work, Slavery and Social Death, defines the ‘characteristics’ attributable to ‘slaves’, definitions discernible in the Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 statements of the U.S. Constitution. ‘Slave’ is defined by Patterson as:
1. Socially dead, without rights to any legitimate social order; 2. Possessing no ancestry and therefore owes no obligations to parents or any blood relations. A slave is a ‘genealogical isolate’ and stands in “natal alienation and loss of ties of birth in both ascending and descending generations.” 3. Person whose ‘social death’ results from an ‘outward conception’ which means, in Roman law, that he remains forever an “unborn being”. 4. Slave status imagines no “legally valid ties with offspring” as they are neither legally related nor offspring to each other. A slave is therefore “dead-but-not-dead”. 5. The status instigates a “continuous loss of potential life and causes death on descendants.”
Whether verbatim or adopted, the 3/5ths of a ‘whole person’ denkstil reflecting in Patterson’s definitions commanded the results, the adverse impact, on the descendant generations of persons enslaved by Atlantic Trade economies.
Might sentience and modern Canaan ethnonationalism underlie 2013 prevalent national perception that black males, both adults and children, are less worthy beings—as black sons and fathers and husbands and brothers are systemically swept up into New Age Prison Slavery via 13th Amendment loophole in the language permanently abolishing slavery and involuntary servitude “except as punishment for crime…?” Do Biblical maledictory retentions and universal denkstil prejudicial mindset and beliefs contribute to and devoutly underlie 2013 American racial profiling patterns and practices?
Life imprisonment of scores of black males in year 2013, the year of the bishop’s Task Force on racial profiling, relegates black males to the status of ‘slave’ or ‘one having no descendants’. Carefully note that the wholesale imprisonment of males cuts off the ability by such males for reproducing themselves which, in turn, effectively stems the flow of black population growth—a major factor for current maintenance and future perpetuation of non-black ‘majority’ status among U.S. ethnic populations.
16 | P a g e
Incarceration of a million black youth in 2013 to 50+ years’ incarceration means that by 2063 the black American population will be significantly reduced. Does wholesale imprisonment amount to genocide or eugenics? Human rights crimes? Does lifelong imprisonment status instigate a “continuous loss of potential life and causes death on descendants?” Who abides among Darwin’s ‘less favoured races’?
David Goldenberg, a Jewish scholar and editor of the Jewish Quarterly Review, writes that European discovery of Africa in the 15th century and the resultant bountiful economies of multi-continental Slave Trade engendered an ethnonationalism supported by Genesis 9 maledictory language, “as the Black slave trade moved to England and then to America, the Curse of Ham moved with it.” He joins other historians in the conclusion that “among Christians the curse of Ham was not commonly applied to blacks until after the 16th century, growing in prominence until the 18th century.”
Stephan R. Haynes, the A.B. Curry Religious Studies chair at Rhodes College in Memphis Tennessee records the history of the curse in the American South through 1901. In a chapter entitled “Noah’s Sons in New Orleans”, the discussions justify slavery and support racial segregation, particularly the assignment of racial ‘place’ and ‘position’ in Southern society.
Despite the fact that all of the earliest civilizations of the world—the nation-states enumerated in Genesis 10 Table of Nations—exclusively fall under Ham-Canaan genealogy, sentient or felt history continues in its negative linkages of Canaan ‘race’ to ‘suspicious’ mistrustful ‘uncivilized’ character. American textbooks do not emphasize the fact of early civilizations predating the arrival of Israel in the “Promised Land” of Canaan city-states’ development. By 1954 Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Acts of the Sixties, strong defenses of segregation were developed, based on ‘Curse of Canaan’ biblical texts.
The question is whether modern religious biases and societal prejudicial denkstil compound the disasters of residual Constitutional slave language, the present-day expectations that black children are innately short in intellect and therefore will be unsuccessful in school. In Ohio elementary schools, students failing public school third grade reading testing, regardless of grade point average, will not be admitted to mid-elementary learning: That black boys of Trayvon generations are naturally ‘suspicious’ and prone to criminality, black-on-black crime being the ‘proof’. From where do children gain access to guns devoid of adult and law enforcement knowledge? What are the economics of ‘not knowing’?
Maledictory mindset, residuals of old man Noah’s drunken “cursed be Canaan” maledictions, did not deter Shem-Jesus’ calling of Simon the Canaan man to the 11th seat among his twelve discipleships. "Blessed be Egypt, my people.”
______
NOTES The Tiahrt Amendment – Congressional Act hides gun traces, protects dealers from public scrutiny.
“Under the law, investigators cannot reveal federal firearms tracing information that shows how often a dealer sells guns that end up seized in crimes. The law effectively shields retailers from lawsuits, academic study and public scrutiny. It also keeps the spotlight off the relationship between rogue gun dealers and the black market in firearms. Such information used to be available under a simple Freedom of Information Act request. But seven years ago, under pressure from the gun lobby, Congress blacked out the information by passing the so-called Tiahrt amendment, named for Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.). The law removed from the public record a government database that traces guns recovered in crimes back to the dealers. Source: Grimaldi and Sari Horwitz Washington Post Staff Writers Industry pressure hides gun traces, protects dealers from public scrutiny. Sunday, October 24, 2010
“Strict scrutiny” is a form of judicial review that courts use to determine the constitutionality of certain laws. To pass strict scrutiny, the legislature must have passed the law to further a "compelling governmental interest," and must have narrowly tailored the law to achieve that interest. For a court to apply strict scrutiny, the legislature must either have significantly abridged a fundamental right with the law's enactment. Source: law.cornell.edu/wex/strict_scrutiny 17 | P a g e
Lingering Effects – The consequences of race “As a result of discriminatory disciplinary policies in schools, students of color are increasingly funneled out of public schools and into the juvenile and criminal justice systems. Many of these children have learning disabilities or histories of poverty, abuse or neglect, and would benefit from additional educational and counseling services. But instead, they are isolated, punished and pushed out,” says the ACLU website concerning the School-to-Prison Pipeline. "Zero-tolerance" policies criminalize minor infractions of school rules, while cops in school lead to students being criminalized for behavior that should be handled inside the school. Students of color are especially vulnerable to push-out trends and the discriminatory application of discipline.”
“The ACLU believes that children should be educated, not incarcerated.” Does public emphasis on Trayvon’s school suspension record subtly insinuate societal endorsement of for-profit incarcerations in the futures of boys like him?
Lower income applicants of public assistance and families in need of public housing must submit to drug screening as a condition of qualifying for the benefits of social program offerings. On the other hand, contrastive statistical evidence shows that Hispanic and White students were “more likely to report drug use and abuse than Asian and African American male students prior to coming to college and during college.”
Comparative statistics show that “students from HBCUs [historically black colleges] reported significantly lower rates of marijuana, cocaine, sedatives, hallucinogens, and other illicit drug use than students at non-HBCUs.” Trayvon populations of boys having possession of smaller quantities of marijuana nonetheless attract charges of criminality and mandatory disproportionately severe jail sentences. See Meilman PW, Presley CA, Cashin JR. The sober social life at Historically Black Colleges. Journal of Blacks in Higher Education. 1995;9:98–100.
The Institute on Race & Poverty at the University of Minnesota produced a study detailing the disparity in traffic stops and search of citizens. Sixty-five Minnesota law enforcement departments participated in the Racial Profiling Study authorized by the 626.951 code legislation of the Minnesota Legislature. The Council on Crime and Justice joined with the Institute on Race and Poverty to analyze the data and create a statewide aggregate report, with 65 individual jurisdictions reporting. The findings showed that officers stopped Black, Latino and American Indian drivers “at greater rates than Whites.” Police searched Blacks, Latinos and American Indians at greater rates than White drivers, but found contraband, i.e., illegal drugs or smuggled goods, at lower rates than for White drivers.
“If officers had stopped drivers of all racial/ethnic groups at the same rate,” says the study, “approximately 18,800 fewer Blacks; 5,800 fewer Latinos; and approximately 22,500 more Whites would have been stopped.” These patterns suggest a strong likelihood that race / ethnic bias plays a role in traffic stop policy and practice in Minnesota. In New York, a 14 August 2013 federal judge decision rendered that state’s stop-and-frisk practices violate the Constitution’s 4th and 14th Amendment rights. As it turns out, the ruling by the Federal District Court in Manhattan, says a New York Times report, “does nothing to disrupt the authority the Supreme Court has given police officers to target African- Americans and Latinos with little or no basis.” “But if unrestrained policing is, for Mr. Bloomberg, policing that works, it turns out that he can still have it,” says the article.
The foregoing narratives provide a foundation for explaining how Canaan genealogy and Noah ancient curse, thousands of years later, became the principal rationalization for American enslavement of Africans, the putative line of Ham, son of proto-ancestor Noah, and the creation of discriminatory law and administrative policies designed to limit participation by certain groups of humans in the American Dream. Far fetched? No. The two (2) volumes of this report educate congregations and the general public concerning incarceration, racial profiling and myriad of interrelated social justice issues. 18 | P a g e
Conclusions In American society, there exist lingering effects of prehistoric denkstil—the tracing of persistence in mindset over time and space toward modern continuation of now illegal “3/5ths fraction of a ‘whole’ human” Constitutional law which, when coupled with Biblical “Curse” residuals, create and perpetuate newer enslavement brandings and newer tactics of racial profiling affecting newer generations of the descendants of Ham, scholar Michelle Alexander’s “the new Jim Crow”. Such lingering effects observably comport disparate impact and disparate treatment discrimination in education, employment or other opportunity against certain peoples, certain populations of Creation, both intra-national and inter- national. Lingering effects theory examines whether past patterns and practices of racial profiling yet exist, to what extent, and whether corrective remedies under the law are practicable.
Bottomline summary, three (3) historical factors have created lingering effects underpinning 2013 racial profiling mindset and overt deeds, their outcomes protected by legislative promulgation of discriminatory and unjust law:
1. The official 3/5ths language of Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the U.S. Constitution creating ‘Other’ human types; 2. The pro-slavery religious preachings of Genesis maledictory language, i.e., the Curse of Canaan authorizing perpetual enslavement of black peoples of the world and Shemitic takeover-ownership of territory formerly in primordial possession by Genesis peoples of Ham lineage; and 3. The 13th amendment to Constitutional language permanently abolishing slavery and involuntary servitude—factual freedom for former slaves stymied by “except as punishment for crime” loophole.
The lingering effects of all of the above arise out of ethnonationalist flawed preconceptions of 'kinship as nation' in a country of melting pot fame, preconceptions of who ‘belongs’ to the nation and who does not; of who naturally ought be included and who naturally ought be excluded from the full citizenship offerings of the American Constitution.
This research study postulates, therefore, the underpinning theory that the patterns, practices, and lingering effects of past discriminatory American constitutional law, influenced by universal denkstil prejudicial mindset and sentience—the natural tendency for hasty expression of emotion devoid of reason or self-control—melded with racially unsympathetic religious philosophy and teachings have all together generated modern passage of Stand Your Ground states law, in violation of 4th and 14th Constitutional protections—rulings of law having New Age adverse discriminatory impact on certain racial citizen groups, black males especially.
Unjust law is no law at all. Where there is no law, neither is there violation.
FBI Supplementary Homicide Report 2005-2010. SYG - Two strangers who are not law enforcement.
Source: -John Roman, Ph.D. is a senior fellow in the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute. http://.metrotrends.org/tag/homicide/ 19 | P a g e
The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling
"Trayvon Martin's death has highlighted a reality no one wanted to face: it is not safe to be an African-American male in this country. I would welcome advice on how the diocese can best respond to this." – Thomas E. Breidenthal, Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio. March 2012.
“First, there is the universal commandment to love our neighbor. This command is closely copied into civil legal edict requiring equality under the law by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, ratified after the end of the Civil War, which protects the rights of all U.S. citizens notwithstanding the particular laws of individual states”. –Merelyn Bates-Mims, Principal Researcher
The research methods, study design and samples of this study on racial profiling enable the Diocese of Southern Ohio and perhaps ultimately The Episcopal Church of the USA, the House of Bishops, to determine whether there is a need for well-defined remedial action(s) to address the facts and effects of profiling. Replicating the objectives of other sociological work, the design plan formulated specific research questions to evaluate participants’ racial profiling experiences (RPEs). The six (6) non-campus Survey instruments collected the data, and incorporated several research questions based on a comprehensive review of the literature. The mission was to reveal straight forwardly the everyday patterns or practice of racial profiling, the presumptions underlying Stand Your Ground and other unjust structures, disparately experienced by American citizens across race and economics: to discern to what extent such practices exist.
Nullifying “Stand Your Ground” states’ law.
The goal is to provoke Congressional actions to nullify “Stand Your Ground” states’ law promulgated to legalize deadly-force against targeted groups of Americans because of ‘suspicious’ mindset labels attached to skin color, race, gender or religion. (As precedent to this moral voice appeal, see Jonathan Weisman’s April 18, 2012 article, “Catholic Bishops Protest House Budget”). States adopting Stand Your Ground laws include Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Montana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Washington, and West Virginia.
"Stand your ground” governs U.S. federal case law in which right of self-defense is asserted against a charge of criminal homicide. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Beard v. U.S. (158 U.S. 550 (1895) that a man who was "on his premises" when he came under attack and "...did not provoke the assault, and had at the time reasonable grounds to believe, and in good faith believed, that the deceased intended to take his life, or do him great bodily harm...was not obliged to retreat, nor to consider whether he could safely retreat, but was entitled to stand his ground…Source: Davekopel.com. Retrieved 2012-03-23. Beard v. United States, 158 U.S. 550 (1895). Supreme.justia.com.Retrieved 2012-03-23.
This comparative study particularly examines whether male American persons of African descent, especially, across variations of economic, educational and professional achievement, and living in a wide geography of American towns experience significant differences in treatment by law enforcement and others in authority by the time they reach age 25. The term ‘citizenship’ implies a relationship between an individual and a state in which the individual owes allegiance to the state and in turn is entitled to its protection. The term ‘racial profiling’ presumes criminal intentions by certain groups without probable cause. The design plan calls for multiple sampling using Web-based college campus survey; urban hip- hop youth; congregations (electronic and paper handout); general public (electronic) and homeless (paper handout) survey. The design plan requires examination across American populations of persons by race, ethnicity, gender, education and economics. Study duration: March 2012 – March 2014.
20 | P a g e
The Civil Rights Act of 1871 is found in Title 42, section 1983 of the United States Code and so is commonly referred to as section 1983. It provides that anyone who, under color of state or local law, causes a person to be deprived of rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, or federal law, is liable to that person. Source: uslaw.com/library/article/bshCivilRights1871.htm
Purpose Seeking to transform unjust structures of society. In March 2012, The Right Reverend Thomas Breidenthal, Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio, commissioned a disparate impact / disparate treatment study on the topic of race and police treatment, largely in response to the killing of the black 17-year-old male high schooler in Florida, Trayvon Martin.
The Commission on Social Justice and Public Policy of the Diocese of Southern Ohio, responsible for the development of the study, is guided strongly by the Baptismal Covenant, the promise to strive for justice and respect the dignity of every human being.
First, there is the universal commandment to love our neighbor. This command is closely copied into civil legal edict requiring equality under the law by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, ratified after the end of the Civil War, which protects the rights of all U.S. citizens notwithstanding the particular laws of individual states.
The Fourteenth Amendment legislation, adopted on July 9, 1868, specifically granted American citizenship to African former slaves. The Fourteenth Amendment forbids the making or enforcement by any state of any law abridging the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States. It secures all persons against any state action resulting in either deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denial of the equal protection of the laws. Governments must demonstrate serious need or ‘compelling interest’ for the abrogation of equal protection rights. Governments must demonstrate ‘strong basis in evidence’ to support the use of measures that deny such protection to any citizen.
What compelling interest or religious force might induce the office of any bishop of The Episcopal Church of the USA to advocate for remedial action in response to such cruelty, the denial of civil and human rights innate to the Trayvon Martin incident?
Discovering the extent of civic deliberative mistreatment of American persons, especially African descendent males, is among the major purposes of this research. For many males of African descent and other minorities born in the United States, respect for the dignity of human beings is absent from daily life. The compelling interest of this study is to unearth and comparatively analyze quantitative and anecdotal evidence to determine whether the data support either substantiation or refutation of the proposition that “It is unsafe to be an African-American male in this country.”
To provide answers to these questions, the principal researcher, possessing disparate impact and disparate treatment research experience, convened a team of researchers to devise the design and use of schemas and tools to achieve the collections of data, i.e., surveys, interviews, and individual stories, pertinent to testing the theory, the definitions, assumptions, problem statement, and research questions described below.
At the ending of the study, a publication of the research findings will be written and distributed by the Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio to the Task Force on Racial Profiling. Specifically, a proposal for the development of a Spring 2014 think tank, commissioned by the Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio in partnership with the Office of the Dean and the Vestry of Christ Church Cathedral, an Ecumenical Commission on Racial Profiling sanctioned by the Task Force for the purpose of ‘next-step’ discussion and ‘legal challenge’ planning (see pg. 137). The proposal calls for the raising of a collection of experts to focus on the topic of legal racial profiling and Stand Your Ground laws, in the interest of
21 | P a g e defining, discussing, and remedying its disparate impact on certain citizen groups, particularly African American men and boys. The body of discussants should include religious leaders, academic and urban studies scholars, legal scholars and litigators, civil rights organizations, political, economic, social, public policy and a wide variety of innovative, knowledgeable professionals in every field having the ability for spontaneous creative ideas for problem-solving in intensive group discussion. The process may include public sessions similar to the ones presented at the Jackson, Mississippi November 2013 conference titled “Fifty years later: The State of Racism in America” sponsored by The Episcopal Church; and the Cincinnati Human Relations Commission’s National Association of Human Rights Workers 2013 Midwest Regional Conference held in Cincinnati. Achievement of nullification of “stand your ground” doctrine, like former “separate but equal” legal structure, requires legal skill, social scholarship, judicial actions, and Moral Voice ecumenical advocation supportive of the launching of legal campaigns recapturing Charles Hamilton Houston May 17, 1954 moment sixty years later.
Methodology OVERVIEW - Reiteration of Major Trends and Indicators Conduits have been created between schools and juvenile justice systems via ‘Cash for Kids’ and ‘mandatory minimums’ judicial sentencing; "life-means-life" sentences to die in prison for kids convicted under 18; and states’ granting private-prison guaranty of 100% full-bed occupancy. Students of lower income families are labeled learning disabled; victims of poverty associated with and deemed to be a factor of lowered intellect. African-American preschoolers suffer higher risks of school suspensions. Young students of color are increasingly criminalized by ‘zero-tolerance’ school policies. They are further victimized by standardized testing of non-standardized teaching/learning. Drug testing impacts people of color disproportionately. Public assistance families submit to drug screening as a condition of qualifying for housing. Hispanic and White students were more likely to engage in drugs than Asians and African American students. HBCUs [historically black colleges] report significantly lower rates of drug use. Justified homicide rulings doubled in states having SYG laws.
Design and Population Samples: March 2012 – November 2013. The purpose of any research is to determine if a theory is supported or not, based on statistical analysis. A theory is an educated guess about a relationship but in order for research to be conducted on a theory, it must first be operationalized—which means that all variables must be defined and the methods of conducting the research must be determined. Once this is done, the resulting statement about the relationship is called a hypothesis. The hypothesis is what gets tested in any research study. -Excerpt: allpsych.com
Proper scientific methodology usually requires four steps: 1. Observation is very important at this initiation stage, i.e., the formulation of theory. 2. The inducement of general hypotheses is the second step; the formulation of possible explanations for what has been observed. Here one must be imaginative yet logical. “Entia non sunt multiplicanda,” or as it is usually paraphrased, the simplest hypothesis is the best. Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily. 3. Construction of specific testable predictions based on the initial hypothesis. The inference of corollary assumptions that must be true if the hypothesis is true.
22 | P a g e
4. Testing the hypothesis by investigation, i.e., surveying the appropriate populations, and confirming the deduced implications. Observation is repeated and data are then gathered with the goal of confirming or falsifying the initial hypothesis. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method Empirical data are produced by experiment or observation. Deductive reasoning applies general principles to reach specific conclusions. Inductive reasoning examines specific information, perhaps many pieces of specific information, to derive a general principle. From his own observations of social reality, the Rt. Rev. Thomas E. Breidenthal posits the primary assertion of this research study on racial profiling, that “It is not safe to be an African-American male in this country.”
The underlying question is whether the protections afforded by the 14th Amendment extend to male American persons of African descent. Who, among male citizens of America country and by eyesight and impromptu evaluation, is likely to be judged as ‘suspicious’ and ‘guilty’? And who is customarily exempt from the harmful effects of Stand Your Ground and other unjust state laws? In logic, judgment is the mental act of making or [mis-]understanding a positive or negative proposition about something. As in the Susan Boyle appraisal advanced by the judges of a popular television talent show, i.e., “She looks like she can’t sing,” a similar eyesight judgmental proposition was applied to student Trayvon: “He’s up to no good. He looks like he’s on drugs or something.” “They always get away.”
To whom does plural pronoun ‘they’ likely apply?
Definitions Glossary of Key Terms. Citizen is one who is entitled to the rights and privileges of a freeman, both civic and civil. The term ‘racial profiling’ assumes criminality among some racial groups, and the alleged policy of some police is to attribute criminal intentions to the members of such groups by stopping and questioning them in disproportionate numbers without probable cause. That assumption is based on the belief that people of particular race have particular behavior. It is the practice of thinking that people of a particular color will behave in a particular, especially criminal, way. Racist implies one who loathes or hates persons of other races. Discrimination is the treatment of others based on feelings (prejudice) about race, ethnicity, age, religion, or gender. Statistical discrimination Majority employers are culturally more attuned to the applicants of their own type than to applicants of minority type, and therefore possess a better measure of the likely productivity of the applicants of their own type. Preconception is an idea or opinion formed in advance, especially if it is based on little or no information or experience and reflects personal prejudices. Judgment implies discernment or good sense and the ability to form sound opinions and make sensible decisions or reliable guesses. Stereotype is an oversimplified conception that reduces a person or groups to a standardized image or idea. Bodily descriptions, otherwise having no intrinsic significance, serve as useful political, educational and other social indices around which human agents propagandize their expectations. Intrinsic judgment – people, relational judgment. -Online Encarta English Dictionary; Glenn C. Loury 2002:26-27; Athena Quotient; Merriam Webster Structural racism is "a system in which public policies, institutional practices, cultural representations and other norms work in various, often reinforcing ways to perpetuate racial group inequity. It identifies dimensions of our history and culture that have allowed privileges associated with ‘whiteness' and disadvantages associated with ‘color' to endure and adapt over time." Lawful suggests ethical, moral permissibility. Legal denotes compliance with technical or formal rules. - Lawrence, et al., The Aspen Institute Roundtable on Community Change, Structural Racism and Community Building 11 (2004).
23 | P a g e
The Problem of “Perception” in Research: Measuring Agreeableness
“People start off with a belief and a prejudice—we all do. And the job of science is to set that aside to get to the truth." —Simon Singh, as quoted in Wired (August 30, 2010) interview by Robert Capps.
"Observation and experiment are subject to a very popular myth…Even research workers will admit that the first observation may have been a little imprecise, whereas the second and third were 'adjusted to the facts' ... until tradition, education, and familiarity have produced a readiness for stylized (that is directed and restricted) perception and action; until an answer becomes largely pre-formed in the question and a decision confined merely to 'yes' or 'no' or perhaps to a numerical determination; until methods and apparatus automatically carry out the greatest part of the mental work for us." Ludwik Fleck labels this thought style (Denkstil). Fleck 1979, p. 84. “... [Truth] is not 'relatively' or even' subjective' in the popular sense of the word. It is always or almost always within a thinking style…” "Agreeableness is a tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than suspicious and antagonistic towards others. The trait reflects individual differences in general concern for social harmony. Agreeable individuals value getting along with others. They are generally considerate, friendly, generous, helpful, and willing to compromise their interests with others. Agreeable people also have an optimistic view of human nature. Disagreeable individuals place self-interest above getting along with others. They are generally unconcerned with others’ well-being, and are less likely to extend themselves for other people. Sometimes their skepticism about others’ motives causes them to be suspicious, unfriendly and uncooperative "-Excerpt-psychometric-success.com/personality-tests/personality-tests-big-5-aspects.htm.
Complexities Overview Complexity sets the design plan of this research report apart from those of other racial profiling studies by means of deliberative formation of multiple layers of inquiry and focus so that the differences and similarities of profiling personal experience are comparatively revealed, encapsulated within the following samplings and formats: Congregations Survey Congregations-A [Hist. Afr-Amer.] Accomplished Professionals Survey Urban Hip-Hop Youth Survey General Public Survey General Public-A [The Homeless] Campus Survey
24 | P a g e
Survey Designs: Citizenship and Racial Profiling Non-Campus Survey Examinations compare (dis)agreement disparities occurring in two main categories: 1) Citizenship; and 2) Racial Profiling. Thus, the reader will readily notice a repetitive pattern of questions and redundant methodology to aid closer comparative examinations among Non-Campus Survey groups for achieving more accurate research results/conclusions. Again, the researchers’ mapping of Citizenship attitudes v. Racial Profiling experiences ultimately enables formation of report results that are then comparatively revealed, consequently giving light to the ‘story’ of racial profiling discrimination experienced by certain citizens of American society. The populations of inquiry and comparisons include 1) General Public (GP and GP-A Homeless); Accomplished Professionals (AP) and Urban Hip-Hop Youth; and finally, Congregations (C- historically Anglican and C-A historically African-American). Each category of survey instrument has its own separate data collector and archive. Generally, the initial set of six questions on citizenship serves as ‘reversals’ of the subsequent questions on racial profiling. Citizen is one who is entitled to legal residency of a place and to the rights and privileges of a freeman, both civic and civil. The website of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) lists the rights and responsibilities of citizenship. The summary below serves as example format of uniform comparative complexity analysis used by this study:
Six SURVEY INSTRUMENTS (NON-CAMPUS) Summary of ‘at-risk – Non-Crosstab Totals THE BISHOP’S TASK FORCE REPORT
“I know that I and my family are at risk.” “I live my life mindful of special ‘safety’ rules.” 75.24% YES. Congregations C [TEC]= 51.5% Congregation C-A = 89.3%. Accomplished Professionals= 83.5% Hip-Hop Youth = 87.25% General Public Survey GP = 58.8% Homeless GP-A = 81.1%. Instructions to Survey Respondents Introduction A National Survey This racial profiling study was commissioned by the Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio, the Right Reverend Thomas E. Breidenthal, in response to the shooting of TRAYVON MARTIN on February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida, United States. Do certain American persons experience differences in societal treatment, in the everyday places of life--school, your neighborhood, driving your car, walking along, shopping malls, etc. despite education and economic achievement? Is accomplished professional achievement an effective guard against being racially profiled?” Please take a moment to complete our survey. THANK YOU. NOTE: Your participation is completely anonymous. You are not asked to identify yourself and we make no attempt to identify you. If you do not have a response for an item you may skip it. 25 | P a g e
Underlying Hypothesis “Disagreeableness tendency in humans heightens propensity for active antagonism towards others.”
The American Dream: Who’s entitled? Part I. General Public Surveys – Disparate Impact Analyses
DEFINITION Disparate Impact statistical analyses give substantial evidence that a procedure has a disproportionate impact on groups of individuals, e.g., Stand Your Ground laws.
Similarly situated is a legal term implying sameness in problems and circumstances wherein the basic facts and legal issues are the same, and separate lawsuits would be impractical or burdensome.
There are two (2) General Public survey instruments measuring the questions: “Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” “Is Stand Your Ground Unjust for certain citizen groups?”
General Public (GP) The first instrument, noted by the name General Public (GP), was distributed electronically via emails passed on by individuals to other individuals. We received a total of 219 GP responses.
General Public–A; Homeless Populations (GP-A) The second is a one-page double-sided paper handout version of the instrument and is labeled in the analyses below as General Public–A (GP-A). The collections stem from an invitation extended by Tamar Mott Forrest, PhD, the Associate Director of the Research Core Centers for Innovation, The Ohio State University, to attend a monthly meeting with homeless providers affiliated with the Centers. The purpose was to secure the surveying of populations like the homeless, voices generally excluded. The meetings take place on the first Wednesday of the month at the Salvation Army in Columbus. Gail L. Lowe, a Columbus South Side Social Worker for Columbus Public Health, served as the major distributor of the paper survey. The surveys were mostly garnered from clients at Catholic Social Services Mission for Inner City Needs (JOIN); and the Lutheran Social Services South Food Pantry. A few were completed at an ACLU meeting event presented at the Columbus Urban League and at social justice meetings held at Mt Olivet Baptist Church, Columbus. The paper data were entered into the electronic collector via the Manual Data Entry mechanism. A total of 102 GP-A surveys were completed.
GENERAL PUBLIC SURVEYS GP Survey = 219 total respondents GP-A Survey (Homeless Populations) = 102 total respondents SUMMARY N=321 total respondents
Tables/Exhibits labeled 1 thru 1.b are basic figures. Tables/Exhibits labeled no.2 are cross-tabulations. 26 | P a g e
“Consult your friend on all things, especially on those which respect yourself. His counsel may then be useful where your own self-love might impair your judgment.” - Seneca
The information in the exhibits and tables below compares/contrasts the similarity and the difference between the two samples concerning good and responsible citizenship as an effective hedge against racial profiling experience. They raise interesting ideas: How alike are we humans? Conversely, how different are we from one another? What is the meaning of ‘common’, as in ‘common ground’? What is meant by public welfare? Are such notions adversative to the universal rights of the individual? Do the differences in physical descriptions, like tallness or shortness of stature, muscular power or undersized frailty, serve as eye-sight verifiers of human worth? Can adjectival appendages construct natural entitlement to the bounty of nature—to the benefit of some and the exclusion of others? Who, by birthright or custom or innateness, is entitled to ‘go/come’ undaunted, that is, disparately or imperviously entitled to Creation: the inheritances of the past and the rewards of the future?
It is in the disaggregation of the data that the story is revealed.
TABLE 1 CITIZENSHIP
COMPARISON OF ‘YES’ RESPONSES – GENERAL PUBLIC SURVEYS GP Survey = 219 total respondents GP-A Survey = 102 total respondents
“Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?”
Citizenship Participation GP Survey GP-A Survey (Homeless) Survey Question # % Yes __ _ % Yes__ Agreement average 98.03% GP+GP-A
1. I am a citizen of the United States. 98.6% 99.0% (98.8% avg.) ______2. I pay my taxes. 99.5% 91.2% (95.3% avg.) ______3. I want good police protection in my community. 99.5% 99.0% (99.2% avg.) ------4. I have plans for the future. 99.5% 98.0% (98.2% avg.) ------5. I live a good life. 100% 94.9% (98.7% avg.) ------6. I believe everyone is entitled to life and liberty. 99.1% 97.0% (98.0% avg.) ------Source: The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling
______NOTES GEO Group (GEO) and Corrections Corp. of America (CXW) are two of the largest private prison companies in America…Here is one essential truth about the future of crime in America: GEO and CXW are currently amongst the hottest stocks in the country right now. And the stocks of companies that make guns for personal protection are not far behind. We are of course talking about Sturm Ruger (RGR) and Smith & Wesson SEHC). Source: Bill Gunderson. marketwatch.com/story/even-prison-stocks-are-breaking-out-2013-03-06
27 | P a g e
Shoot First: A Matter of Opinion What may or may not have been considered during the adoption of these laws is the fact that whether a person's violent response to an attack was "honestly and reasonably" necessary can be purely a matter of opinion. The subjectivity of [Stand Your Ground] laws poses certain hazards, given the undeniable impact of race on the criminal justice system. -Mark P. Fancher is the staff attorney for the ACLU of Michigan Racial Justice Project.
Mr. Strolla [defense Attorney in the black ‘teenager playing loud music case’] has a strong ally in Florida law, which gives people who claim self-defense wide latitude in their responses. Mr. Dunn need only have had a reasonable belief that his life was in danger to respond with justifiable force. And no actual crime needs to have been committed. It is enough for his [‘fear’] to have been triggered by an attempt at a crime. - Lizette Alvarez. Weapon in Slaying of Florida Teenager Figures Again in Court New York Times. FEB. 12, 2014
Note: Like teenager Trayvon Martin killed in Florida, 17-year-old Jordan Davis has also been profiled by his assailant as a ‘thug’—a label commonly implying black male criminality. Both Martin and Davis come from middle- class working families generally characterized by the citizenship participation normalcy measures showing in Table 1; Questions # 1-6.
EXHIBIT 1 CITIZENSHIP
“Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?”
Table I and Exhibit 1 answer the question: What is the average of ‘Yes’ agreement between GP and GP-A (Homeless) survey respondents regarding the positive aspects of American citizenship? Respondents share an overall average of 98.03% ‘Yes’ agreement regarding: Citizenship (98.8%); Taxes (95.3%); Good police protection (99.2%); Future (98.2%); Good life (98.7%); Entitlement (98.0%). In citizenship standing, respondents are ‘similarly situated’. In summary, there is close overall agreement between GP and GP-A responses relating to ‘Citizenship’ (98.03%).
Table 1.a, below, answers the question: What is the average of ‘Yes’ agreement between GP and GP-A survey respondents regarding the non-positive aspects of American citizenship, i.e., racial profiling?
28 | P a g e
TABLE 1.a RACIAL PROFILING
COMPARISON OF ‘YES’ RESPONSES – GENERAL PUBLIC SURVEYS GP Survey = 21 9 total respondents GP-A Survey = 102 total respondents
“Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” Racial Profiling Experiences (RPEs) GP Survey GP-A Survey (Homeless) Survey Questions # % Yes __ _ % Yes__Agreement average 67.1% GP+GP-A
7. I have experienced being unjustly profiled. 45.8% 66.3% (55.6% avg.) ------8. If you answered yes to question number 7, please tell us when this happened. 10+ years ago 38.9% 13.0% Within past 1-3 years 29.5% 46.3% ------9. I have (or know someone who has) experienced police ‘suspicion’ stops and/or threat. 74.8% 75.3% (75.0% avg.) ------10. I caution against night walks wearing a hoodie. 51.7% 56.7% (54.2% avg.) ------11. I know that I and my family are at risk. 44.1% 69.4% (56.7% avg.) ______12. I live my life mindful of special “safety” rules. 73.5% 92.8% (83.1% avg.) ______13. Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain [146/200/19] [77/92/10] citizen groups. 73.0% 83.7% (78.4% avg.) [78.4%] Source: The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling SYG GP+GP-A
EXHIBIT 1.a Questions #7 – 13: Racial Profiling Experiences (RPEs)
Source: The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling 29 | P a g e
Table 1.a respondents share a lower average, 67.1%, in ‘Yes’ overall agreement pertaining to racial issues: Unjust profiling (55.6% “yes”); Police ‘suspicion stops’ (75.05); Hoodie (54.2%); At-risk (56.7%); Safety rules (83.1%); Stand Your Ground law unjust (78.4%). In the cross-over line from question #6 to #7 there exists a 30.8% average drop in ‘Yes’ agreement between GP and GP-A respondents to General Public survey. In summary, for the questions relating to ‘Racial Profiling’, questions #7-13, the overall ‘Daily Life Experience’ agreement between GP and GP-A Homeless responses fell to a 67.1% average. Table 1.b below describes the demographic makeup of the two groups of respondents.
TABLE 1.b DEMOGRAPHICS COMPARISON – GENERAL PUBLIC SURVEYS GP Survey GP-A Survey (Homeless) Survey Questions Demographics Demographics 14. Which race/ethnicity best describes you? American Indian/Alaskan Native 0.5% 8.2% Asian/Pacific Islander 4.2% 0.0% Black/African American 41.4% 73.5% Hispanic American 1.9% 2.0% White/Caucasian 50.2% 18.4% Two or more races 1.9% 12.2% ______15. What is the highest level of education you have completed? High School degree 3.3% 16.7% Some College 13.0% 33.3% College degree 22.3% 12.2% Some graduate school 9.8% 0.0% Graduate degree 31.2% 5.6% Post-graduate degree 19.1% 1.1% 16. What is your occupation? [#/% Responses] 209/219 (95.4%) 76/102 (74.5%) ______17. What is your approximate household income? $0-24,999 8.6% 68.6% $25,000-49,000 17.2% 19.8% $50,000-74,000 18.2% 4.7% $75,000-99,999 18.7% 2.3% $100,000-124,999 14.8% 1.2% $125,000-149,999 6.2% 0.0% $150,000-174,999 4.8% 0.0% $175,000-199,999 3.3% 1.2% $200,000+ 8.1% 2.3% ______18. In which category includes your age? Under 30 6.5% 23.0% 31-40 17.6% 25.3% 41-50 18.1% 34.5% 51-60 24.5% 10.3% 61-70 24.1% 4.6% Over 70 9.3% 2.3% 19. What is your gender? Female 64.4% 59.8% Male 35.6% 40.2% 20. What state do you live in? 22 states Columbus Ohio only_____ Source: Demographic Data - The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling; General Public Surveys GP and GP-A 30 | P a g e
Table 1.b answers the question: What is the demographic makeup of the respondents to General Public surveys—by race, education, household income, age, gender and state? Racially, at Table 1.b, White/Caucasian represents half (50.2%) of all GP survey respondents; of GP-A survey (homeless), Black/African-Americans 73.5%. The percentage figures shown in Tables 1 and 1.a (page 27;29); and Table 1.b (page 30) derive from the number of respondents answering ‘Yes’ to the questions #1-6 (Citizenship) and #7-13 (Racial Profiling). The largest portion (68.6%) of GP-A Homeless respondents earn $0-24,000 in comparison to GP 8.6% presence in that income range. The states represented in the data collection include OH VT NC MO IN KY VA MI DC GA MD NC AR TX NY CA IL FLA WA AL VA NV. In summary, GP Survey=219 respondents; GP-A Survey = 102 respondents. Table 2 below gives both a cross-tabulated and non-cross tabulated display of responses based on ‘YES” agreement to Survey question #13: “Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups.” 143/0/3=146 reads: 143 persons responded ‘YES’ to Question #17; 0 responded ‘NO’; 3 persons skipped the question altogether.
TABLE 2. ‘SYG UNJUST’CROSS-TABULATED/NON-CROSSTAB COMPARISON OF RESPONSES Survey Question #17 – A COMPOSITE: Table 1.b; and Table 2.a Crosstab: “Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups.” ‘YES’ Crosstab Non-Crosstab Crosstab Non-Crosstab 17. What is your approximate household Green Purple Orange Brown income? GP survey GP survey GP-A survey GP-A survey $0-24,999 8.4% 8.6% 68.7% 68.6% $25,000-49,000 17.5% 17.2% 22.4% 19.8% $50,000-74,000 23.8% 18.2% 3.0% 4.7% $75,000-99,999 18.9% 18.7% 0.0% 2.3% $100,000-124,999 14.0% 14.8% 1.5% 1.2% $125,000- 149,000 4.2% 6.2% 0.0% 0.0% $150,000-174,999 4.2% 4.8% 0.0% 0.0% $175,000-199,999 2.8% 3.3% 1.5% 1.2% $200,000+ 6.3% 8.1% 3.0% 2.3% 143/0/3=146 209/0/10=219 67/0/10=77 n=86/0/16=102
Source: Demographic Data - The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling
EXHIBIT 2 – ‘SYG UNJUST’ Crosstab/Non-Crosstab
31 | P a g e
Question #13 of Table 1.a (page 29) asks whether SYG is unjust for certain citizen groups. The ‘Yes’ response rate on ‘SYG unjust’ question is 73.0% (n=146) for the GP survey and 83.7% (n=77) for GP-A survey, a (78.4% average ‘Yes’ response for the two survey groups.) It is on these original n=146 and n=77 figures that Table 2 and Exhibit 2 (page 31) base their cross- tabulation calculation. The green and the orange bars answer the [SYG cross tabulated] question: “What percentages of respondents and in what category of household income believe Stand Your Ground is unjust law?” The GP-A orange/brown $0-24,000 (73.5% African- American) ‘Yes’ responses out strips all other ‘SYG unjust’ responses: They represent homeless and other lower-income populations served by the OSU Centers for Innovations, persons who oft find themselves in profiling situations. The purple and brown bars address the question: “What is your approximate average household income?”
In summary, the examination of orange/brown reveals that among GP-A populations, there exist strong beliefs that “Stand Your Ground” laws are unjust. Of the 100% [n=102] GP-A persons asked the Question #13 on ‘SYG unjust’, 83.7% (n=77/102) [page 29] agree that the laws are unjust. See Table 1.a; Question #13 (page 29). Results: “YES” - SYG is unjust for certain citizen groups. Table 2.a, below, answers the questions: “Of GP/GPA populations believing SYG to be unjust, what percentages display good citizenship? Racial profiling experiences? By race/ethnicity?”
TABLE 2.a ‘SYG UNJUST’CROSS-TABULATED: PERCENT OF ‘Yes’ RESPONSES COMPARISON OF ‘YES’ RESPONSES – GENERAL PUBLIC SURVEYS Crosstab: “Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups.” Survey Questions #1-14; 17 GP Survey GP-A Survey (Homeless) n=146 cross tabulations n=77 cross tabulations Response Response Response Response Survey Questions % ‘YES’ Count % ‘YES’ Count 1. I am a citizen of the United States. 98.6% 144 /2/0 100% 77/0/0 2. I pay my taxes. 99.3% 145/1/0 90.9% 70/7/0 3. I want good police protection in my community. 99.3% 144/1/1 100% 77/0/0 4. I have plans for the future. 100% 146/0/0 97.4% 75/2/0 5. I live a good life. 100% 145/0/1 94.7% 72/4/1 6. I believe everyone is entitled to life and liberty. 99.3% 145/1/0 98.7% 75/1/1 7. I have experienced being unjustly profiled. 45.8% 66/78/2 67.6% 48/23/6 8. If you answered yes, please tell us when - - - - this happened. 9. I have (or know someone who has) experienced police ‘suspicion’ stops and/or 81.0% 115/4/4 78.4% 58/16/3 threat. 10. I caution against night walks wearing a hoodie. 55.2% 79/64/3 62.7% 47/28/2 11. I know that I and my family are at risk. 49.7% 71/72/3 77.6% 59/17/1 12. I live my life mindful of special “safety” rules. 73.9% 105/37/4 95.9% 71/3/3 13. Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups. **[Cross-tabbed item] **100% **146 **100% **77 14. Which race/ethnicity best describes you? White/Caucasian 42.8% 62 15.8% 12 32 | P a g e
Black/African American 47.6% 69 78.9% 60 All others combined 9.7% 14 16.7% 16 17. What is your approximate household income? $0-24,999 8.4% 12 68.7% 46 $25,000-49,000 17.5% 25 22.4% 15 $50,000-74,000 23.8% 34 3.0% 2 $75,000-99,999 18.9% 27 0.0% 0 $100,000-124,999 14.0% 20 1.5% 1 $125,000- 149,000 4.2% 6 0.0% 0 $150,000-174,999 4.2% 6 0.0% 0 $175,000-199,999 2.8% 4 1.5% 1 $200,000+ 6.3% 9 3.0% 2 143/0/3 67/0/10 Source: Data - The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling; General Public Surveys GP and GP-A by SYG Unjust crosstab.
The percentages shown in Table 2.a, above, derive from the number of persons answering ‘Yes’ to Q.#13 proposition that **“Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups.”
The count/percentages of ‘Yes’, ‘No’ and ‘skipped’ responses can be read in Table 2.a. For example, question #5 of Table 2.a reports 100%‘yes’ agreements via ‘145/0/1’ expression, correctly interpreted as ’yes’=145; ’no’=0; ’skipped’=1. Of the 145 responses to question #5, 100% indicated ‘yes’. ‘No’ response causes the drop in percentage at question #6. At Q. #7, ‘yes’=66 persons; ‘no’=78 persons; 2 persons skipped Q. #7.
Tables/Exhibits labeled #1 thru 1.b represent basic figures of Surveys GP and GP-A. Table2/Exhibit2 and Table2.a summarize the cross-tabulations of those basic figures by ‘SYG unjust’. ______NOTES Citizenship and the State of the Dream 2014 Healthcare for Whom? United for a Fair Economy's (UFE) eleventh annual MLK Day report–Healthcare for Whom?–explores the racial economic implications of one of the most important human rights issues and public policy debates of the day: healthcare. The report looks at both disparate health outcomes–driven largely by racial segregation and concentrated poverty–and the current state-by-state fights over implementing the Affordable Care Act. The report also includes the latest data on racial disparities in education, employment, income, poverty and wealth that indicate the dream of racial equity, as so clearly articulated by Dr. King, remains unfinished.
High Poverty Neighborhoods Poor Blacks and poor Latinos are significantly more likely than poor Whites to live in high-poverty neighborhoods that exacerbate health problems due to limited access to healthcare services, healthful food, and green space; higher exposure to lead and other toxins; and physical stresses from crime, poverty, and racism itself.
Economic Inequality [The building of the American middle class] was not a product of unfettered markets and heroic bootstrapping. It was built through deliberate public investments, a broad tax system based on ability-to- pay, and rules-changes that created ladders of opportunity and which helped ensure that workers shared in the prosperity their labor made possible. Source: www.faireconomy.org 33 | P a g e
“But there has been also the American dream that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for every man, with opportunity for each according to his ability or achievement. It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position.” - James Truslow Adams. The Epic of America, 1931
Making the case - General Public Surveys
“Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?”
Pulitzer winner, James Truslow Adams, American writer and historian, first coined the term “American Dream” in his work entitled The Epic of America, published in 1931, from which an excerpt is included at the top of this page. Taking the “all men are created equal” language of the U.S. Declaration of Independence as accepted fact, the American Dream can be deemed a natural subsequence of equality ideology.
The year 1931 marks the era of the national crisis known as the Great Depression--an outcome of the 1929 Stock Market crash--when great public works initiatives were created under the leadership of President Herbert Hoover to increase employment and economic activity. It is also the era of both the approval by President Hoover of the Star Spangled Banner as the national anthem and the completion of the construction of the Empire State Building in New York.
But previous to his 1930 “American Dream”, in a 1929 essay Adams talks about the role of education:
"There are obviously two educations. One should teach us how to make a living and the other how to live. Surely these should never be confused in the mind of any man who has the slightest inkling of what culture is. For most of us it is essential that we should make a living...In the complications of modern life and with our increased accumulation of knowledge, it doubtless helps greatly to compress some years of experience into far fewer years by studying for a particular trade or profession in an institution; but that fact should not blind us to another—namely, that in so doing we are learning a trade or a profession, but are not getting a liberal education as human beings."
The website of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) lists the rights and responsibilities of citizenship, including the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness and the responsibility to pay taxes. ‘The Dream’ expressed in Sociology teaching, and defined by Merriam Webster, is the fundamental character and spirit of American culture—the ‘ethos’ of Greek custom, habit, and character. The notion defines the temperament or disposition of a community, i.e., Greek ethos represents high valuing of the life of the individual. As an ideal, ‘freedom’ includes the opportunity for prosperity and success wherein "life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement" regardless of circumstances of birth. As an ideal, then, ‘freedom’ encompasses a major American tenet with which racial profiling is in direct conflict, a natural enemy.
34 | P a g e
Directional Findings: General Public Surveys GP and GP-A. Thus far, the research on racial profiling commissioned by the Right Reverend Thomas E. Breidenthal, Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio, the General Public Survey instruments, gives indication that class and race do impinge on individual rights to life, liberty and happiness of certain citizen groups. The following summarizes the statistical presentations of Tables 1.a and Exhibit 1.a (page 29) containing the evidentiary facts on whether, for GP and GP-A (Homeless) samples, “good citizenship is an effective guard against being racially profiled”.
Here are some salient factors that have emerged as a result of report analyses comparing Citizenship and Racial Profiling.
Citizenship Although there is wide diversity in the economic makeup of households [$0-$200,000+] represented in the General Public surveys, yet there exist little disagreement among the two groups concerning their enjoyment of the rights and responsiblities of citizenship, particularly as they pertain to paying taxes and the belief in equal entitlement to life and liberty. Their agreement rises to a 95.3% average concerning the responsibility for paying taxes and a 98.0% average on life and liberty entitlement [Table 1, page 27].
Racial Profiling – SYG cross tabulated by Household Income. But when it comes to racial profiling the margin of agreement falls to a 67.1% overall concurrence [Table 1.a, Page 29]. See also Tables 2 and 2.a (Pages 31-32) cross-tablulated examination showing a [green] 56.7% GP [n=146] upper income [$50,000-$124,999] agreement in contrast the [orange] 91.1% GP-A [n=77] lower income [$0-$49,000] agreement with the hypothesis that “Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups.” By Table 2.a analysis (page 32), the cross-tabulated GP-A lower income populations reach 100% [n=77] agreement with question #3: “I want good police protection in my community” — 0.7% above GP higher-income populations. The Disparate Treatment stories cited in Volume 2 of this report bolster the case made by the statistical Disparate Impact analyses of the first section of General Public survey reports.
Here is the full list of Freedoms, Rights and Responsibilities of American Citizenship displayed at the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) website:
RIGHTS RESPONSIBILITIES Freedom to worship as you wish. Support and defend the Constitution. Right to a prompt, fair trial by jury. Stay informed of the issues affecting your community. Right to vote in elections for public officials. Participate in the democratic process. Right to apply for federal employment requiring Respect and obey federal, state, and local laws. U.S. citizenship. Respect the rights, beliefs, and opinions of others. Right to run for elected office. Participate in your local community. Freedom to pursue “life, liberty, and the pursuit Pay income and other taxes honestly, and on time, to federal, of happiness.” state, and local authorities. Serve on a jury when called upon. Defend the country if the need should arise. uscis.gov/citizenship/learners/citizenship-rights-and-responsibilities SUMMARY “Are Stand Your Ground laws unjust for certain citizen groups?” Yes. (78.4% - Question #13) pg.29 “Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” No. (113 Story Narratives)
35 | P a g e
Part A. General Public Survey Comparison Racial Profiling Experience (RPEs) TABLE 3 RACIAL PROFILING GP Survey GP-A Survey (Homeless) Question #21 n=117 RPE Respondents n=72 RPE Respondents Response Response Response Response RACIAL PROFILING EXPERIENCES Percent Count Percent Count Suspicious character 24.8% 29 56.9% 41 Real estate location/purchasing/bank lending 17.1% 20 30.6% 22 Traffic stops or driving along in my car. 44.4% 52 48.6% 35 Job/school application 20.5% 24 36.1% 26 Mistaken identity 13.7% 16 36.1% 26 Employment 25.6% 30 51.4% 37 (Un)intelligence/competence perceptions 27.4% 32 16.7% 12 Classroom/education/campus 24.8% 29 18.1% 13 Prejudgments 51.3% 60 40.3% 29 Qualified/unqualified 21.4% 25 19.4% 14 Limitations/inclusion/exclusion 17.9% 21 12.5% 9 Medical care 3.4% 4 22.2% 16 Guns 0.9% 1 18.1% 13 Shopping 36.8% 43 2.8% 2 ‘Just because’ 21.4% 25 2.8% 2 Business Venture/Credit/Bonding 4.3% 5 2.8% 2 Other 4.3% 5 6.9% 5 Answered question 53.4% 117 70.5% 72 Skipped question 46.5% 102 29.4% 30 [219] [102] Source: Data - The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling; General Public Surveys GP and GP-A Homeless
36 | P a g e
Table 3 and Exhibit 3 answer the question: What is the average of ‘Yes’ comparative agreement between GP and GP-A survey respondents regarding their racial profiling experiences (RPEs).
In summary, the lower economics GP-A population, i.e., homeless persons, though sharing equally with all others in citizenship responsibility, experience the highest comparative rates of profiling impediment, good citizenship practices notwithstanding: Suspicious (56.9%); Real Estate (30.6%); Traffic stops (48.6%); Job/school application (36.1%); Employment (51.4%); Medical care (22.2%); Guns (18.1%). Of GP sample, 53.4% (n=117/219) responded to Table 3 questions. For GP-A, 70.5% (n=72/102). (See page 74 illustrating ‘SYG Unjust’ crosstab across five (5) survey instruments).
______NOTES The disparity between the graduation rates for black and other sports people. As a sports agent, Attorney Everett Glenn has negotiated contracts for some of the biggest names in sports, including NFL Hall of Famers Jerry Rice, Richard Dent and Reggie White as well as 11 first round draft picks. He has also had a front-row seat observing how Black athletes and the Black community are exploited, enriching others while leaving the community and, ultimately, the athletes themselves destitute. Sports are a $500 billion per year industry, but few of those dollars return to the African-American community. According to Sports Illustrated, by the time former NFL players have been retired for two years, nearly 80 percent of them “have gone bankrupt or are under financial stress because of joblessness or divorce.” Within five years of retirement, approximately 60 percent of former NBA players are broke. [A petition is being circulating urging the NCAA] to finance a study to determine what happens to the 99 percent of Black student-athletes in college basketball and football who do not go pro. Some who do turn pro are ill-equipped for life. “One of the saddest spectacles I have ever witnessed was former All-Pro defensive end Dexter Manley of the Washington Redskins testifying before Congress in 1989 that he could not read, write or spell. He was failed at every point in his life – from high school and university coaches who allowed him to play football without mastering basic academic skills to the NFL that allowed him to continue on his dead-in path to nowhere. …Black athletes represent 52.9 percent of Ohio State University’s basketball and football rosters and dominate among its star players, fueling a nearly $130 million athletic department budget on a campus where Black males represent only 2.7 percent of the student body. The disparity between the graduation rate for OSU’s Black football players, at 38 percent, and all student-athletes, at 71 percent, represent the highest disparity in the Big-10. Community Action Plan #3:Petition the NCAA and each of the six major conferences (ACC, Big East, Big-10, Big-12, Pacific-12 and SEC) to impose sanctions on their members, including the loss of scholarships and/or a ban on bowl appearances, if the graduation rate of Black student- athletes in basketball and football is not within 20 percent of the graduation rate of all student athletes in their respective institutions, commencing in 2016 when the NCAA’s new eligibility standards for prospective student-athletes go into effect. [There is a] long list of professional athletes who earn millions of dollars yet, in the case of Allen Iverson, for example, he had reached to point where he said he could not afford to buy a cheeseburger. Source: Everett L. Glenn, NNPA Special Contributor Unsportsmanlike Conduct: The exploitation of Black athletes – Part III 37 | P a g e
“In my effort to maintain my physical well-being, I resolved to take daily walks, depending on my newly acquired pedometer to keep track of my progress. My wife also purchased for me a special ‘safety vest’, one whose neon lighting would warn motorists of my presence as I walked during early dusk. One evening as I was walking briskly along, a police vehicle pulled up alongside me, the policeman demanding my identity. So when I produced my driver’s license, he smiled apologetically while acknowledging my name. “Oh, you are the Reverend Moss,” said he, handing back the ID. “Have a good evening,” and turned to get back into his car. But then I said to him, “Wait a minute, officer. Can you tell me the reason for this incident?” I live in a gated community and there was no one else on the streets. “Why did you stop me?” “Well sir,” he replied, “one of your neighbors called in to report a suspicious person in the neighborhood.” A suspicious person walking in my neighborhood where I have lived for the past sixteen (16) years--a suspicious person glowing in the darkness! -The Rev. Otis Moss, Jr., D. Min., M.Div., Member, The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling; Pastor Emeritus, Olivet Institutional Baptist Church, Cleveland, Ohio.
Popular myth of the “American Dream” alleges the ability by any hard-working member of society to improve one’s social, economic and educational circumstances through stubborn determination and use of “boot strap” elevation. Opportunities for advancement are freely open to all Americans. “Get a job.” “People don’t get ahead because they are just plain lazy.” “All you have to do is work hard.”
“Is accomplished professional achievement an effective guard against being racially profiled?”
“The time a scruffy old black man came to clean the blackboards in a physics class at Berkeley; the janitor I thought, until he turned around and started lecturing on the BCS theory of superconductivity.” From San Francisco - New York Times - Pick
The American Dream: Who’s entitled? Part II. Accomplished Professionals & Urban Hip-Hop Youth Disparate Impact Analyses
DEFINITION Disparate Impact statistical analyses give substantial evidence that a procedure has a disproportionate impact on groups of individuals, e.g., Stand Your Ground laws. Similarly situated is a legal term implying sameness in problems and circumstances wherein the basic facts and legal issues are the same, and separate lawsuits would be impractical or burdensome.
DEFINITION A professional is a person who is engaged in a certain activity, or occupation, for gain or compensation as means of livelihood; such as a permanent career, not as an amateur or pastime. The traditional professionals were doctors, engineers, lawyers, architects and commissioned military officers. Today, the term is applied to nurses, accountants, educators, scientists, technology experts, social workers, artists, librarians and many more. The term is also used in sports to differentiate amateur players from those who are paid—hence "professional footballer" and "professional golfer". Many companies include the word professional in their store name to imply the quality of their workmanship or service. In some cultures, the term is used as shorthand to describe a particular social stratum of well-educated, salaried workers who enjoy considerable work autonomy and are commonly engaged in creative and intellectually challenging work. Due to the personal and confidential nature of many professional services, and thus the necessity to place a great deal of trust in them, most professionals are subject to strict codes of conduct enshrining rigorous ethical and moral obligations. ‘Accomplished Professional’ term implies self-confidence and hard work. - Webster online www.definitions.net.
38 | P a g e
Conventional observation does not readily predict that professionally accomplished persons experience profiling similar to the general populations of persons resembling Trayvon ‘hoodie’ physical description, black males especially. The information in the exhibits and tables below compares/contrasts the similarity and the difference between the two samples. These comparative data tell the story of racial profiling experienced by certain groups of Americans; Accomplished Professionals (AP) and the Youth of Elementz Center:
Sigma Pi Phi Fraternity, Boulé of African-American Professionals. At the dawn of the twentieth century black men of distinction had long functioned in various leadership posts, especially in the churches and benevolent association movement. Some, notably Frederick Douglass among them, had even served in high government posts. But by and large they lived lives separate from those of the black masses and the white professionals. In 1904 a small group in Philadelphia set out to create an organization that would provide a vehicle for men of standing and like tastes to come together to know the best of one another. …“Saving Our Youth: One on One, One by One." It was Archon Perkins's position that every Archon has a responsibility to roll up his sleeves and make a difference in our communities, especially for the youth. - http://www.sigmapiphi.org
Accomplished Professionals Survey measures the questions: “Is accomplished professional [boot strap] achievement an effective guard against being racially profiled?” “Is Stand Your Ground Unjust for certain citizen groups?” The survey was largely distributed electronically via emailing of the link to the survey, forwarded by individuals on to other individuals. Additionally, Dr. Charles O. Dillard, a Physician of Internal Medicine in Cincinnati, urged participation in the study via paper-handout of the survey at several meetings of the Sigma Pi Phi Fraternity, Boulé of African-American Professionals--the first Greek- letter fraternity to be founded by African American men. “Significantly, unlike the other African American Greek-letter organizations, its members already have received college and professional degrees at the time of their induction,” says Boulé website.
The National Medical Association. “Conceived in no spirit of racial exclusiveness, fostering no ethnic antagonism, but born of the exigencies of the American environment, the National Medical Association has for its object the banding together for mutual cooperation and helpfulness, the men and women of African descent who are legally and honorably engaged in the practice of the cognate professions of medicine, surgery, pharmacy and dentistry.”-C.V. Roman, MD. NMA Founding Member and First Editor of the JNMA 1908
Moreover, at the December 2012 national conference of the National Medical Association (NMA), a pilot study of the Accomplished Professionals (AP) survey was conducted by eminent scholar Dr. William B. Lawson, MD, Professor and Chair, Health Sciences, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Howard University in Washington DC. The pilot served as model for this current analysis of the data. In total, the responses to the survey originate from thirty (30) states, the Virgin Island, and Canada. The paper data were entered into the electronic collector via the Manual Data Entry mechanism. The categories of professions represented in AP Survey group include religion, medicine, law, education, business, human resources, administration and management, social work, sales, consultant, media relations, architecture, commercial banking, engineering, nursing, accounting, art, journalism. Black or African-American racial classification comprises 72% of the Professionals respondents. A total of 141 AP surveys were completed.
The Office of Ethnic Programs and Services (EPS – University of Cincinnati (EPS) “EPS encourages academic excellence, positive social interaction, cultural enrichment, student leadership development and community service. We value each and every contact with members of the university community and see every interaction as an opportunity to encourage positive relationships.” - http://www.uc.edu/eps.html 39 | P a g e
The marketing of the Urban Youth Survey responds to suggestions by two associate researchers: Professor Emeritus Prince Brown of Northern Kentucky University; and Professor Eric Abercrumbie, University of Cincinnati Africana Department, black males themselves. Bishop Breidenthal reported that at the University of Cincinnati (UC) meeting sponsored by the office of Ethnic Programs and Services, for whom Dr. Abercrumbie serves as director, more than seventy (70) young men of the university “showed up, eager to share their stories.” (This study also involves an electronic 3-campus survey that was managed by the OSU Kirwan Institute; including the UC campus).
Elementz Hip Hop Youth Arts Center, Cincinnati was built after the riots during the process of rebuilding the city. "The founders surveyed young people that came from the city to find out what it is that the majority of them were interested in and were speaking of hip-hop, music, dancing—the things that we provide in the center," said Brandon Abdullah Powell, BFA, director [and a Research Associate for this research project]. More than 40 people come to the center daily. Just six years after the program began, membership rose to 300 inner city youth. The goal is to provide teenagers with a safe haven and encourage them to go to college.” –Elementz website.
Bishop Breidenthal also attended storytelling sessions held at Elementz Center that included black male professionals from a myriad of occupations—law, law enforcement, medicine, education, government and business—who in small roundtable groups of Elementz young men, each group led by an elder professional, all reciting similar sounding tales of past and present profiling experiences, shared their common tales—forging personalized effects unexpected by this research effort: The young men expressed high astonishment that the elder men, persons of community distinction and high professional achievement, still experience everyday possibility of police ‘stop and search’, the elders’ enduring ‘do you belong here?’ suspicion in the workplaces of their professions, and elsewhere. Black or African-American racial classification comprises 83.3% of Urban Youth respondents. A total of 29 Youth surveys were completed. Observable reality generalizes the results to larger populations of youth.
“It is now an accepted, popular culture convention that it is possible to identify criminally inclined tendencies in young black males by observing how they behave and dress in public. In fact, these presumptions have led to the creation of a massive crime control industry that poses a present and constant danger to African American males of all ages and economics in the encounters with the American justice system.” -Unknown
Accomplished Professionals and Urban Hip-Hop Youth AP Survey = 141 total respondents Youth Survey = 29 total respondents “Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” EXHIBIT 1 SUMMARY N=170 total respondents
40 | P a g e
TABLE 1 “Is accomplished professional achievement an effective guard against being racially profiled? DEMOGRAPHICS – ACCOMPLISHED PROFESSIONALS; URBAN YOUTH AP Survey n= 141 *YOUTH Survey n=29 Survey Questions ______1. What is your gender? 133/141 responses Q. #15* Female 51.1%% 16.7% [n=4/29 responses] Male 48.9% 20.8% [n=5/29 responses] ------2. What is your profession? 122 Responses 18+ Categories ------3. Which category includes your age? 133/141 responses Q. #13* [24/29 responses] Under 30 3.8% 82.75% 31-40 8.3% 41-50 12.0% 51-60 33.8% 61-70 24.1% Over 70 18.0% ------4. Which category best describes your classification (please check only one box)? n=137/141 responses Q. #15*n=24/29 responses White/Caucasian 19.0% 4.2% Black/African American 72.3% 83.3% American Indian/Alaskan Native 0.7% 4.2% Asian 4.4% 0.0% Hispanic - 0.0% Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Island 0.0% 0.0% From multiple races 3.6% 12.5% ______5. What state or U.S. territory do you live? n = 30 states/terr. Ohio n=28/29 responses ______6. What is your approximate household income? Q. #17* $0-24,999 8.5% 61.9% $25,000-49,000 13.8% 19.0% $50,000-74,000 16.9% 14.3% $75,000-99,999 20.8% $100,000-124,999 13.1% 4.2% $125,000-149,999 4.6% $150,000-174,999 11.5% $175,000-199,999 3.8% $200,000+ 6.9% ______
Source: Demographic Data - The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling Table 1 answers the question: What is the demographic makeup of the respondents to Accomplished Professionals survey—by race, education, household income, age, gender and state? In summary, the demographics percentages figures shown in Table 1, above, derive from the number of respondents answering ‘Yes’ to the questions #7-17 of the surveys AP and Youth (pg. 42) at Table 1.a. The states and territories of respondents’ residences include IN, TN, OR. NC, NM, VT, COL, CA, FLA, KY, MD, VA, AL, LA, AK, TX, MS, MI, NY, VA, PA, DC, MI, AZ, IL, GA, KY, MD, OH, Virgin Island, Canada. Also, note the absence at question #4 of Hispanic responses, even though the Principal Researcher purchased from Cincilingua translator service two (2) instances of translations of the survey into Spanish language; also purchasing the posting of a Spanish version on the website of the National Episcopal Church, and meeting with a local organization serving the Hispanic community.
41 | P a g e
‘YES’ RESPONSES: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS PROFESSIONALS vs. URBAN YOUTH NON-CROSSTAB AP Survey = 141 total respondents [Green] Urban Youth [Elementz] = 29 respondents [Purple] “Is accomplished professional achievement an effective guard against being racially profiled?” TABLE 1.a CITIZENSHIP AP SURVEY *URBAN YOUTH SURVEY
Survey Question # % Yes __ _ % Yes__ Agreement average 98.18% 7. I enjoy leisure time with my family. 98.5% - AP+Youth ______8. I own a valid credit card. 88.3% - ______9. I want good police protection 100% Q.#4* 96.4% (98.2% avg.) ------10. I have plans for the future. 98.5% Q.#5* 100% (99.25% avg.) ------11. I live a good life. 97.7% Q.#6* 96.6% (97.1% avg.) ------12. I think ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws are unjust for 86.4% certain citizen groups. [108/17/16] 141 - [question not asked] EXHIBIT 1.a CITIZENSHIP ALIKENESS “Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?”
RACIAL PROFILING EXPERIENCES (RPEs) % Yes __ _ % Yes__ Agreement average 13. I have experienced ‘eyesight judgment’ and 76.6% 75.47% [‘do you belong here?’] demand. [98/30/13]141 Q.#9* 72.4% (74.5% avg.) AP+Youth ------14. I have experienced police stops and/or threat of gun use. 51.6% ------15. I caution against night walks wearing a hoodie. 67.2% Q.#10* 46.4% (56.8% avg.) ------16. I teach my family [follow] special ‘safety rules’. 84.6% Q.#12* 85.2% (84.9% avg.) ------17. I know that I am [and my (grand) children are] at risk. 82.4% Q.#11* 89.3% (85.8% avg.) ------Safety+Risk = 85.35% Source: The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling RISK #16-17 AP [83.5%] Youth [87.25%; #12-11] AP+Youth
Additionally, the *YOUTH Survey instrument makes the following unique propositions: *1. I am a citizen of the United States. 100% YES *2. I have college or further education in my life plans. 93.1% YES *3. I believe anyone can achieve whatever they want to in America. 89.7% YES *7. I believe everyone is entitled to life and liberty. 100% YES *8. I have experienced being unjustly profiled. 62.1% YES Table 1.a shows a near perfect [98.18% average] ‘Citizenship’ agreement (questions 9, 10 and 11). Moreover, at Table 1.a, Professionals and Youth share 75.47% agreement that racial profiling is an integral part of daily life experience. Notice especially question #9: “I want good police protection.”(98.2% avg. agreement) But it is at #16-17 that the answer lies: “Safety rules” + “At risk” [85.35%] together express the enormity of their peril [‘Safety rules” + “At risk” separately: 83.5% average for Accomplished Professionals; 87.25% for Urban Youth]. 42 | P a g e
SUMMARY “Is high professional achievement a guard against being racially profiled?” No. (83.5% - Questions #16-17). Accomplished Professionals & Urban Youth Racial Profiling Experiences (RPEs) –Non-Crosstab “Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” Is high professional achievement an effective guard against being racially profiled?” TABLE 2 RACIAL PROFILING AP Survey YOUTH Survey Questions #18 n= 86 RPE respondents n= 21 respondents COMPARATIVE Response Response Response Response RACIAL PROFILING EXPERIENCES (RPEs) Percent Count Percent Count Suspicious character 34.9% 30 42.9% 9 Real estate location/purchasing/bank lending 25.6% 22 Traffic stops or driving along in my car. 47.7% 41 38.1% 8 Job/school application 20.9% 18 28.6% 6 Mistaken identity 26.7% 23 33.3% 7 Employment 29.1% 25 23.8% 5 (Un)intelligence/competence perceptions 27.9% 24 14.3% 3 Classroom/education/campus 29.1% 25 33.3% 7 Prejudgments/ Do you belong here? 43.0% 37 47.6% 10 Qualified/unqualified 17.4% 15 Limitations/inclusion/exclusion 22.1% 19 Medical care 12.8% 11 9.5% 2 Guns 4.7% 4 9.5% 2 Shopping 48.8% 42 23.8% 5 ‘Just because’ 18.6% 16 66.7% 14 Business Venture/Credit/Bonding 14.0% 12 *Other /Stand on the curb 9 14.3% 3 Answered question 86 373 RPEs 21 81 RPEs Skipped question 55 8 [141] [29] Source: Data - The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling
EXHIBIT 2 COMPARISONS – Surveys AP/Hip-Hop Youth Racial Profiling Experiences (RPEs) by Type
43 | P a g e
For Accomplished Professionals, the responses [not shown] to *Other, Question #18, included the following: Reverse profiling; Restaurant long waits for service; Police brutality; Air travel; Here at Christ Church Cathedral. White/Caucasian makes up 19.0% of Accomplished Professionals; and 4.2% Hip-Hop Youth group. Black/African American 72.3% and 83.3%, respectively. Table 2 and Exhibit 2, pg. 43, answer the question: What is the average of ‘Yes’ comparative agreement between AP and URBAN YOUTH survey respondents regarding their racial profiling experiences (RPEs). In summary, less than 9 percentage points of separation exist between most categories of experiences of the Accomplished elders and the Youth, although nearly forty percent (39.9%) of the Accomplished Professionals earn $100,000-$200,000+ in salary [Question #6; Table 1, pg. 41]. The ‘just because’ category of Table 2 expresses a serious perception (66.7%) of non-reasoning harassment experienced by Urban Youth of Elementz Hip-Hop Center enrollment, while the ‘classroom’ experiences may infer a generational longevity of profiling. Meanwhile, the language and semantics of the disparate treatment narratives (Volume 2 of this research report) of the two groups are strikingly similar. When it comes to societal treatment, the minority racial persons of both Accomplished Professional and Youth survey examination are similarly situated. (See page 74 for RPEs / ‘SYG Unjust’ comparisons).
Directional Findings: Accomplished Professionals and Youth Surveys. The following summarizes the statistical presentations of Tables 1.a and Exhibits 1.a-2 containing the evidentiary facts on whether, for Accomplished Professionals, “Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups;” whether “good citizenship is an effective guard against being racially profiled” and whether “high professional achievement is a guard against being racially profiled.” Here are some salient factors that have emerged as a result of report analyses comparing Citizenship and Racial Profiling. Citizenship As in the GP surveys, among the Accomplished Professionals and the Youth of these comparative analyses, there is wide diversity in the economic makeup of households [$0- $200,000+]. Yet, here again there exist virtually no disagreement—rather, a 98.18% strong agreement between the two groups—concerning the belief in good police protection (98.2% avg.), future life planning (99.25% avg.), and the view that they are living currently “a good life” (97.1 avg.). [Table 1.a, page 42].
Racial Profiling - Is accomplished professional achievement a guard against profiling? Remarkably when it comes to racial profiling there appears a stunning 75.47 percent commonality of experience existing between the two groups—elders and youth. [Table 1.a, Pg. 42]. At questions #16-17, this commonality rises between the two groups to 84.9% regarding special ‘safety rules’ and 85.8% regarding ‘at risk perception’, which taken together, at 85.35% common agreement, settles the argument applied to this sample of persons on whether professional achievement is a guard against being racially profiled: No. It is not. [Table 1.a, Page 42] At Table 1.a analysis (page 42), the Youth lower income populations’ 96.4% agreement join Accomplished Professionals 100% agreement with item #9 declaration: “I want good police protection in my community.” At page 41, there is 77.8% [72.3%; 83.3%] Black/African American combined demographic representation in the two (2) surveys. The Disparate Treatment stories cited in Volume 2 of this report bolster the case made by the Disparate Impact analyses of the statistics appearing in Accomplished Professional and Youth survey reports.
SUMMARY “Are Stand Your Ground laws unjust for certain citizen groups?” Yes. (86.4% - AP Question #12) “Is high professional achievement a guard against being racially profiled?” No. (83.5% - AP Questions #16-17) “Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” No. (76 Story Narratives)
44 | P a g e
“I have not seen the analysis you referenced in your email but wanted to share a very recent experience in Toronto that said to me the perception of blacks has been deeply internalized by all other cultures; and I was very saddened. My experience was going in to a store run by Muslims and was admiring the items when I realized that the man whom I greeted at the counter was now following me around the store. There was a sign that advertised batteries for watches so I asked for a battery for my watch. Without looking at the watch or his inventory, he promptly informed me that he did not have a battery for my watch. I walked out awed by the fact that the racism taught by the majority culture against blacks has been well learned by people from all over the world, even dark skinned people. The lesson is that black people are not to be trusted, they are dishonest and everything that is bad. And the message seems to be that those traits are inherent because it does not matter who or what you are. You are black, therefore you are “less than.” –The Rev. Canon Angela S. Ifill, Missioner, Black Ministries. The Episcopal Church.
Seeking to transform unjust structures of society. Part III. Congregations Surveys - Disparate Impact Analyses
DEFINITION Disparate Impact statistical analyses give substantial evidence that a procedure, e.g., Stand Your Ground laws, has a disproportionate impact on groups of individuals. Similarly situated is a legal term implying sameness in problems and circumstances wherein the basic facts and legal issues are the same, and separate lawsuits would be impractical or burdensome.
DEFINITION A congregant is one who is a member of a group of people gathered for religious worship. -The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language.
The Episcopal Church of the USA (TEC) “We all struggle with being fully present to the moment, and we bring different attitudes and reactions to each encounter. Jesus tells us to travel light and be radically open to encountering God, who is present and active all around us, if we will only notice. That’s part of the tragedy of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. The Bishop of Central Florida saw a piece of it when he tweeted, “I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman offered Trayvon Martin a ride home to get him out of the rain that night…”That encounter offered an opportunity…, but whatever happened in the midst of it – racial prejudice or the inability to see anything except threat in the other – turned a God-given opportunity into death and destruction. - Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori. St. James - Roanoke, VA Sunday, July 21, 2013
The Episcopal Church welcomes all who worship Jesus Christ, in 109 dioceses and 3 regional areas in 17 nations, and having, in 2010, a baptized membership of 1,951,907 in the U.S., making it the nation's 14th largest denomination. The Episcopal Church is a member province of the worldwide Anglican Communion. The mission of the church, as stated in the Book of Common Prayer’s catechism (p. 855), is "to restore all people to unity with God and each other in Christ." The 2012 General Convention established the Anglican Communion Five Marks of Mission as a mission priority framework for the 2013-2015 triennium: · To proclaim the Good News of the Kingdom · To teach, baptize and nurture new believers · To respond to human need by loving service · To seek to transform unjust structures of society · To strive to safeguard the integrity of creation and sustain and renew the life of the earth.
45 | P a g e
TEC and Public Policy - The Episcopal Church’s Office of Government Relations Being an advocate does not always involve drastic measures. Every day, we have the chance to stand up and speak when we see the need. Advocates have the opportunity to speak to their elected representatives, friends, family, and congregations about important issues. The Episcopal Church’s Office of Government Relations cannot advocate for important issues alone. It needs individuals and congregations to write to their representatives, ask for support on social justice issues, and make their voices heard. Working together, we can send a strong message to Congress. Become a member of the Episcopal Public Policy Network today and join committed Episcopalians working for a better world. How many times have you read an article in the paper or watched a news story and wished there was something you could do? With the Episcopal Public Policy Network, you can. Senators and Representatives care about what you, their constituent, think about a particular issue. Whether you feel passionately about environmental protection, HIV/AIDS funding, or education, you can make your voice heard on Capitol Hill. Advocacy can happen at many different levels. The Episcopal Public Policy Network is specifically focused (by General Convention) on federal advocacy. We do have a number of state affiliates that work on state level legislation. -http://www.episcopalchurch.org/page/public-policy
The Diocese of Southern Ohio The Rt. Reverend Thomas E. Breidenthal serves as the current bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio, and it is under his sponsorship that this study on racial profiling is conducted. 25,000 people attend 75 Episcopal congregations in the 40 southern counties of Ohio, including Columbus, Cincinnati, Dayton, Marietta and Portsmouth. The diocese was officially founded in 1875, when the state was divided into two jurisdictions of the Episcopal Church. “…When riots erupted in Cincinnati after the assassination of Martin Luther King, Bishop Blanchard…took an office in Cincinnati City Hall and led the city’s effort to improve race relations and economic justice. “In 1970, the bishop and diocesan convention launched the Institutional Racism Project, a 20-year effort involving a rigorous audit of the practices of the Church. For two decades, this work engaged Episcopalians at the parish and regional level in analyzing and seeking to redress the economic, political and spiritual dimensions of racism in their own congregations and communities. The project documented the almost total segregation of the diocese’s parishes and clergy deployment, and the miniscule representation of black Episcopalians on diocesan staff, leadership bodies and commissions. In relations with the worldwide Anglican Communion, Blanchard sought to replace the paternalism of 19th century missionary work with a new model of companion dioceses, grounded in the desire to learn from each other’s experience…Continu[ing] the work of fighting against racism and discrimination, Bishop Black and his fierce Archdeacon Morry Hollenbaugh delighted the Appalachian region by their crusade for an end to second-hand status for Appalachian people and culture in this state. “The bishops appointed several black clergy to senior staff positions in the diocese, starting with Archdeacon Lorentho Wooden. Far from being pigeonholed on anti-racism work, the black clergy directed major ongoing diocesan functions like deployment. By 1978, nearly a third of the members of diocesan committees were black. “In 1988, the diocese elected its ninth bishop from a slate of four nominees – two white and two black. Herbert Thompson, a black priest from the Diocese of Long Island, was elected on the first ballot. Excerpts - Compiled in 2006 by Ariel Miller, and edited by Richelle Thompson, director of communications.
Digital Marketing and Advertising Sales, under the direction of The Rev. Jake Dell in the Office of Communications at the Episcopal Church Center, New York, NY was the main electronic infrastructure 46 | P a g e for the national marketing of the Congregations survey. Moreover, congregations engaging in localized marketing of the survey, irrespective of access format, included the Diocese of Southern Ohio; Shiloh Baptist Church, DC; the Diocese of North Carolina, the Diocese of Arizona; the Diocese of Ohio; the Zion Baptist Church, Cincinnati; the Samuel Dewitt Conference of Churches; the Ohio Council of Churches; the Union of Black Episcopalians, the New Jerusalem Baptist Church, Cincinnati. 1,518 online surveys were collected. Racially, 74.3% White/Caucasian respondents (1109/1493). We owe a debt of gratitude to The Rev. Jake Dell and his associates for their good help and productive suggestions.
The New Jerusalem Baptist Church – Cincinnati New Jerusalem was founded in December, 1926. The membership has grown from approximately 65 in 1970, has moved once and expanded three times during the years from 1970 until present. New Jerusalem's membership has a diversified base of young families, teens, middle-aged, youth and older members. New Jerusalem has an active prison ministry, nursing home ministry and active professional mission groups who are socially, politically and civically involved. There is also an active bus ministry. S.I.M.B.A. and MALAIKA provide mentors who give their time to boys and girls through rites of passage programs. These are community resource groups to meet the needs of African-American children and their families. –New Jerusalem website
The Reverend Damon Lynch, Jr, pastor of historically black New Jerusalem Baptist Church (NJBC) in Cincinnati since 1970, has joined in the collaboration to achieve the social justice mission of the Task Force on Racial Profiling commissioned by the Rt. Reverend Thomas E. Breidenthal, Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio. The goal of the commission is to provoke Congressional actions to nullify “Stand Your Ground” states’ law promulgated to legalize deadly-force against targeted groups of Americans because of ‘suspicious’ mindset labels attached to skin color, race, gender or religion. Pastor Lynch appointed NJBC congregant Cynthia Pinchback Heinz, PhD to aid the mission work of the commission by serving as coordinator of the congregation’s participation in the bishop’s survey that ultimately collect disparate impact statistical information probative to the commission’s proposition that Stand Your Ground Laws are unjust and impose a disparate impact on certain groups of Americans. New Jerusalem’s participation adds a specialized insight to racial profiling experience while simultaneously affirming good citizenship, the desire for good community policing, and equality of treatment. The responses provide the content for the Congregations-A analysis of survey results. 159 paper surveys were collected. Racially, 97.5% Black /African American respondents (153/157).
Congregations Surveys C Survey = 1,518 respondents C-A Survey (Historic Afr-American) =159 respondents SUMMARY N= 1,677 total respondents
47 | P a g e
TABLE 1 CITIZENSHIP COMPARISON OF ‘YES’ RESPONSES – CONGREGATIONS SURVEYS Congregations Survey-C = 1,518 total respondents Congregations-A Survey = 159 total respondents
“Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” CONGREGATION C CONGREGATION – C-A Survey Question # % Yes __ _ % Yes__ Agreement average 98.55% C+C--A
1. I am a citizen of the United States. 97.8% 99.4% (98.6% avg.) ______2. I pay my taxes. 98.9% 98.1% (98.5% avg.) ______3. I want good police protection in my community. 99.2% 99.4% (99.3% avg.) ------4. I have plans for the future. 97.2% 98.1% (97.65% avg.) ------5. I live a good life. 98.9% 98.7% (98.8% avg.) ------6. I believe everyone is entitled to life and liberty. 98.9% 98.1% (98.5% avg.) ------
Source: Demographic Data - The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling; Congregations Surveys Table I and Exhibit 1 answer the question: What is the average of ‘Yes’ agreement between C and C-A survey respondents regarding the positive aspects of American citizenship? Respondents share an overall [non-crosstab] average of 98.55% ‘Yes’ agreement regarding: Citizenship (98.6%); Taxes (98.5%); Good police protection (99.3%); Future (97.65%); Good life 98.8%); Entitlement (98.5%). In citizenship standing, respondents are ‘similarly situated’, implying sameness in problems and circumstances wherein the basic facts and legal issues are the same. EXHIBIT 1 CITIZENSHIP
In summary, there is equality in agreement between C and C-A congregants relating to ‘Citizenship’ (98.55%). EXHIBIT 1.a CITIZENSHIP
48 | P a g e
TABLE 1.a RACIAL PROFILING COMPARISON OF ‘YES’ RESPONSES – CONGREGATIONS SURVEYS C Survey = 1,518 total respondents C-A Survey = 159 total respondents TOTAL 1,677
“Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” CONGREGATION-C Survey CONGREGATION-A Survey
Survey Questions # % Yes __ _ % Yes__ Average
[67.22%] C+C--A
7. I have experienced being unjustly profiled. 37.0% 57.5% (47.25% avg.) ------8. If you answered yes to question number 7, please tell us when this happened. Within the past 1-3 years 38.7% 35.4% Within the past 3-5 years 14.4% 15.9% Within the past 5-10 years 14.9% 23.2% More than 10 years ago 32.0% 25.6% ------9. I have (or know someone who has) experienced police ‘suspicion’ stops and/or threat. 62.2% 73.2% (67.7% avg.) ------10. I caution against night walks wearing a hoodie. 48.0% 76.4% (62.2% avg.) ------11. I know that I and my family are at risk. 33.8% 80.0% (56.9% avg.) ______12. I live my life mindful of special “safety” rules. 69.2% 98.6% (83.9% avg.) ______13. Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain 76.5% 94.3% (85.4% avg.) citizen groups. ** [1082] **[132] Source: Bishop’s Task Force Data
EXHIBIT 1.1.a Questions #7 – 13: Racial Profiling Experiences (RPEs)
Table 1.a and Exhibit 1.1.a answer the question: To what degree does good citizenship and good stewardship, serve as effective hedges against being racially profiled? Were all the enjoyments of citizenships described in Table 1 Page 48, the ‘life and liberty’ freedoms regularly accessible to every
49 | P a g e citizen, would the 67.22% racial profiling disparity average showing at the top of page 49 have occurred- -the disparity in universal, national and municipal treatment among citizens appearing as they do in Table 1.a [p.49] averages? See the Unjust profiling experience (47.25% average); Police ‘suspicion stops’ experience (67.7% average); Hoodie experience (62.2% avg.); At-risk perception (56.9% avg.); ‘Safety rules’ life requirement (83.9% avg.). At Question #13, ‘Stand Your Ground law unjust’ generated a close level of ‘YES’ agreement (85.4% average) despite the 20.5% gap in personal experience (showing at Table 1.b, below; and Question #7, Table 1.a, Page 49). Pertaining to ‘unjust profiling experience’, lack of personalized profiling experience does not necessarily blind the eyes of the one citizen group to the havoc that racial profiling heaps upon other fellow citizens—illustrated by the smaller gap [11.0%] shown ‘Knowledge of other’s plight’ at [Table 1.b below and Q.#13 SYG unjust’ at Table 1.a, Page 49].
TABLE 1.b RACIAL PROFILING - COMPARISON OF ‘YES’ RESPONSES – CONGREGATIONS SURVEYS “Is good citizenship an effective guard against being racially profiled?” NO. C Survey = 1,518 total respondents C-A Survey = 159 total respondents Survey Questions #7-12 Racial Profiling C- C-A %Gap Experience/Knowledge Personal experience 37.0% 57.5% 20.5% Knowledge of other’s 62.2% 73.2% 11.0% plight ______Hoodie wear 48.0% 76.4% 28.4%____ *At-risk reality 33.8% 80.0% 46.2% ____*Safety management rules 69.2% 98.6% 29.4%____ *At-Risk + Safety (avg.) (51.5%) (89.3%) Source: Bishop’s Task Force Data
Volume 2 narratives appended to this Volume 1 statistical analysis affirm awareness among citizens not suffering racial profiling abuse concerning the realities and plight of other fellow citizens via statements like: “A friend of mine…African-American woman, was harassed by a bus driver.” “My black women friends...and the longstanding mistreatment of blacks by police...fear of calling 911.” “I've have seen African Americans treated differently and talked about once they have left.” “I have…witnessed salespeople in stores keeping an eye on Black customers.” Combining (Q. #11) ‘At-risk’(80.0%) with (Q. #12) ‘Safety Rules’ (98.6%) generates 89.3% C-A ‘historically black’ profiling concern (Tale 1.b, above). Is racial profiling real? “Yes”. GAPS IN REALITY - RACIAL PROFILING realities of Questions #7-12. EXHIBIT 1.b
Congregations-C Survey=1,518 respondents; Congregations-A Survey = 159 respondents. 50 | P a g e
Responses originated from 50 states: MS, FL, MD, TX, NM, PA, GA, NE, OH, NC, MI, AL, NY, CT, IN, TN, NJ, CO ID, IO, WA, AZ, OR, CA, OK, ME, VA, VT, KY, MO, NC, AL, HI, WI, LA, SC, NH, MA, IL, WV, WY, MD, MT, NV, RI, AR, DE, SD, SD, PR, VI; Canada; Rep. Korea (military); Germany (military); Rosebud Sioux reservation.
SUMMARY: Q. #13. ‘YES’. “Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups.” C-Survey C-A Survey Overall ‘YES’ % [Question #13; Page 49] 76.5% 94.3% (85.4% avg.) [1,082/333/103] [132/8/19] [‘yes’/ ‘no’ /skipped] Of the number of C-congregants responding to Q.13, 1,415 answered the question. [76.5%’Yes’ n=1,082/1415]; [C-A 94.3%; n=132/140] [76.5% of the total C- respondents answered ‘Yes’ to Q. #13] [94.3% of the total C-A respondents answered ‘Yes’ to Q. #13] ______NOTES Anglican Communion Five Marks of Mission 2013-2015 Triennium “To seek to transform unjust structures of society.”
Effects: Mandatory Sentencing “If Smith gets time off for good behavior, his 232-year sentence will be reduced to 197 years. A federal jury convicted him of 10 robberies…Because Smith had been charged under a "mandatory minimum" law, the judge could not weigh the trial testimony or consider that Smith had no previous convictions. Automatic penalties written by Congress kicked in. So Smith was sentenced to 2 centuries, 2 decades, and 2 years. Nathan Gorenstein, Inquirer Staff Writer. Posted: February 07, 2012 "Mandatory minimum" laws can mean grossly disparate sentences for gun crimes.
Effects: Stop and Frisk “Nationwide, more than a million people--mostly black and Hispanic men--are stopped, questioned and frisked annually by police. Nearly all are innocent of any crime, according to figures from departments around the country. Source: New York Civil Liberties Union
Effects: Ethnonationalist Denkstil Prejudgments “Listening to black friends about their own experiences, what I found most shocking…was even the most successful, wealthy and highly educated… One of my friends, a successful surgeon of Indian descent (with very dark skin) once decided to buy himself a high end European sports car. He could afford it. He was an accomplished professional earning hundreds of thousands of dollars per year working for a prestigious hospital. Yet as soon as he stepped into the exotic car dealer's showroom he was treated with contempt by a…salesman who did not even stop eating a sandwich to greet his customer... My friend walked out… But he tells me that this experience rattled him - he thought that he had "made it" - that he was a successful, respected member of society.” From Illinois - New York Times - Pick
Marian Wright Edelman. Funneling Children into the Adult Criminal Justice System Children are not little adults. Adolescents are not the same as adults. We’ve known this for years. The research showing that their brains are still developing is clear. Although young people act on impulse, they have the ability to positively change and have a productive future. That’s why it’s outrageous that in the 21st century we still ignore the consequences of automatically funneling children into the adult criminal justice system against so much research on youth development and juvenile justice best practices. It’s bad for public safety and it’s bad for the youths and their families. Nearly 40 years later, the good news is that there are only two states that automatically treat all 16- and 17-year- olds like adult criminals...New York, is one of them. North Carolina is the other. It’s time for change. Source: atlantadailyworld.com/2014/01/13/funneling-children-into-the-adult-criminal-justice-system/ 51 | P a g e
TABLE 2 ‘SYG UNJUST’CROSS-TABULATED: PERCENT OF ‘Yes’ RESPONSES COMPARISON OF ‘YES’ RESPONSES – CONGREGATIONS SURVEYS Hypothesis: “Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups.” CITIZENSHIP AND RACIAL PROFILING – CROSSTAB BY SYG Survey Questions #1-13 C Survey C-A Survey SYG - ‘YES’=1,214 n=1,082 cross tabulations n=132 cross tabulations Survey Questions Response Response Response Response %’YES’ Total % YES Total 1. I am a citizen of the United States. 97.6% 1052/1078/4 99.2% 130/131/1 2. I pay my taxes. 99.1% 1063/1073/9 99.2% 130/131/1 3. I want good police protection in my Avg. community. 99.2% 1067/1076/6 99.2% 129/130/2 99.2% 4. I have plans for the future. 97.7% 1042/1066/16 98.5% 128/130/2 5. I live a good life. 99.1% 1065/1075/7 98.5% 129/131/1 6. I believe everyone is entitled to life and liberty. 99.5% 1072/1077/5 97.7% 126/129/3 7. I have experienced being unjustly Gap profiled. 38.5% 413/1074/8 62.1% 77/124/8 23.6% 8. If you answered yes, please tell us when this happened. 9. I have or know someone who has experienced police ‘suspicion’ stops or 69.6% 741/1065/17 77.0% 94/122/10 Avg. threat. 73.3% 10. I caution against night walks wearing a hoodie. 49.6% 526/1060/22 77.6% 97/125/7 11. I know that I and my family are at risk. 33.0% 350/1060/22 80.3% 102/127/5 Gap 47.3% 12. I live my life mindful of special ‘safety’ rules. 68.6% 723/1054/28 99.2% 124/125/7 13. Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups. **[Cross-Tab item] **100% **1082 **100% **132 Source: Demographic Data - The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling; Congregations Surveys: CROSSTAB by ‘SYG Unjust’
Again, from SYG cross-tab perspective, C-A African-American congregants [#11; 80.3%; 102/127] historically knowing themselves and their families to be at-risk of profiling abuse resolve, therefore, to live life “mindful of special safety rules” [Q #12; cross-tab 99.2% 124/125], especially during encounters with the police. Of the citizens of Table 2, Q #9; C and C-A groups believing that “SYG is unjust law,” 73.3% live life at shared awareness of ‘suspicion stops and/or threat’ possibility of racial profiling; and a 47.3% shared gap in fear of “family ‘at-risk’ to profiling danger” [Question #11]. The 80.3% figure underscores “The Talk”, i.e., the need to teach C-A youngsters self-safety behaviors in face of ‘stop and search’. Table 2 answers the CROSS-TAB question: “Of the total number of congregant persons agreeing that SYG is unjust (C- n=1,082; C-A n=132), what number and percentage also share Q. #3, “I want good police protection” agreement? [99.2%]: Gaps in common experience notwithstanding.
Note: At Table 2, above, Question #1; 1052/1078/4 can be interpreted as follows: “Of the CROSSTAB 1,082 persons believing SYG to be unjust, 1,052 (97.6%) persons, out of 1,078 total responding, answered “YES’ to Question #1 “I am a citizen of the United States.” Four (4) persons skipped question #1. See also page 74 RPEs /’SYG Unjust’ comparisons across five (5) survey instruments.
52 | P a g e
TABLE 2.a ‘SYG UNJUST’CROSS-TABULATED: PERCENT OF ‘Yes’ RESPONSES COMPARISON OF ‘YES’ RESPONSES – CONGREGATIONS SURVEYS Hypothesis: “Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups.” DEMOGRAPHICS Survey Questions #13-14; 17-19 C Survey C-A Survey SYG - ‘YES’=1,214 total n=1,082 cross tabulations n=132 cross tabulations 13. Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups. **100% **1,082 **100% **132 **[Cross-tabbed item]
Response Response 14. Which race/ethnicity best describes you? SYG
White/Caucasian 70.9% [761/1074]/8] 0.0% 0.0% [240/1074/8] 22.3% 97.7% [128/131] Black/African American [73/1074/8] All others combined 6.8% 2.3% [03/131] 17. What is your approximate household Response Response [n=1,023] [n=119] income? $0-24,999 7.8% 80 20.2% 24 $25,000-49,000 17.7% 181 36.1% 43 $50,000-74,000 23.2% 237 31.1% 37 $75,000-99,999 18.4% 188 0.8% 1 $100,000-124,999 15.1% 154 1.7% 2 $125,000- 149,000 6.5% 67 0.0% 0 $150,000-174,999 5.3% 54 6.7% 8 $175,000-199,999 2.0% 20 0.8% 1 $200,000+ 4.1% 42 2.5% 3 Other 14
Source: Demographic Data - The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling; Congregations Surveys: CROSSTAB by ‘SYG Unjust’
The cross-tabulated percentages shown in Table 2.a, above, derive from the number of persons answering ‘Yes’ to the proposition that **“Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups”. Note: Eight (8) persons of C-Survey [761/1074/8=1082] skipped question #14 about race/ethnicity; One (1) C-A Survey person skipped ‘race/ethnicity’ question [128/131/1=132]. Exhibit 2.2 below illustrates ‘SYG Unjust’ crosstab racial profiling experiences (RPEs) for the two congregational types. See also page 74 Racial Profiling Experiences (RPEs) percentages/counts across five (5) survey instruments.
53 | P a g e
‘SYG Unjust’ Cross-Tabulated Race/Ethnicity Congregational Surveys C- and C-A
EXHIBIT 2.a – By Racial Categories Q.#14 CONGREGATION C CONGREGATION C-A n=1,074 [8 persons skipped question] n=131 [1 person skipped question]
Of [TEC website] Episcopal Church C-Survey cross-tab ‘Yes, SYG unjust’ survey population, 70.9% of persons [761/1074;8] at Q.#14 self-describe as White/Caucasian; 22.3% as African-American; and 6.8% as all other racial persons. For C-A Survey of historically black experience, 97.7% of respondent congregants [128/131/1] believe SYG to be unjust law. See the full array of race/ethnicity percentages at Question #14, Table 2.a. page 53 displaying crosstab ‘Yes, SYG is unjust law’ by C and C-A congregations. The Episcopal Church USA (TEC) has a predominantly White/Caucasian congregational membership; New Jerusalem Church is composed of a predominantly Black/African American membership.
Directional Findings: Congregations Surveys C and C-A. Moral voice Thus far, the research on racial profiling commissioned by the Right Reverend Thomas E. Breidenthal, Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio, the General Public Survey instruments, gives indication that class and race do impinge on individual rights to life, liberty and happiness of certain citizen groups. The following summarizes the statistical presentations of Tables 1; 1.a; 1.b; and Exhibits 1; 1.a; 1.b containing the evidentiary facts on whether, for C and C-A samples, “good citizenship is an effective guard against being racially profiled”.
Here are some salient factors that have emerged as a result of report analyses comparing Citizenship and Racial Profiling.
54 | P a g e
Citizenship –non-cross tabulated. Having reached a 98.55% commonality within the Survey’s citizenship category, among congregants in their total responses to the CONGREGATIONS surveys on racial profiling the respondents are ‘similarly situated’, that is, congregants experience sameness in problems and circumstances wherein the basic facts and legal issues are the same. See page 48, Table I and Exhibit 1 and 1.a.
Racial Profiling – SYG cross tabulated. However, congregant responses also reflect the realities of American society wherein daily life is lived and citizen treatment and municipal law enforcement protection behaviors are comparatively disparate. Disaggragated statistical data review unfurls the complexity of racial profiling mindset and the hidden, non-public patterns and practices of racial profiling. To what degree does good citizenship and good stewardship serve as effective hedge against being racially profiled?
African-American C-A congregants [page 52, crosstab question #11; 80.3%; 102/127] historically knowing themselves and their families to be at-risk of profiling abuse resolve, therefore, to live life mindful of special safety rules [page 52, question #12; cross-tab 99.2% 124/125], especially during ‘stop and search’ encounters with the police. Pg 52
Table 2, page 52 answers the CROSS-TAB question: “Of the total number of congregant persons agreeing that SYG is unjust (C n=1,082; C-A n=132), what number and percentage also share “I want good police protection” agreement? 99.2%. Pg 52
Within the context of the 2013-2015 mission priority of The Episcopal Church (TEC) “to seek to transform unjust structures of society,” the cross-tab populations of TEC—70.9% of persons self- described as White/Caucasian; 22.3% African-American; and 6.8% other racial persons—reach ‘Yes’ Significant Majority Agreement that SYG is unjust. Page 53, Question #14, Table 2.a. Exhibit 2.a. Pg 54
The Disparate Treatment stories bolster the case made by the statistical Disparate Impact analyses of C- and C-A surveys. A combination of approximately five hundred [505] stories were submitted.
Page 67 discusses the legal background of Stop & Frisk, the unrestrained policing sanctioning of Terry v. Ohio by 2013 Supreme Court authority showing in the statistics on school suspensions, students required to appear in criminal court via so-called Zero Tolerance policy. Black students are shipped off to court more frequently than white students committing similar non-complying behaviors. Pg 68. A summary of Terry v. Ohio ruling appears at page 117 of this report. ______NOTES Fair Sentencing: Reforms do not apply to those already imprisoned. December 2013 (For March 2014 update see page 57 Holder and Republicans Unite to Soften Sentencing Laws) A sharply divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled Dec. 3, 2013 that the Fair Sentencing Act (FSA), which reduced the unfair, unjustified, and racially discriminatory crack cocaine/powder cocaine sentencing ratio from 100-to-1 to 18-to-1, does not apply to thousands of individuals who are currently incarcerated pursuant to sentences imposed under the discredited 100-to-1 regime. Seven judges concluded that the FSA should apply to those serving sentences under the 100-to-1 federal sentencing structure, but ten judges declared that it should not. The Sixth Circuit encompasses an area including Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. See: www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/13a0336p-06.pdf See also: www.afro.com/sections/news/national/story.htm?storyid=80617 55 | P a g e
Fair Use Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 Part IV. Supplementary Scrutiny: A Compendium Moral Voice: Stand Your Ground & Racial Profiling, War on Drugs, Incarceration
The Department of Justice 2003 Racial Profiling Guidance Has Loopholes The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR), the nation's oldest, largest, and most diverse civil and human rights coalition, expressed dissatisfaction with the Department of Justice's [2003] Guidance on Racial Profiling. LCCR asserted that the guidance on racial profiling is like a poorly constructed building: while the foundation is there, the main components needed to hold it up were either faulty or missing…The guidelines only apply to federal agents, rather than state and local police. This is problematic since state and local police have to deal more with responsibilities where racial profiling is prevalent such as traffic stops and searches. The second problem is that there is no clear enforcement mechanism…[T]his leaves "victims of profiling without a remedy." “…by carving out an exception that easily swallows the rule, the [Bush] attorney general ignores the president's promise to end racial profiling.” Congress [is urged] to end racial and ethnic profiling by enacting a bill that builds on the administration's definition, closes the loopholes, and provides a remedy for victims of this discredited practice." -Feature Story by civilrights.org staff - 6/23/2003
“Mr. Holder has repeatedly criticized the moral impact of the nation’s high incarceration rate, emphasizing that while the United States has only 5 percent of the world’s population, it has 25 percent of its prisoners.” – ACLU Editorial Board
“Minnie's Sacrifice (1869) is a novel dissecting the difficult choices faced by a light-skinned husband and wife when they learn, after having been raised as white, that their veins run with African American blood.”
War on Drugs - A Self-Sustaining Business A Los Angeles Times January 12, 2013 news release, The House I Live In, takes a passionate look at war on drugs.” The article written by reporter Noel Murray, makes the stunning pronouncement that the highly unsuccessful, 40-year War on Drugs is a self-sustaining business resulting in: 45 million arrests. $1 trillion in government spending. In today’s economy drugs are cheaper, purer, and more available than ever. Solidified America’s role as the world’s largest jailer. Source: U.S. Bureau of Justice (BOJ) statistics
An article by former Kofi Annan and Former Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso calling for an end to the war on drugs comes in the wake of countries the world over including Uruguay, Colombia, Guatemala, Mexico, New Zealand, Switzerland, Portugal, the Netherlands and even some West African countries successfully implementing drug policy reforms in recent years. Source: -http://www.netnewsledger.com/2013/11/05/end-war-drugs-kofi-annan-brazilian president/#sthash.a8nFaXJs.dpuf
EXHIBITS 1 and 1.a, below, provide U.S. Bureau of Justice (BOJ) statistics that do not include local jails and private prisons. They exhibit the steadiness in the growth of state and federal populations of the incarcerated from roughly 400,000 in 1981 to 1,400,000 by year 2009. A round robin effect has been created: the statistics both record the reality of imprisonment and recite the numbers as ‘evidence’ of the propensity for crime, i.e., among African Americans, devoid of the consideration of the injustice inherent in laws like Stand Your Ground and the inequities inherent to disparate enforcement practices during the implementation of law. In what proportions are Black, White, Hispanic and other groups committed as inmates to state and federal prisons in the United States? 56 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 1
U.S. Census 2000; Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. “Prison and Jail inmates at Midyear 2002.” – April 6, 2003
EXHIBIT 1.a
U.S. Attorney Eric Holder on Fair Sentencing Act – March 2014 Update In 2010, Congress unanimously voted to reduce the 100-to-1 disparity between sentences for crack cocaine offenses and those for powdered cocaine, a vestige of the crack epidemic. Now, the Obama administration and its allies in Congress are pushing to go even further. Mr. Holder wants to make prisoners eligible for early release if they were sentenced under the now-abolished crack guidelines. And he wants judges to have more discretion when sentencing nonviolent drug offenders…Black Americans have disproportionately received lengthy prison terms and are extremely overrepresented in the inmate population. Source: Holder and Republicans Unite to Soften Sentencing Laws MATT APUZZO MARCH 3, 2014 New York Times
57 | P a g e
DEFINITION The United Nations drew up a definition of the child so that all countries having ratified the international Convention of the Rights of the Child share the same reference, which is laid down in Article 1 of the Convention. A child means every human being below the age of eighteen years (18) unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.
The number of Children with a Parent in Prison or Jail In the Figure 6.1 (renamed Exhibit 1.b) displaying the 2009 calculations created by Pettit, Sykes, and Western researchers, the totals are configured by race. From the years 1980 to 2005, the numbers grew from 500,000 to 2,500,000, confirmed by Exhibit 1.b. And concerning the total count of persons with children, the highest growth rates affect African-American families. What connections are there between racial profiling and the continuing growth rates of the incarceration of certain citizen groups?
EXHIBIT 1.b
Black teenager Willie Francis sentenced to die by electrocution by the State of Louisiana in 1945 (at age 16) for [purportedly] murdering Andrew Thomas, a Cajun pharmacy owner in St. Martinsville who had once employed him…Despite two separate written confessions, Francis pleaded not guilty. During his trial, the court-appointed defense attorneys offered no objections, called no witnesses and put up no defense. -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Francis
Had the child Trayvon lived, would he have been immediately jailed? Sentenced to long-term imprisonment?
58 | P a g e
Slavery raises a host of negative images for Black people; so much so, [Blacks and Whites] fail to realize the tremendous economic contributions [Blacks] made, albeit forced, to the development of the United States into a world power. This lack of realization stems from the national shame of slavery and the concomitant national denial. Using U.S. market growth data provided by the Rittenhouse Trust data and the moneys are accumulated from 1700 through 1830 (the beginning of the Rittenhouse data), yields a value of U.S. $6.42 trillion current dollars. The subsequent moneys are invested at the time they accrued yields an additional $1.44 trillion… a staggering $7.86 quadrillion in 2006 dollars. Source: Waldron H. Giles, Ph.D Slavery and the American Economy
Economics: Privately-owned for-profit juvenile detention centers. ‘Kids for Cash’ sentencing: The Number of Children in Life w/o Parole. Moreover, to increase the number of inmates in privately-owned for-profit detention centers, ‘Kids for Cash’ sentencing practices award monetary benefits to some judges in return for judges’ imposing harsh sentences on juveniles brought before their courts. Minors charged with nonviolent crimes were often given harsher sentences than what probation officers recommended, court documents say. Other investigators say the trials lasted a few minutes at most.
Judges have sentenced children to extended stays in juvenile detention for offenses as minimal as mocking a principal on MySpace, trespassing in a vacant building, and shoplifting DVDs from Wal-mart, says a February 24, 2009 CNN article titled “Pennsylvania rocked by 'jailing kids for cash' scandal.” Two judges sentencing over 5,000 children secretly received more than $2.6 million in prison industry kickbacks, prosecutors said. "Kids think very much in the present, and they have limited abilities to understand long-term consequences," said Robin Dahlberg, an attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union in New York.
A 16 September 2013 Iowa Supreme Court held that the United States Supreme Court's 2012 decision in Miller v. Alabama barring mandatory life imprisonment without parole sentences for children would apply retroactively "to sentences that are the functional equivalent of life without parole."
Compare the ‘life without parole’ to ‘life with the possibility of parole after serving 60 years’. Is there a difference? Effectively, there is no reprieve for prisoners automatically sentenced to die in prison for juvenile offenses.
The "unconstitutional imposition of a mandatory life-without-parole sentence is not fixed by substituting it with a sentence with parole that is the practical equivalent of a life sentence without parole," the court wrote. "Oftentimes, it is important that the spirit of the law not be
lost in the application of the law. This is one such time."
"In the end," the court concluded, "a government system that resolves disputes could hardly call itself a system of justice with a rule that demands individualized sentencing considerations common to all youths apply only to those youths facing a sentence of life without parole and not to those youths facing a sentence of life with no parole until age seventy-eight.
Accordingly, we hold Miller applies to sentences that are the functional equivalent of life without parole. The commuted sentence in this case is the functional equivalent of a life sentence without parole."
In two separate decisions issued, the court ordered individualized resentencing for two other juveniles, Denem Anthony Null, who was sentenced to more than 52 years for murder and robbery when he was 16, and Desirae Monique Pearson, who was sentenced to 35 years without parole for robbery and burglary when she was 17. The court held that Miller "bars states from imposing a certain type of punishment on certain people," and applies retroactively. – Sources: 2009. “Pennsylvania rocked by 'jailing kids for cash' scandal.” July 15, 2013. “Confronting the Presumption of Guilt That Killed Trayvon Martin 59 | P a g e
Incarcerated Americans: Statistics covering 1920 – 2009. EXHIBIT 1.c
"Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics 2003" page 500
Concerning African-American imprisonment, the era of the ‘new’ Jim Crow began during the decades after 1920, when African-American farm laborer populations were caught up into mandatory share cropping nigh-slave economies. After WWII and the flight of thousands of African Americans from southern regions of the country, African-American imprisonment rates began to take off, remaining at stabilized levels during the Civil Rights years. What 21st century economic contributions does black male imprisonment (New Jim Crow enslavement) continue to make to the development of United States world power?
EXHIBIT 1.d
Source: U.S. Bureau of Justice (BOJ) statistics
Standing at an approximate 250,000 in 1980, the numbers quadrupled to over a million by 2005. At year-end 2009, in the United States, 743 per 100,000 of all American adults of all races were incarcerated.
60 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 1.e
Source: U.S. Bureau of Justice (BOJ) statistics Exhibit 1.e, above, shows the incarceration rate under state and federal jurisdiction per 100,000 during period 1925-2008. The report does not include prisoners held in the custody of local jails, inmates out to court, and those in transit. Male incarceration rate is roughly 15 times the female incarceration rate. Table C, below, shows the years 2000 - 2010 incarceration counts of USA adults:
TABLE C
Source: U.S. Bureau of Justice (BOJ) statistics Inmates held in custody in state or federal prisons or in local jails, December 31, 2000, and 2009–2010.
61 | P a g e
Still, it is the length of sentences that truly distinguishes American prison policy. Indeed, the mere number of sentences imposed here would not place the United States at the top of the incarceration lists. If lists were compiled based on annual admissions to prison per capita, several European countries would outpace the United States. But American prison stays are much longer, so the total incarceration rate is higher..."Rises and falls in Canada's crime rate have closely paralleled America's for 40 years…But its imprisonment rate has remained stable." –NYT April 22, 2008. American Exception. Inmate count in U.S. dwarfs other nations.
Likelihood Length of Sentencing At Exhibit 1.f, it is the length of sentencing soars the United States to the top highest rates of incarceration existing in the world:
EXHIBIT 1.f World Comparisons
Source: United Kingdom – Home Office Research
“Using rich data linking federal cases from arrest through sentencing, we assess the contribution of prosecutors' initial charging decisions to large observed black-white disparities in sentence length. Pre- charge characteristics, including arrest offense and criminal history, can explain about 80% of these disparities, but substantial gaps remain across the distribution. On average, blacks receive almost 10% longer sentences than comparable whites arrested for the same crimes. At least half this gap can be explained by initial charging choices, particularly the filing of charges carrying mandatory minimum sentences. Prosecutors are...almost twice as likely to file such charges against blacks. African Americans are given longer federal sentences, even when factoring prior criminal records. African American jail sentences tend to be roughly 10% longer than white jail sentences for the same crimes. -Rehavi, M. Marit and Starr, Sonja B., Racial Disparity in Federal Criminal Charging and Its Sentencing Consequences (May 7, 2012). U of Michigan Law & Econ, Empirical Legal Studies Center Paper No. 12-002.
United States Supreme Court's 2012 decision in Miller v. Alabama barred mandatory life imprisonment without parole sentences for children.
A Case Study – Mandatory Minimums “It was the second-biggest mistake of LaRue Y. Smith's life. Laid off from his job, Smith went to his computer, copied out a list of 7-Eleven stores in and around Philadelphia, grabbed a gun, and started sticking them up. The clerks and customers were terrified. Smith fired his revolver once, by accident, and almost shot himself in the leg. Police caught the former Marine eight weeks after his crimes had started in June 2007. Within hours, he confessed to a dozen robberies that netted him an unimpressive $2,510,
62 | P a g e
plus cigarettes, chips, and soft drinks. Then Smith made his really, really big mistake. In 2009, he rejected a plea bargain to serve 25 years and went to trial. A federal jury convicted him of 10 robberies. Because Smith had been charged under a "mandatory minimum" law, the judge could not weigh the trial testimony or consider that Smith had no previous convictions. Automatic penalties written by Congress kicked in. So Smith was sentenced to two centuries, three decades, and two years. The 232-year sentence was 10 times the average 2009 federal sentence for murder. Critics call such extreme disparities a "trial tax," and say it amounts to a penalty for exercising the right to trial by jury. "He needs to be punished," defense attorney Christopher D. Warren said in court, "but based on my experience, he hasn't done anything which requires him to die in a federal prison." If Smith gets time off for good behavior, his 232-year sentence will be reduced to 197 years. -By Nathan Gorenstein, Inquirer Staff Writer. Posted: February 07, 2012 "Mandatory minimum" laws can mean grossly disparate sentences for gun crimes.
Likelihood
THE CRIMINAL BLACK MAN The criminal black man is an ethnic stereotype in the United States that has been around since the Transatlantic Trade in African slavery. The stereotype is known to the United Kingdom and other countries engaging in slavery. It justified the enslavement of black persons in the Americas and the Caribbean Sea, labeling males—the most feared among the rebellious—“to be criminal and dangerous,” reports a study on African American criminology and criminal justice published by SAGE Publications. The figure of the black man as criminal continues its appearance in modern popular culture and the media. It is used in 2013 by law enforcement and is essential to constructing ‘profiles’ of humans by racial characteristics thought to be immutable: thus the flaws in stereotype are reflected in the number of errors occurring during the implementation of law, the patterns and practices and mistakes of law underlying the disparate impact statistics and disparate treatment narratives of the research study on racial profiling commissioned by the Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio. Exhibit 1.g, above, starkly illustrates that the black male American has the highest statistical chance, the highest likelihood, of going to prison at some point in life. How do black parents and communities safeguard children from high likelihood? Their sons and grandsons, especially. Will the “Talk” suffice?
“3rd grade teacher told class that AA skin was tough like leather. This is why they could live in Africa where it was very hot. All the kids wanted to feel my son's skin to see if it felt like leather. He was very upset about this.” Source: 2013 Disparate Treatment Narratives. Bishop’s Task Force Data. Volume 2.
Perception: Stand Your Ground Law Outcomes and Bottomlines
Is perception reality?
The ‘perception as reality’ premise would naturally trouble the development of any rational treatise, any defense applied to any incident of loss of life resulting from an adverse profiling of any person by another. The FBI Supplementary Homicide Report referenced in The Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling research report gives a narrow definition of justifiable homicide: “If two men get into an argument, the first man attacks the second, and the second man returns deadly force — that doesn't fit the FBI's parameters. But a storeowner, who shoots a robber, does.” Twenty-one states have legislated expansion of Stand Your Ground, also called ‘castle doctrine’ which traditionally limits the laws to a person’s home. SYG expansions allow ‘shoot first’ in places outside the home from which a person has no duty to retreat from a perceived threat. Perception, obviously, is at the heart of the argument.
63 | P a g e
Therefore, in search of a literary example of ‘shoot-first perceived threat’ this researcher turns to the perceptions described in novelist Albert Camus’ 1946 L’Etranger. The novel examines the universal question on whether ‘perception’ is ‘reality’ by juxtaposing the ‘seeming’ threats to his life lodged in the mind of French citizen Mersault and the ‘seeming’ criminal intent raised by the mere presence of Arabs in Algeria--a geography of historic Phoenicia (a Classical Greek term used to refer to the region of the major Canaan port towns along the Mediterranean Sea in Africa) and where French and other colonizers settled. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia records in a History of Algiers article that “from the French invasion on 18 June 1830 until its July 1962 independence, Algeria was administratively part of France.”
The accused Mersault’s perceptions were confused—lost in his inability to discern the difference between ‘le ciel bleu’ and ‘le ciel blanc’—his (mis)perceptions comparative to the shooter Michael Dunn’s “It sounded like a barrel coming up on the window” or the Trayvon vigilante pursuer’s ‘he looks like he’s up to no good’ judgment. Camus’ characterizations describe people who are the ‘slaves of habit’, which gives them a “semblance of aim and of value,” ‘semblant’ as it is called in my home state Louisiana—‘acting like’ in Creole English patois; acting a part, i.e., as an officer of the law, and “attaching importance to the banality of everyday life,” i.e., as a watchman. A Texas A&M study “found no evidence [that Stand Your Ground] laws deterred crimes like burglaries, robberies and aggravated assaults.” Rather, the study showed that “states that had adopted such laws saw a 7 percent to 9 percent increase in murders and manslaughters, compared to states without them.” Perception led to Mersault’s shooting of ‘’L’Arabe’, an outsider to French colonial political representation. To the Frenchman Mersault’s eyesight, the Arab looked like perhaps possibly maybe he might probably slash Mersault with the knife while he, the Arab person, was lying on his back on the beach, Mersault shooting the lounger from yards away, then closing the distance and shooting 4 times more. Perception ruled the day. After some delay in the trial, the universal guillotine was Mersault’s reward. Residual perceptions about Africa retain a kind of underground existence, “stercoraceous sediment” settling like “a layer of dust on the mind…of large numbers of people,” says scholar Basil Davis in his 1969 cultural history, The African Genius. That the “Negro has contributed nothing” to world civilization is a notion scientifically mistaken, though it nevertheless persists…an “aggressive violence of opinion,” says Davidson. “Victorian men of property,” of 1861 London’s Ethnographical Society viewed Africans as beings of “the lower order,” the ‘leather-skinned Hottentot’ whom civilization must keep “sternly in their place…” the Victorians considering Africans not only as children incapable of growing up, but “dangerous and potentially criminal children.” [Reference ‘leather-skin’ comment page 63]. ‘Criminal black man’ stereotype and American societal mindset drive the 32% likelihood of black male imprisonment and the accompanying ‘length of sentencing,’ i.e., sentencing practices--not its counts of annual admissions to prisons per capita--that compels the comparative results showing at Exhibit 1.g.
EXHIBIT 1.g As of 2001, the chances of going to prison in percentages for various demographic groups in the United States.
Source: Criminal black man stereotype. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_black_man#cite_note-1
64 | P a g e
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) told party activists that kids receiving free breakfast and lunch should either be asked to pay for part of their meals or earn them by sweeping the floor…: “why don’t you have the kids pay a dime, pay a nickel, to instill in them that there is, in fact, no such thing as a free lunch. Or maybe sweep the floor in the cafeteria.” Kids not having the five to ten cents for their meals would single them out as janitors and would broadcast to other students which families are the poorest. Source: huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/18/jack-kingston-school-lunch_n_4467711.html
EXHIBIT 1.h ‘Born’ Criminal: Early History and Lingering Effects.
Source: Jordan Weissmann Oct 17 2013 “Philly Closes 23 Public Schools, Generously Builds $400 Million Prison Where Kids Can Hang Instead.”
“Priorities are out of whack in Pennsylvania,” says one online news source. “Scheduled to be completed in 2015, the new prison’s cell blocks and classroom will be capable of housing almost 5,000 inmates. The youths of color disproportionately affected by school closings can just hang out there.” - Kristen Gwynne is an associate editor and drug policy reporter at AlterNet.
The association of criminality with physical type. Over the centuries, some ‘experts’ have promoted the notion of ‘criminal types.’ For example, the Italian, Cesare Lombrose, born in 1835 to a wealthy Jewish family, was a professor of forensic medicine and hygiene and a researcher in criminology. He developed a theory that some peoples were more "civilized" (Europe), and others more "savage" (Africa-Asia). His Darwinist theories incorporated notions that crime was inherited and a characteristic of human nature, that the propensity for crime could be informed by physical feature, a certain facial type, and that some human types are ‘born’ criminals. Using clinical and descriptive research methods that measured skull dimension, his examinations were applied to ‘gypsy’ Italians, persons of Arabia and North Africa origins. Lombroso never completely relinquished his belief in the existence of the born criminal type. Source: encyclopedia.com/topic/Cesare_Lombroso.aspx
NOTE CAREFULLY: Life imprisonment of scores of black males relegates them to the status of ‘slave’ or one having no descendents. Slave imprisonment of males cuts off the ability for reproducing themselves which, in turn, effectively stems the flow of black population growth—future perpetuation of non-black ‘majority’ status among U.S. ethnic populations. See Graham v. Florida 560 U.S. (2010) which held that sentencing an individual to life imprisonment without parole for a non-homicide crime committed before the defendant reached the age of 18 violates the Eighth Amendment. See Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. (2012) life without the possibility of parole is unconstitutional for juvenile offenders. Does the 2012 ruling apply retroactively? Note that sentencing black youth in 2013 to parole after 50+ years’ incarceration means that by 2063 the black American population will be significantly reduced.
65 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 1.i
“In the United States, there are well-known racial, ethnic, age, and sex differences in incarceration rates. Younger offenders are more likely to be sentenced to prison than are older offenders. Black and Hispanic rates of incarceration are six to eight times that of White offenders and males are 14 times as likely as women to be sentenced to prison. OSI research explores how the combined effects of race, ethnicity, age, and sex, net of legally relevant factors, influence the decision to incarcerate. We examine these effects across nine offense categories. The analysis is based on Florida felony conviction data for the years 2000 to 2006. We find that legally relevant factors significantly influence the incarceration decision. Young Black males are most disadvantaged at the incarceration decision. -Patricia Warren, College of Criminology and Criminal Justice. The Imprisonment Penalty for Young Black and Hispanic Males: A Crime-Specific Analysis. Florida State University, 634 West Call Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32306, USA.
Gunnar Myrdal. An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy. “There is no doubt that the overwhelming majority of white Americans desire that there be as few Negroes as possible in America. If the Negroes could be eliminated from America or greatly decreased in numbers, this would meet the whites' approval—provided that it could be accomplished by means which are also approved. Correspondingly, an increase of the proportion of Negroes in the American population is commonly looked upon as undesirable. White prejudice and discrimination keep the Negro low in standards of living, health, education, manners and morals. This, in its turn, gives support to white prejudice. White prejudice and Negro standards thus mutually "cause" each other.” Source: wikipedia.org/wiki/An_American_Dilemma:_The_Negro_Problem_and_Modern_Democracy
Gun trafficking should be made a federal crime Currently, prosecutions only happen through a law that prohibits selling guns without a federal license, which carries the same punishment as trafficking chicken or livestock. Source: faithsagainstgunviolence.org/
66 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 1.j A Hugely Disproportional Number of Blacks and Latinos are Stopped and Frisked by the NYPD
Source: New York Civil Liberties Union
Nationwide, more than a million people--mostly black and Hispanic men--are stopped, questioned and frisked annually by police. Nearly all are innocent of any crime, according to figures from departments around the country.
Legal Background Stop and Frisk is a practice by which a police officer who reasonably suspects a person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a felony or a penal law misdemeanor, stops and questions that person, and, if the officer reasonably suspects he or she is in danger of physical injury, frisks the person stopped for weapons. The New York City stop-and-frisk program is a practice of City Police authorizing any police officer, who reasonably suspects a person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a felony or penal law misdemeanor, to stop and question that person.
The rules for stop and frisk are found in New York State Criminal Procedure Law section 140.50, and are based on the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Terry v. Ohio. About 684,000 people were stopped in 2011. The vast majority of these people were African-American or Latino. Residents questioned whether these stops are based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. According to NYPD statistics from 2002 through 2012, an average of only one in eight people stopped were accused of a crime.
In New York, a 14 August 2013 federal judge decision rendered that state’s stop-and-frisk practices violate the Constitution’s 4th and 14th Amendment rights.
As it turns out, the ruling by the Federal District Court in Manhattan, says a New York Times report, “does nothing to disrupt the Terry v. Ohio authority the Supreme Court has given police officers to target African-Americans and Latinos with little or no basis.” “But if unrestrained policing is, for Mr. Bloomberg, policing that works, it turns out that he can still have it,” says the article.
67 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 1.k
Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Since Columbine, repressive school environments in which young people are suspended, expelled or even arrested over minor misbehaviors — like talking back or disrupting class — that would once have been handled by the principal, have become the norm.
“By criminalizing routine disciplinary problems, they have damaged the lives of many children by making them more likely to drop out and entangling them, sometimes permanently, in the criminal justice system.
“The policies are also discriminatory: black and Hispanic children are shipped off to court more frequently than white students who commit similar infractions.
A New York City School-Justice Partnership Task Force, led by the former chief judge of the State of New York examined disciplinary practices in the city’s 1.1 million-student system during the 2011-2012 school year. The findings indicate that “the overwhelming majority of school-related suspensions, summonses and arrests are for minor misbehavior, behavior that occurs on a daily basis in most schools.” New York City schools imposed nearly 70,000 suspensions in the 2011-2012 school year, 40 percent more than the period six years earlier. Of the 882 arrests during the school year studied, one in every six was for “resisting arrest” or “obstructing governmental administration,” charges for which there is often no underlying criminal behavior. The authorities also issued more than 1,600 summonses — tickets that require the student to appear in criminal court and that can lead to arrest for those who fail to appear.” Source-The NYTimes Editorial Board. The School-to-Prison Pipeline. May 29, 2013
68 | P a g e
“And now that more people are walking around with weapons dangling from their bodies, states have moved to make the use of those guns more justifiable.” - Charles M. Blow. Standing Our Ground. The New York Times. July 24, 2013
Making the Case: Stand Your Ground
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985). The Supreme Court of the United States held that under the Fourth Amendment, a law enforcement officer in pursuit of a fleeing suspect may use deadly force only to prevent escape if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.
Are citizens posing as ‘community’ law enforcement officers exempt from such prohibition?
Current research has shown that the use of deadly force contributes little to the deterrence of crime or the protection of the public. On the basis of the facts found by the district court, the police officer had no reason to believe that the fleeing suspect, Garner, was armed or dangerous. The Court ordered the case to be remanded for determination of the liability of the other defendants.
“Black Americans are far less likely to be adjudicated as justified in using deadly force in a firearm-related death.”
Source: judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing
2013 Senate Judiciary Committee 'Stand Your Ground' Laws: Civil Rights and Public Safety Implications of the Expanded Use of Deadly Force” Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights
DATE: October 29, 2013 TIME: 10:00 AM ROOM: Hart 216
Witnesses The Honorable Marcia L. Fudge Sybrina Fulton Lucia McBath The Honorable Luis Guierrez David LaBahn Ronald Sullivan The Honorable Louie Gohmert John R. Lott Ilya Shapiro
69 | P a g e
“Is American justice system color-blind? The statistics say no.” Disparate Impact FBI REPORT Homicides Ruled Justified by Race 2005-2010 SYG/non SYG Exhibits 2 and 2.a, exactly replicate the numbers/percentages data from two graphs published in the FBI Supplementary Homicide Report. Exhibits 2 and 2.a reformats those data to show side by side disparities in SYG rulings of justifiable homicide during the 5-year period (2005-2010) examined by Researcher John Roman, Ph.D., a senior fellow in the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute. Roman indicates that “in the FBI data, a homicide is said to be justified if it is coded as the ‘killing of a felon by a private citizen’; that is, in order for a law enforcement finding of self-defense, it must be the case that the perpetrator feared for his or her life. If you give anyone a reason to fear for their life, you are committing a felony. A regression analysis of FBI Supplementary Homicide Reports from 2005 to 2010 finds that the odds a homicide is ruled to be justified have increased about 10 percent a year.” See http://blog.metrotrends.org/tag/homicide/.
The FBI Supplementary Homicide Report measures the percentages of rulings by race of the perpetrator/shooter by race of the victim and Non-SYG/SYG states. For ‘all cases’, the highest percentages of ‘justified homicide’ killings appeared at the category ‘white perpetrator or shooter/black victim’—Stand Your Ground states showing the highest disparity rate (16.85%), which then doubles when the shooting involves two strangers who are not law enforcement and, at both Exhibits 2 and 2a, a white is the perpetrator/shooter and a black is the shooting victim (Exhibit 2a; 35.88%).
EXHIBIT 2 SYG and NON-SYG STATES - All cases. “Black Americans are far less likely to be adjudicated as justified in using deadly force in a firearm-related death.”
EXHIBIT 2.a SYG and NON-SYG STATES - Two strangers who are not law enforcement.
Source: -John Roman, Ph.D. is a senior fellow in the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute. http://.metrotrends.org/tag/homicide/ 70 | P a g e
John Roman, Ph.D. the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute: “This morning, I submitted written testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee about the effect of Stand Your Ground (SYG) laws on civil rights and public safety. There are racial disparities throughout the juvenile and criminal justice system in America. African Americans are more likely to be stopped and frisked, to have their motor vehicle searched at traffic stops, and to receive longer prison sentences than are whites… Are there racial disparities in the justification of homicides? That is, are homicides by shooters of differing races, or involving victims of different races, ruled justified at different rates? Is the degree of disparity higher in states that have SYG laws than in states that do not? In states with SYG laws, did the degree of disparity increase or decrease when SYG laws were passed? The answer to the first question is clearly yes. The starkest contrast is between homicides of blacks committed by whites, of which 11.4 percent are justified, and homicides of whites committed by blacks, of which 1.2 percent are justified.”
Testimony: “Stand Your Ground” Laws: Civil Rights and Public Safety Implications of the Expanded Use of Deadly Force: “Stand your ground laws, which extend the right to use deadly force in self-defense beyond the home, exacerbate racial disparities in the rate at which homicides are found to be justified, John Roman told a Senate subcommittee. In homicides of blacks committed by whites, 11.4 percent were found to be justified, while in homicides of whites committed by blacks, only 1.2 percent were found to be justified. The racial disparity is larger in states with stand your ground laws, and racial disparities increase in stand your ground states after the law is enacted.” Source: -John Roman, Ph.D. is a senior fellow in the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=904607&renderforprint=1
[Roman’s] study finds that homicides with a white perpetrator and a black victim are ten times more likely to be ruled justified than cases with a black perpetrator and a white victim, and the gap is larger in states with Stand Your Ground laws. After accounting for a variety of factors, such as whether the victim and perpetrator were strangers, the gap is smaller, but still significant. Cases with a white perpetrator and a black victim are 281 percent more likely to be ruled justified than cases with a white perpetrator and white victim. - John Roman. Race, Justifiable Homicide, and Stand Your Ground Laws. Analysis of FBI Supplementary Homicide Report Data. www.urban.org/publications/412873.html ______NOTE Race plays complex role in Florida's 'stand your ground' law In 2006, Laurie Lynn Bartlett killed her boyfriend. She said he was drunk and tried to sexually assault her. She put a knife in him and got 10 years. A year later, Ernestine Broxsie killed her ex-boyfriend. She said he "snapped" and began choking her, so she put a bullet in him. She went free. Two similar cases with one big difference — Bartlett's victim was white, Broxsie's was black. The dramatic contrast in outcomes might not have had anything to do with the victims' race. But it reflects a reality about Florida's controversial "stand your ground" law. A Tampa Bay Times analysis of nearly 200 cases— the first to examine the role of race in "stand your ground" — found that people who killed a black person walked free 73 percent of the time, while those who killed a white person went free 59 percent of the time. "I don't think judges or prosecutors or whoever works in the field of criminal justice is consciously saying black life is worth less than that of other ethnicities,'' said Kareem Jordan, a criminologist at the University of Central Florida. "But at the end of the day, it could be something that's subconscious going on if you look at how the media depicts black life.'' -By Susan Taylor Martin, Kris Hundley and Connie Humburg, Times Staff Writers Saturday, June 2, 2012 12:00pm
71 | P a g e
“Unjust law is no law at all.” –Augustine of Hippo. “Where there is no law, neither is there violation.” –Romans 4:15 Part V Summary: Who’s At-Risk? EXHIBIT 1 TOTAL COUNT OF SURVEY RESPONSES – Seven (7) survey instruments. N=2,962
Exhibit 1 collections of data total n=2,962. Eighty-three (83%) total non-campus n=1545 respondents across unlike populations of Americans recommend moral voice national actions toward nullification of Stand Your Ground states’ law (page 12). At Exhibit 1.1.a below, across six (6) populations, survey respondents are similarly situated in citizen appreciation of ‘I live a good life,’ their expressing across the board (90+%) unanimity in desire for ‘good police protections.’ Inequality enters in at the last column: “I am at-risk of racial profiling’ self perception--higher earning professionals included. (72.3%) of Accomplished Professionals [AP-survey] populations are African- Americans. EXHIBIT 1.1.a CITIZENSHIP AND RACIAL PROFILING AT-RISK DISPARITY - Across 6 survey populations Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5
CITIZENSHIP – Columns 1- 4: 98.1% Avg. Agreement AT-RISK – Column 5: 67% Avg. Agreement “I want good police protection.” 97.6% avg. “I am at risk of racial profiling.” “I have future plans.” 97.8% avg. [Red] General Public 44.1% “I live a good life.” 98.4% avg. [Purple] Homeless – 69.4% “Belief in life and liberty.” 98.6% [AP Survey: Not asked] [Gold] Accomplished Professionals – 82.4% [Brown] Hip-Hop Youth – 89.3% [Blue] Congregations - TEC – 33.8% [Green] Afr-Amer Congregation – 80%
72 | P a g e
“I know that I and my family are ‘at risk’ survey response coupled with “I live my life mindful of special ‘safety’ rules” together construct “at risk” awareness. –The Bishop’s Task Force Data
EXHIBIT 2 - SIX SURVEY INSTRUMENTS Summary averages of ‘at-risk – Non-Crosstab Totals THE BISHOP’S TASK FORCE REPORT
“I know that I and my family are at risk.” “I live my life mindful of special ‘safety’ rules.” 75.24% YES. Congregations C [TEC]= 51.5% [Survey Questions #11;12; 33.8%+69.2%] Congregation C-A = 89.3%. [Survey Questions #11; 12; 80% +98.6%] Accomplished Professionals= 83.5% [Survey Questions #16; 17; 84.6%+82.4%] Hip-Hop Youth = 87.25% [Survey Questions #16; 17; 85.2%+89.3%] General Public Survey GP = 58.8% [Survey Questions #11; 12; 44.1%+73.5%] Homeless GP-A = 81.1%. [Survey Questions #11; 12; 69.4%+92.8%] ______CONGREGATIONS C- Q. #14 “What race/ethnicity best describes you?” C-Survey Demographics n=1,518 98.4% Answered question n=1,493; Skipped question n=25 74.3% White/Caucasian n=1,109 17.7% Black/African American n=264 4.6% Two or more races n=68 1.5% Hispanic American n=23 1.1% American Indian/Alaskan Native n=17 0.8% Asian/Pacific Islander n=12 TOTAL SURVEYS n= 2,962 Grand Total Congregations Surveys Campus General Public Urban Youth Professionals C Survey = 1,518 respondents 794 respondents GP 219 respondents 29 respondents 141 respondents C-A Survey =159 respondents GP-A 102 respondents Moral Voice The citations and exhibits 1 through 2.a (pages 57-68; and page 70 showing the FBI report) are ancillary to the statistical data collected by the Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling, pages 26-55. The FBI and the Urban Institute supplemental data on Stand Your Ground disparities at Exhibit 2 and 2.a (page 70), for example, affirm that Stand Your Ground is unjust law, an outside verdict independent of the Bishop’s data. The series of U.S. Bureau of Justice (BOJ) statistics (EXHIBITS; 1.c to 1.e; and Table C (pages 60-61), coupled with the work of other scholars like Pettit, Sykes and Western researchers (page 58), who calculate the number of children with a parent in prison, and the stunning revelation relating to privately owned for-profit juvenile detention centers—especially the ‘kids-for-cash’ judicial sentencing fraud by judges receiving kickbacks for imprisoning children for life—educate congregations and the general public concerning incarceration, racial profiling and myriad of interrelated social justice issues.
73 | P a g e
TABLE 1 Summary of ‘At-Risk’ THE BISHOP’S TASK FORCE REPORT – non-CROSSTAB SIX (6) SURVEY INSTRUMENTS
AP C- C-A GP GP-A Accomplished Youth Hist. Anglican Afr-American General Public Homeless Professionals Hip-Hop Congregation Congregation Experienced Police Stops… 74.8 75.3 51.6 - 62.2 73.2 Caution Hoodie 51.7 56.7 67.2 46.4 48.0 76.4 I am at-risk 44.1 69.4 82.4 89.3 33.8 80.0 Safety rules 73.5 92.8 84.6 85.2 69.2 98.6 I want good police. 99.5 99.0 100 96.4 99.2 99.4 SYG is Unjust. 73.0 83.7 86.4 - 76.5 94.3
EXHIBIT 3 - FIVE (5) SURVEY INSTRUMENTS – CROSSTAB ‘SYG UNJUST’ BY RACIAL PROFILING EXPERIENCES (RPEs)
74 | P a g e
“I know that I and my family are ‘at risk’ at Q.#13 survey response, coupled with “I teach my family special ‘safety’ rules” at Q.#16, together construct “at risk” reality. –The Bishop’s Task Force Data - Accomplished Professionals
Summary: Who’s At-Risk? - Crosstab Totals Professional Achievement, Racial Classification, and Income
EXHIBIT 4 - ACCOMPLISHED PROFESSIONALS CROSSTAB Q. #14 - “I have experienced police stops and/or threat of gun use.” *n=65 (100%) CROSSTAB Q. #16 - “I teach my family special ‘safety’ rules.” *n=110 (100%)
Q. #4 - RACE CLASSIFICATION More than eighty-six percent (80.6%) of professional persons [n=50] expressing ‘stops and threats’ profiling experience in *Q.#14 are self-described as Black/African-Americans [Q.#4]; 80.7% of African American respondents teach their families ‘special safety rules’ at *Q.#16. The term ‘professional’ is defined at page 38 of this report.
EXHIBIT 4.a ACCOMPLISHED PROFESSIONALS CROSSTAB Q. #14 - “I have experienced police stops and/or threat of gun use.” ‘YES.’ n=65 (100%) CROSSTAB Q. #16 - “I teach my family special ‘safety’ rules.” ‘YES.’ n=109 (100%)
Q. #6 “What is your average household income?” Of the professionals reporting “I have experienced police stops and/or threat of gun use” encounters, Q.#14 crosstab; 49.2% report income earnings [Q.#4] of $50,000-$99,999. Forty-one (41.3%) percent in that earnings category “…teach their families ‘safety’ rules.” [Q.#16]. 75 | P a g e
Summary: Who’s At-Risk? - Crosstab Totals EXHIBIT 4.b - ACCOMPLISHED PROFESSIONALS CROSSTAB Q. #14 - “I have experienced police stops and/or threat of gun use.” ‘YES’ n=65 (100%) CROSSTAB Q. #16 - “I teach my family special ‘safety’ rules.” ‘YES’ n=110 (100%)
Q. #9 THE ‘AT-RISK’ DESIRING ‘GOOD POLICE PROTECTION’ Of the n=65 responses at Exhibit 4.b; Crosstab Q. #14 ‘Accomplished Professionals’ declaring “Yes. I have experienced police stops and/or threat of gun use,” one hundred percent (100%) affirmed Q.#9 - ‘YES’ “I want good police protection.” [100% ‘Yes’; n=64/0/1] One person skipped ‘good police’ Q.#9. Moreover, of the [n=110] ‘Professionals’ responding to crosstab Q.#16 “I teach my family special ‘safety’ rules,” the strong affirmative reply is also at 100% “YES” at crosstab Q.#9: “I want good police protection.” [n=108/0/2]. 2 persons skipped ‘good police protection’ question.
EXHIBIT 4.c - ACCOMPLISHED PROFESSIONALS CROSS-TAB Q.#14 – “I have experienced police stops and/or threat of gun use.” *n=65 (100%)
Q. #13 - “I have experienced ‘eyesight judgment’ and ‘do you belong here?’ demand.” 84.3% Q. #15 - “I caution against night walks wearing a hoodie.” 73.4% Q. #17 - “I know that I and my (grand) children are at risk.” 90.3% 76 | P a g e
Of the n=65 ‘Professionals’ at Exhibit 4.c, above, declaring (crosstab Q. #14) “I have experienced police stops and/or threat of gun use,” 84.4% say ‘Yes’ [n=54] to Q. #13 “I have experienced ‘eyesight judgment’ and ‘do you belong here?’ demand.” One person skipped Q. #13. [15.6% gave ‘No’ as a reply]. Moreover, of the n=65 ‘Professionals’ at Exhibit 4.c declaring (crosstab Q. #14) “I have experienced police stops and/or threat of gun use,”73.4% say ‘Yes’ [n=47] to Q. #15 “I caution against night walks wearing a hoodie.” [26.6%; n=17 gave ‘No’ as a reply; (1) person skipped question #15]. Of the n=65 ‘Accomplished Professionals’ declaring crosstab Q. #14 “Yes. I have experienced police stops and/or threat of gun use,” 90.3% [n=56] give a ‘Yes’ response to Q. #17: “I know that I and my (grand) children are at risk.” [9.7% ‘No’ n=6] Six persons skipped Q. #17.
Who’s At-Risk? – ‘SYG Unjust’ Crosstab Totals EXHIBIT 4.d Accomplished Professionals and the American Dream CROSSTAB Q. #12 - “I think “stand your ground” laws are unjust for certain citizen groups. [n=108 crosstab]
Q. #6 “What is your average household income?” Of the Exhibit 4.d professionals reporting “Stand Your Ground laws are unjust for certain citizen groups[ n=108 crosstab],” 39.8% comprise $50,000-$99,999 ‘middle class income’ [Q.#6]; (103 responses; 5 persons skipped Q.#6) Moreover, of those believing ‘SYG unjust’ [crosstab Q.#12], 100% avow a desire for ‘moral law enforcement’: “I want good police protection.” [106 ‘yes’/2 skipped]. Survey results further show 77.6% [n=83/107] “I have experienced ‘eyesight judgment’ and ‘do you belong here” demand; one-half (50.5%) having “experienced police stops and/or threat of gun use;” 100% enjoying time with family; 98.1% “I live a good life;” 98.1% “I have plans for the future.” Black/African American professionals make up 78.3% of the ‘SYG Unjust’ Q.#12 crosstab respondents. The demographic counts are listed below at Table 2, as follows:
Table 2 – ACCOMPLISHED PROFESSIONS – By Household Income Q.#12 – CROSSTAB “I think ‘stand your ground’ laws are unjust for certain citizen groups.” n=108 (100%) Racial Category Yes White/Caucasian 14.2% Black/African–American 78.3% All other racial persons 7.5% Answered Question 106 Skipped Question 2 77 | P a g e
Parental Reality: A Child At-Risk Father: Murdered teen Jordan Davis was worried he wouldn’t ‘Make it’ in life. -By Freddie Allen, NNPA March 25, 2014 ‘Dad, I don’t think I’m going to make it,” said the 17-year old child, Jordan Davis to his father. He began to cry one night sitting on the patio of his father’s condo. Jordan wanted to work and was having a hard time finding a job. He didn’t feel great about his grades, either. “Don’t think that you’re in this world by yourself,” the father reassuring his son that he wasn’t alone. “You’re going to make it.” Jordan dried his tears and hugged his father. Looking back, Ron Davis said, maybe he knew more than what I knew at the time. Maybe he saw something. “Mom, what would you do if I died?” Shocked, his mother, Lucy McBath, replied, “Why are you asking me these questions, Jordan?” “I need to know how you would handle it,” Jordan answered. The mother told her son that God promised her that he would live a long fruitful life, that he would get married and give her grandchildren one day. Jordan continued to press, telling his mother that he needed to know that she would be okay, that she would be able to go on. McBath finally told her son that she would be devastated, but she would find the strength to go on. This time it was the teen reassuring one of his parents. “I’ll be good, you’ll be the ones that will be suffering,” Jordan told his mother. “I’ll be in Heaven with Jesus. I’ll be fine. I’m not afraid to die.” ______Part VI – The Bishop’s Task Force Results Incarceration of a million black youth in 2013 to 50+ years’ incarceration means that by 2063 the black American population will be significantly reduced. Does wholesale imprisonment amount to genocide? Human rights crimes? Does lifelong imprisonment status instigate a “continuous loss of potential life and causes death on descendants?” For whom is the city of Philadelphia building prisons while closing 23 schools? Fifty years after Martin Luther King, Jr. led the March on Washington, what is the state of the American dream for black citizens of the United States? Does ‘Stand Your Ground’ law create disparate impact on certain citizens? Most members of racial minority communities are law abiding. Most members want more police protection. Police must take different approaches within minority communities. Source: The Police in America. Samuel Walker, University of Nebraska and Charles M. Katz, Arizona State University-West This research report commissioned by the Bishop’s Task Force on Racial Profiling concurs.
Stand Your Ground Disparate Impact
“Is American justice system color-blind? The statistics say no.” – John Roman THE BISHOP’S TASK FORCE REPORT Non-Cross Tab Totals: “Is Stand Your Ground unjust for certain citizen groups?” YES. 83%
“Is Stand Your Ground unjust for certain citizen groups?” YES. 83% Average Agreement. Congregation C and Historically African-American C-A = 85.4%. [Avg.] General Public Surveys GP and Homeless GP-A = 78.4% [*78.35% rounded off] Accomplished Professionals = 86.4%. Note: Urban Youth and Campus surveys do not ask ‘SYG Unjust’ question. 78 | P a g e
Recommendations: “Seeking to transform unjust structures of society.” The 2012 General Convention established the Anglican Communion Five Marks of Mission as a mission priority framework for the 2013-2015 triennium, “to seek to transform unjust structures of society” listed among them. The Bishop’s Task Force research on racial profiling, recommends ecumenical Moral Voice advocation and actions toward resisting racial profiling and the rescission of Stand Your Ground states’ law. The results of this research on racial profiling proposes to the Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio and the Task Force commissioners the raising of an Ecumenical Commission on Racial Profiling initiative the following actions, Item #7, below, being the primary focus of this present communiqué: 1. The development of communiqués to Congress urging funding for the full support of the work of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ), so that it has the resources to investigate civil rights violations by law enforcement across the nation. 2. The communiqués moreover urging Congressional passage of S.1038; H.R.2851 - End Racial Profiling Act of 2013 (Originally End Racial Profiling Act of 2011) for enforcing 14th Amendment constitutional right to equal protection of law; and strengthening the Department of Justice’s “Guidance Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement.” (See page 46 of the Task Force report describing the federal advocacy work of the Public Policy network of TEC) 3. In the interest of fair, thorough and unbiased answers, the recommendation here is for ecumenical Public Advocation for thorough, independent inquiry into events surrounding the death of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida and supporting the work of the FBI, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the Department of Justice in their investigations, not only of what happened to Trayvon, but all of the other similar “shoot first” cases that have happened and will happen across our nation. 4. TEC adoption of R13-01 “A Resolution on the Resistance to Racial Profiling,” as amended, approved by the 139th annual convention of the Diocese of Southern Ohio. The vision is for wide ecumenical advocation by the USA Episcopal and other churches of every denomination speaking in One Great Moral Voice against the injustices and havoc of Stand Your Ground states’ law, its disparate impact on certain citizen groups. 5. Moreover, Task Force research recommends review and advocacy support for State level rescission of policies emanating from Stand your Ground laws and the War on Drugs, as described in the Task Force research report. 6. Formal development of next step planning for raising a legal claim: A demand as a right of citizenship for relief and protection from the disparate impact of legal racial profiling. Facts recited in this research on racial profiling commissioned by the Diocese of Southern combine to give rise to a legally enforceable right or judicial action, i.e., the rescission of Stand Your Ground laws sanctifying racial profiling and its deadly impact on certain citizen groups. 7. Proposal: A Spring 2014 Think Tank for ‘next-step’ discussion and ‘legal claim’ planning to be commissioned by the Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio in partnership with the Office of the Dean and the Vestry of Christ Church Cathedral, an Ecumenical Commission on Racial Profiling sanctioned by the Task Force. The proposal calls for the raising of a collection of knowledgeable professionals, diverse experts having the ability for spontaneous creative ideas for problem-solving in intensive group discussion, working in the interest of dismantling legal racial profiling and Stand Your Ground laws, and remedying the disparate impact of such unjust practices on certain citizen groups, particularly African American men and boys. The body of discussants should include religious leaders, academic and urban studies scholars, civil rights legal scholars and litigators, social justice, political, economic, public policy and other scientists. The goal is to devise and offer action solutions in sessions outlining the difficulties of the what’s, the who’s and how’s of nullification process, simultaneously mapping out fundamental implementation strategies for achieving success. Reference also the Brookings Institution’s The Hamilton Project. 79 | P a g e
Fair Use Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 Discussion
Reference 1: End Racial Profiling Act of 2013 (S. 1038; H.R.2851) govtrack.us/congress/bills
113th Congress (2013-2014) 4% chance of getting past committee. 1% chance of being enacted. 09/13/2013 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Latest Action: Security, and Investigations. Major Recorded There are no Roll Call votes for this bill Votes:
The End Racial Profiling Act 2013 is designed to enforce the constitutional right to equal protection of the laws by eliminating racial profiling through changing the policies and procedures underlying the practice. First, the bill provides a prohibition on racial profiling, enforceable by declaratory or injunctive relief. Second, the bill mandates racial profiling issues as part of Federal law enforcement training, the collection of data on all routine or spontaneous investigatory activities that is to be submitted through a standardized form to the Department of Justice. Third, the receipt of federal law enforcement and other funds that go to state and local governments is conditioned on state and local government adoption of effective policies that prohibit racial profiling. [Cincinnati City Council authorized passage of such policies]. Fourth, the Justice Department is authorized to provide grants for the development and implementation of best policing practices, such as early warning systems, technology integration, and other management protocols that discourage profiling. The Attorney General is required to provide periodic reports to assess the nature of any ongoing discriminatory profiling practices. Reference State of Ohio Stand Your Ground proposal that on 21 November 2013 passes the House with 62-27 vote. The Bill now goes to the Senate. Source: govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s1038
Discussion Reference 2 Stand Your Ground laws: “No duty to retreat?”
In July, 2013, Republican Senator John McCain joined President Barack Obama in a call for review of "Stand Your Ground" law, urging that the state legislature in his home state of Arizona consider revising their law. And on yesterday I received an email indicating that in the state of Ohio, the city of Youngstown is the most recent city to pass an anti-Stand Your Ground resolution. Thus far, in Ohio, Canton, Dayton, Cincinnati and Youngstown have all passed (some unanimously) resolutions against Stand Your Ground law. Note the End Profiling Act 2011 indicates that the receipt of federal law enforcement and other funds that go to state and local governments is conditioned on state and local government adoption of effective policies that prohibit racial profiling.
80 | P a g e
ACLU Editorial Mark P. Fancher ACLU of Michigan Racial Justice Project
“…The pertinent provision of Florida's self-defense law provides that a person who is attacked can stand his or her ground and respond with deadly force "if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."
Michigan's law likewise provides that, under proper circumstances, there is no duty to retreat, and individuals may use deadly force anywhere they have a right to be if they "honestly and reasonably" believe it is necessary to prevent imminent death, great bodily injury or sexual assault to self or others.
What may or may not have been considered during the adoption of these laws is the fact that whether a person's violent response to an attack was "honestly and reasonably" necessary can be purely a matter of opinion.
The subjectivity of these laws poses certain hazards, given the undeniable impact of race on the criminal justice system.
Somehow, decisions that are made every day by police, prosecutors, judges and others about the guilt or innocence of people of African descent have resulted in their over incarceration relative to their representation in the general population. Specifically, the Sentencing Project reported that while in 2007 there were 412 white prisoners per 100,000 white Michigan residents, there were 2,262 black prisoners for every 100,000 black residents. Nationally, about 13% of the population is of African descent, but approximately 40% of U.S. prisoners are black.
Because of the criminal justice system's racial reality, many have asked whether police would have allowed Trayvon Martin to go home if he had managed to subdue and kill George Zimmerman. Will a white suburban woman who kills after having been accosted by a mugger in a mall parking lot be treated in precisely the same way as a black youth with a criminal record who is forced to justifiably defend against an unprovoked drive-by shooting in Detroit?
These laws present the potential for white suspects to receive the benefit of the doubt, and for black suspects to become subject to racial presumptions of black criminality that are deeply rooted in stereotypes that were opportunistically created generations ago for purposes of economic advantage and the control of an oppressed population.
There are still other questions begging for answers. Will those inclined toward vigilante justice feel more confident that the law will protect them when they inject themselves into threatening situations? Will police become confused as they sort through legal questions that normally don't come up during routine arrests?” -Mark P. Fancher is the staff attorney for the ACLU of Michigan Racial Justice Project.
81 | P a g e
“All the kids use drugs…except my African-American friends. They are afraid they might get arrested.” –MBM Personal Conversation with a college student.
Discussion
Reference 3: The War on Drugs and state level reforms. drugwarfacts.org/cms/Cocaine#sthash.XoSSne1l.dpuf
Florida Congressman Henry "Trey" Radel pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of possession of cocaine in D.C. Superior Court on Wednesday and was sentenced to one year of probation. Radel, 37, was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives last year… -Gabriel Debenedetti WASHINGTON (Reuters)
Drug War Facts: Racial Profile and Demographic Characteristic Prevalence of Cocaine and Crack Use in the US, 2012, by Demographic Characteristics Numbers in Thousands Cocaine (Total) Crack Demographic Past Past Past Past Characteristic Lifetime Lifetime Year Month Year Month Total 37,688 4,671 1,650 9,015 921 443 Age 12-17 265 180 30 34 19 * 18-25 4,267 1,600 398 34 19 * 26 or Older 33,156 2,890 1,222 8,327 762 405 Gender Male 22,757 3,298 1,231 6,214 699 329 Hispanic Origin and
Race Not Hispanic or Latino 33,030 4,005 1,481 8,070 888 428 White 28,583 3,160 1,009 6,306 579 231 Black or African- 2,978 552 336 1,417 252 157 American American Indian or 286 37 24 52 7 * Alaska Native Native Hawaiian or 71 * 2 18 * * Other Pacific Islander Asian 507 98 58 68 17 17 Two or More Races 605 123 52 209 34 24 Hispanic or Latino 4,658 666 169 945 33 15 *: Low precision; no estimate reported. Source: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Results from the 2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Detailed Tables. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2013, Tables 1.29A and 1.34A. - See more at: http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Cocaine#sthash.XoSSne1l.dpuf
82 | P a g e
CRACK COCAINE: USERS vs. ARRESTS While African-American defendants account for roughly 80% of those arrested for crack-related offenses, public health data have found that 2/3rds of crack cocaine users are white or Hispanic. -wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Sentencing_Act Discussion Reference 4: The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010
The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-220) an Act of Congress, was signed into law by U.S. President Barack Obama on August 3, 2010.
The law reduced the disparity between the amount of crack cocaine and powder cocaine needed to trigger certain U.S. federal criminal penalties from a 100:1 weight ratio to an 18:1 weight ratio and eliminated the 5-year mandatory minimum sentence for simple possession of crack cocaine.
Extensive research by the United States Sentencing Commission and other experts has suggested that the differences between the effects of the two drugs are exaggerated and that the sentencing disparity is unwarranted. Further controversy surrounding the 100:1 ratio was a result of its description by some as being racially biased and contributing to a disproportionate number of African Americans being sentenced for crack cocaine offenses.
The Creation of Legal Disparity: Crack vs. powder penalties.
The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 created a disparity between federal penalties for crack cocaine and powder cocaine offenses. The possession of an amount of crack 100 times smaller than an amount of powder cocaine automatically led to mandatory minimum sentences and other disparities between the two forms of the drug.
Sentencing disparity and racial disparate effects
In the 3 decades prior to the passing of the Fair Sentencing Act, those who were arrested for possessing crack cocaine faced much more severe penalties than those in possession of powder cocaine. While a person found with 5 grams of crack cocaine faced a 5-year mandatory minimum prison sentence. To receive that same sentence, a person must hold 500 grams powder cocaine. Similarly, those carrying 10 grams of crack cocaine faced a 10-year mandatory sentence, while possession of 1,000 grams of powder cocaine was required for that same 10-year mandatory sentencing. The sentencing disparity between these two drug offenses is racially biased. In 1995, the U.S. Sentencing Commission concluded that the disparity created a "racial imbalance in federal prisons and led to more severe sentences for low-level crack dealers than for wholesale suppliers of powder cocaine.
"The sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine has contributed to the imprisonment of African Americans at six times the rate of whites and to the United States' position as the world's leader in incarcerations." –U.S. Senator Dick Durbin.
83 | P a g e
Timelines wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Sentencing_Act In 2002, the United States Sentencing Commission "found that the ratio was created based upon a misperception of the dangers of crack cocaine, which had since been proven to have a less drastic effect than previously thought." In 2009, the U.S. Sentencing Commission introduced figures stating that no class of drug is as racially skewed as crack in terms of numbers of offenses. According to the data: Of the 6,020 powder cocaine convictions, 53% were Hispanic, 17% of offenders were white; 28% were black. Of the 5,669 crack cocaine convictions, 79% offenders were black, 10% were white and 10% were Hispanic. A 115-month average imprisonment was imposed for crack offenses; 87 months for powder cocaine offenses. The sentencing disparity results in more African-Americans spending more time in the prison system.
Legal challenges: Attempts to change the disparity Although the 100:1 federal sentencing ratio remained unchanged from 1986 to 2010, two U.S. Supreme Court cases provided lower courts with discretion in determining penalties for cocaine sentences: Kimbrough v. United States (2007) and Spears v. United States gave lower courts the option to set penalties and allowed judges who disagreed to depart from the statutory ratio. In 2009, the U.S. District Courts for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Western District of Virginia and District of Columbia used these cases to create 1:1 sentencing ratios of crack cocaine to powder cocaine.
Opposition to the Act Some Congressmen claimed that the severe sentences for crack cocaine were justified by a high correlation between crack cocaine arrests and both violent crime and past criminal history.
Key provisions The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, signed into law by President Obama on August 3, 2010, amended the Controlled Substances Act and the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act The new law increased the amount of a controlled substance or mixture containing a cocaine base i.e., crack cocaine, that would result in mandatory minimum prison terms for trafficking and by increasing monetary penalties for drug trafficking and for importing/exporting controlled substances. The 5-year mandatory minimum was also eliminated for first-time possession of crack cocaine. Sentencing may take account of accompanying violence, among other aggravating factors.
Monetary Impact The Congressional Budget Office (CBO)has estimated that implementing the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 will reduce the prison population by 1,550 person-years over the time period from 2011–2015, creating a monetary savings of $42 million during that period. The CBO also estimates that the Act's requirement for the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct a report on the effectiveness of a Department of Justice (DOJ) grant program to treat nonviolent drug offenders would cost less than $500,000 from appropriated funds.
84 | P a g e
On October 15, 2010, the U.S. Sentencing Commission approved a temporary change in the sentencing guidelines: Congress increased the amount of crack cocaine that would trigger a 5-year mandatory minimum sentence from 5 grams to 28 grams (one ounce). The minimum was raised from 50 grams to 280 grams for triggering a 10-year mandatory. The amendment also creates harsher sentences for crack cocaine offenses involving violence or bribery of law enforcement officials. The Commission made the amendment permanent on June 30, 2011.
Effective November 1, 2011, the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 applies retroactively to reduce the sentences of certain offenders already sentenced for federal crack cocaine offenses before the passage of the bill. (See July 2013 US Sentencing Report showing % of crack offenders benefitting retroactively). However, advocates of the Fair Sentencing Act lobbied Congress to make the entire act retroactive, as "there is no scientific basis for the disparity.” Advocates argue for elimination of the sentencing disparity altogether and believe that the impact of the on racial disparities in drug enforcement may be limited for several reasons. First, the bill reduces without parity the ratio between crack and powder cocaine sentencing. Second, the Act does not address the enforcement prerogatives of federal criminal justice agencies. Third, the Act does not reduce sentences for those prosecuted under state law. State prosecutions account for a vast majority of incarcerations for drug-related offenses. Source: -wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Sentencing_Act
Citing high arrest and dropout rates, cities and school districts rethink “zero tolerance” We are not accepting that we need to have hundreds of students getting arrested and getting records. Schools around the country that use so-called zero tolerance policies and station police officers at school have seen a steady rise in the number of suspensions, expulsions and arrests for minor nonviolent offenses, but little improvement in academic achievement or higher graduation rates. The widespread criminalization of teenagers for minor offenses –the majority of whom are young people of color — has led many schools administrators, city lawmakers and even law enforcement officials to question the approach. As the New York Times notes, several large school districts, including Los Angeles, Baltimore, Chicago and Denver, have reconsidered the punitive approach in favor of providing counseling and behavioral support for students.” -Katie McDonough is an assistant editor for Salon, focusing on lifestyle.
REDUCED SENTENCING, CRACK OFFENDERS and RACE– Mother Jones July 2013
85 | P a g e
Discussion – Drug Use Disparities in ‘Black and White’ Reference 5: Criminal Justice Fact Sheet This fact sheet may be found on the NAACP site, and is copied here [at Exuberant Eclectic website] in full to help generate greater discussion and awareness racial disparities in incarceration.
Incarceration Trends in America From 1980 to 2008, the number of people incarcerated in America quadrupled-from roughly 500,000 to 2.3 million people. Today, the US is 5% of the World population and has 25% of world prisoners. Combining the number of people in prison and jail with those under parole or probation supervision, 1 in every 31 adults, or 3.2 percent of the population is under some form of correctional control.
Racial Disparities in Incarceration African Americans now constitute nearly 1 million of the total 2.3 million incarcerated population African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites Together, African American and Hispanics comprised 58% of all prisoners in 2008, even though African Americans and Hispanics make up approximately one quarter of the US population According to Unlocking America, if African American and Hispanics were incarcerated at the same rates of whites, today's prison and jail populations would decline by approximately 50% One in six black men had been incarcerated as of 2001. If current trends continue, one in three black males born today can expect to spend time in prison during his lifetime 1 in 100 African American women are in prison Nationwide, African-Americans represent 26% of juvenile arrests, 44% of youth who are detained, 46% of the youth who are judicially waived to criminal court, and 58% of the youth admitted to state prisons (Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice).
Drug Sentencing Disparities About 14 million Whites and 2.6 million African Americans report using an illicit drug 5 times as many Whites are using drugs as African Americans, yet African Americans are sent to prison for drug offenses at 10 times the rate of Whites African Americans represent 12% of the total population of drug users, but 38% of those arrested for drug offenses, and 59% of those in state prison for a drug offense. African Americans serve virtually as much time in prison for a drug offense (58.7 months) as whites do for a violent offense (61.7 months). (Sentencing Project)
Contributing Factors Inner city crime prompted by social and economic isolation Crime/drug arrest rates: African Americans represent 12% of monthly drug users, but comprise 32% of persons arrested for drug possession "Get tough on crime" and "war on drugs" policies Mandatory minimum sentencing, especially disparities in sentencing for crack and powder cocaine possession
86 | P a g e
In 2002, blacks constituted more than 80% of the people sentenced under the federal crack cocaine laws and served substantially more time in prison for drug offenses than did whites, despite that fact that more than 2/3 of crack cocaine users in the U.S. are white or Hispanic. "Three Strikes"/habitual offender policies Zero Tolerance policies as a result of perceived problems of school violence; adverse affect on black children. 35% of black children grades 7-12 have been suspended or expelled at some point in their school careers compared to 20% of Hispanics and 15% of whites.
Effects of Incarceration Jail reduces work time of young people over the next decade by 25-30 percent when compared with arrested youths who were not incarcerated. Jails and prisons are recognized as settings where society's infectious diseases are highly concentrated. Prison has not been proven as a rehabilitation for behavior, as two-thirds of prisoners will reoffend .
Exorbitant Cost of Incarceration: Is it Worth It? About $70 billion dollars are spent on corrections yearly. Prisons and jails consume a growing portion of the nearly $200 billion we spend annually on public safety. Source: exuberanteclectic.com/2011/04/naacp-incarcertation-statisticsCriminal
“There are many ways to hijack political power. One of them is to draw state or city legislative districts around large prisons — and pretend that the inmates are legitimate constituents. “ –Brent Staples See: prisonersofthecensus.org See also: prisonpolicy.org/graphs/ohio_migration_2010
87 | P a g e
OUR SCHOOLS ARE AT-RISK. One of the foremost authorities on education in the United States, the former U.S. assistant secretary of education, Diane Ravitch, argues that the crisis in American education is not a crisis of academic achievement but a concerted effort to destroy public schools in this country…She warns that major foundations, individual billionaires, and Wall Street hedge fund managers are encouraging the privatization of public education, some for idealistic reasons, others for profit. Many who work with equity funds are eyeing public education as an emerging market for investors…Ravitch makes clear what is right about U.S. education, how policy makers are failing to address the root causes of educational failure, and how we can fix it. Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America’s Public Schools. Ravitch, Diane. Copyright 2013. Discussion Reference 6: School to Prison Pipeline 2003 Incarcerated America.nyclu.org
ZERO TOLERANCE DISCIPLINE, DISCRIMINATION, AND THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE “The School to Prison Pipeline (STPP) is a nationwide system of local, state, and federal education and public safety policies that pushes students out of school and into the criminal justice system. The system disproportionately targets youth of color and youth with disabilities. Inequities in areas such as school discipline, policing practices, high-stakes testing, wealth and healthcare distribution, school “grading” systems, and the prison-industrial complex all contribute to the Pipeline. The STPP operates directly and indirectly. Directly, schools send their students into the Pipeline through zero tolerance policies, and involving the police in minor discipline incidents. All too often school rules are enforced through metal detectors, pat-downs and frisks, arrests, and referrals to the juvenile justice system. And schools pressured to raise graduation and testing numbers can sometimes artificially achieve this by pushing out low-performing students into GED programs and the juvenile justice system. Indirectly, schools push students towards the criminal justice system by excluding them from the learning environment and isolating them from their peer groups through suspension, expulsion, ineffective retention policies, transfers, and high-stakes testing requirements.
THE RISE OF THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE DID NOT CORRESPOND WITH AN INCREASE IN SCHOOL VIOLENCE. Zero Tolerance policies directly and indirectly feed the Pipeline Crimes against and by youth were actually declining before zero tolerance policies took hold. Schools rely on suspension, expulsion, citations, summonses, and arrests to handle disciplinary problems like bringing cell phones and ipods to school, smoking cigarettes, and skipping class. Students who might easily be disciplined through a visit to the principal’s office end up in jail cells—this is the essence of the Pipeline. Criminal charges are brought against youth in schools for violations that never would be considered criminal if committed by an adult. Suspensions indirectly feed the Pipeline A child who has been suspended is more likely to fall behind in school, be retained a grade, drop out of high school, commit a crime, and become incarcerated as an adult.
88 | P a g e
The best demographic indicators of children who will be suspended are not the type or severity of the crime, but the color of their skin, their special education status, the school they go to, and whether they have been suspended before. The Pipeline limits opportunities for our most vulnerable youth Zero tolerance and suspensions disproportionately affect students of color and those with learning disabilities. Black students represented only 17% of national public school enrollment in 2000 but accounted for 34% of suspensions. Special education students represent 8.6% of public school students, but 32% of youth in juvenile detention nationwide. Black students with learning disabilities are three times more likely to be suspended than white students with learning disabilities and four times more likely to end up in correctional facilities. School disciplinary, juvenile, and criminal records work against disadvantaged students when they apply for colleges, scholarships, jobs, and selective high schools. In many places, having a criminal record can prevent students and their families from living in public housing. Schools rely on suspension, expulsion, citations, summonses, and arrests to handle disciplinary problems like bringing cell phones and ipods to school, smoking cigarettes, and skipping class. Students who might easily be disciplined through a visit to the principal’s office end up in jail cells—this is the essence of the Pipeline. Criminal charges are brought against youth in schools for violations that never would be considered criminal if committed by an adult. Source: Human Rights Watch 2003 Incarcerated America.nyclu.org/schooltoprison
General Statistics 1.6 million: Total number of state and federal prisoners in the United States as of December 2010, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. 128,195: Number of state and federal prisoners housed in private facilities as of December 2010 37: Percent by which number of prisoners in private facilities increased between 2002 and 2009 217,690: Total federal inmate population as of May 2012, according to the Bureau of Prisons 27,970: Number of federal inmates in privately managed facilities within the Bureau of Prisons 33,330: Estimated size of detained immigrant population as of 2011, according to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Source: Human Rights Watch 2003 Incarcerated America.nyclu.org/schooltoprison
89 | P a g e
Source: The National Opportunity to Learn Campaign www.otlcampaign.org/blog/2013/04/05/color-school-closures
The Color of School Closures Mass school closings have become a hallmark of today's dominant education policy agenda. But rather than helping students, these closures disrupt whole communities. And as U.S. Department of Education data suggest, the most recent rounds of mass closings in Chicago, New York City and Philadelphia disproportionately hurt Black and low-income students.
Source: The National Opportunity to Learn Campaign www.otlcampaign.org/blog/2014/01/22/cycle-of-school-closures
The Cycle of School Closures Privately-run charters siphon money away from neighborhood schools. Schools deprived of resources cannot provide the supports and opportunities students need. They cannot meet the high standards set by policymakers. Officials then label the schools “under-performing” and close them down. Students pushed out of charter schools mid-year are sent to local public schools which are obliged to take them in—regardless of capacity or funding. 90 | P a g e
Fenning and Rose (2007)…attribute high rates of school suspension and expulsion rates to racism and bias, specifically institutional racism. School policies are often designed by individuals raised with White middle-class values and the assumption is made that all students are raised with a similar perspective. In their research, Fenning and Rose discovered that minority students were more likely to be suspended for nonviolent issues, such as class disruption and disrespecting teacher authority. Thus, these students are more likely to be punished because of teacher lack of behavior management, lack of connection with the teacher or school, or unclear classroom rules. Yet, when punishing students, schools fail to examine whether student disrespect could be the result of school factors as well. Source: nasponline.org/publications/.../mocq374impact_zero_tolerance.asp
School Funding Inequality TOPEKA, Kan. — Kansas’s highest court ruled on Friday that funding disparities between school districts violated the state’s Constitution and ordered the Legislature to bridge the gap, setting the stage for a messy budget battle in the capital this year. With its ruling, the State Supreme Court averted, for now, a larger constitutional showdown by ordering a lower court to reconsider the most controversial part of the case — whether the public school system statewide was adequately funded. The lower court originally ordered an increase of more than $400 million in school spending, and the conservative-led majority in the Legislature had vowed to defy that order if it were upheld. Legislators said it was the job of lawmakers, not judges, to appropriate money. Still, the unanimous court decision Friday would seem to leave some Republican lawmakers in Kansas unsettled because it orders them, by July 1, to potentially appropriate tens of millions of dollars in payments to poorer districts to make the school system more equitable. The Legislature had been withholding those constitutionally mandated payments in recent years. The issue of increasing base aid per student was politically charged because at the same time that lawmakers, led by the Republican governor, Sam Brownback, refused to increase funding, they passed the largest tax cuts in state history. Source: New York Times. Court Orders Kansas Legislature to Spend More on Schools. Trevor Graff and John Eligon, March 7, 2014
Corrections Corporation of America 66: Number of facilities owned and operated by Corrections Corporation of America, the country’s largest private prison company based on number of facilities 91,000: Number of beds available in CCA facilities across 20 states and the District of Columbia $1.7 billion: Total revenue recorded by CCA in 2011 $17.4 million: lobbying expenditures in the last 10 years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. $1.9 million: total political contributions from years 2003 to 2012, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics. $3.7 million: Executive compensation for CEO Damon T. Hininger in 2011 132: Recorded number of inmate-on-inmate assaults at CCA-run Idaho Correctional Center between Sept. 2007 and Sept. 2008 42: Recorded number of inmate-on-inmate assaults at the state-run Idaho State Correctional Institution in the same time frame (both prisons at the time held about 1,500 inmates)
The Geo Group, Inc., the U.S.’s 2nd largest private detention company $1.6 billion: Total revenue in year 2011, according to its annual report. 65: Number of domestic correctional facilities owned and operated by Geo Group, Inc. 65,716: Number of beds available in Geo Group, Inc.’s domestic correctional facilities $2.5 million: Lobbying expenditures in the last 8 years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. $2.9 million: Total political contributions from years 2003 to 2012, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics. $5.7 million: Executive compensation for CEO George C. Zoley in 2011 91 | P a g e
$6.5 million: Damages awarded in a wrongful death lawsuit against the company last June for the beating death of an inmate by his cellmate at a GEO Group-run Oklahoma prison. An appeal has been filed and is pending. $1.1 million: Fine levied against the company in November 2011 by the New Mexico Department of Corrections for inadequate staffing at one of its prisons -Source: Suevon Lee. ProPublica. By the Numbers: The U.S.’s Growing For-Profit Detention Industry
The Gun Control Act of 1968 requires licensed dealers to collect certain information when a firearm is sold. A buyer must affirm that he or she is at least 21 and not a felon, a fugitive, an illegal immigrant or mentally ill. Dealers must list the information on Form 4473, with the firearm's serial numbers, to allow police to trace guns.
Lingering Effects: Discriminatory Sentencing “As a result, thousands of people – mostly African Americans – have received disproportionately harsh prison sentences." –U.S. Senator Dick Durbin.
Racial Profiling Lives On. The historic ruling by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin that the stop-and-frisk practices of the New York Police Department violate the Constitution is being applauded as a major victory against unreasonable policing. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, meanwhile, is bitterly disappointed. “This is a very dangerous decision made by a judge who I think does not understand how policing works,” he said after the decision was handed down Monday. But if unrestrained policing is, for Mr. Bloomberg, policing that works, it turns out that he can still have it. The ruling by Judge Scheindlin, of the Federal District Court in Manhattan, does nothing to disrupt the authority the Supreme Court has given police officers to target African-Americans and Latinos with little or no basis. Despite the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of that provision gives the police frighteningly wide discretion to follow, stop, question, frisk and employ excessive force against African-Americans and Latinos who have shown virtually no indication of wrongdoing. -The New York Times. August 14, 2013, LOS ANGELES.
92 | P a g e
Ohio’s “zero-tolerance” policy for certain infractions committed by public school students would be repealed with the passage of Senate Bill (SB 167), introduced by Senator Charleta Tavares (D-Columbus). SB 167 would repeal Ohio Revised Code section 3313.534 and replace it with a requirement that all Ohio public schools “eliminate any policy of zero tolerance for violent, disruptive, or inappropriate behavior, including excessive truancy.” Source: mediatrackers.org/ohio/2013/09/23/ohio-democrat-proposes-repeal-school-zero-tolerance-policies
Zero tolerance polices – Ohio As Introduced 130th General Assembly
Regular Session S. B. No. 167 2013-2014
Senator Tavares Cosponsors: Senators Schiavoni, Brown, Sawyer
A BILL To amend section 3313.534 of the Revised Code with respect to school district policies for violent, disruptive, or inappropriate behavior. Removes the current requirement that each school district adopt a policy of zero tolerance for violent, disruptive, and inappropriate behavior by students, and requires districts to eliminate their current zero tolerance policies. Prohibits school districts from adopting new zero tolerance policies. Requires each school district to adopt a policy that allows for many factors to be considered prior to the suspension or expulsion of a student and that establishes alternative strategies, including prevention, intervention, restorative justice, peer mediation, and counseling.
CONTENT AND OPERATION Under current law, each school district must have a policy of zero tolerance for violent, disruptive, or inappropriate behavior, including excessive truancy, and must establish strategies to address such behavior that range from prevention to intervention. The bill removes this requirement and, instead, requires each school district to eliminate its current zero tolerance policy and expressly prohibits a district from readopting that policy or adopting a new one.
The bill further requires each school district to adopt a policy that allows for many factors to be considered prior to the suspension or expulsion of a student. That policy must establish alternative strategies, including prevention, intervention, restorative justice, peer mediation, and counseling to address discipline for student behavioral problems and to address harassment, intimidation, and bullying. Finally, the bill states in an uncodified provision that zero tolerance policies often punish a student with a behavioral problem twice by both expelling that student and preventing that student's education during the expulsion. It then states that it is the General Assembly's intent (in enacting the bill) to provide support for students with behavioral problems and to ensure they remain in school.
Background on discipline for violations of a school code of conduct Current law, not affected by the bill, provides for the suspension and expulsion of students for disciplinary violations. Under that law, each school district board is required to adopt a student code of conduct and policies for the enforcement of that code. The district superintendent or a school principal may "suspend" a student for up to ten days for minor violations of the district's code. 93 | P a g e
Discussion Reference 7: The Poverty Defense Michele Estrin Gilman Excerpted from: Michele Estrin Gilman, The Poverty Defense, 47 University of Richmond Law Review 495 (January, 2013) (380 Footnotes)
ABSTRACT Is stealing a loaf of bread to feed a starving family of eight a crime? Or, is poverty a defense? In Victor Hugo's classic, Les Misérables, the protagonist, Jean Valjean, commits this crime and is sentenced to five years of hard labor. Hugo clearly intends the reader to sympathize with Valjean. The punishment not only seems grossly disproportionate to the crime, but Valjean also seemingly had no other choice. While Valjean's crime may inspire sympathy among readers (and musical theater aficionados alike), it is widely assumed and accepted in our American criminal justice system that poverty is not a defense to crime. In 1971, Judge David Bazelon of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia famously challenged this assumption, arguing, in dissent to a decision upholding a murder conviction, that juries should be allowed to consider a defendant's “rotten social background”--that is, how growing up under circumstances of severe environmental deprivation can subsequently influence a criminal defendant's mental state and actions.
In turn, Bazelon's dissent spurred a lively academic debate as to whether the law should recognize a poverty defense, what such a defense would look like, and how it would operate. The question is presumed to be the stuff of the ivory tower; one scholar deemed it “entirely the province of intellectuals engaged in scholarly debate.” Gone unnoticed in this debate is that one area of law recognizes a poverty defense to wrongful conduct, and this defense is implicated in thousands of cases a year. In both civil and criminal child neglect cases, various states recognize that conduct that would otherwise be considered neglect is excused on account of a parent's poverty. In short, a poverty defense is not hypothetical. The child neglect case law provides evidence about how the poverty defense works in practice and can guide scholars--and more importantly, lawmakers and courts--in considering whether to extend a poverty defense to other areas of the law.
Considering a poverty defense is timely in light of our increasing poverty rate and the correlation between poverty and crime. As of 2010, more than fifteen percent of all Americans live below the federal government's official poverty line, which is $22,314 for a family of four (meaning that a family earning $22,315 is not considered poor). Twenty million Americans, or 6.7 percent of the population, live in extreme poverty, defined as those living at fifty percent or less of the official poverty level. Of people in the labor force, 7.2 percent--or more than ten million people--do not earn enough to be lifted out of poverty. While the link between crime and poverty is complex, statistics show unequivocally that poor people are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. Further, mass incarceration policies have a particularly devastating impact on low-income, African American, urban communities, as 1/3 of black men in their twenties are under supervision of the criminal justice system. “By reducing parental capacity to parent children, by further weakening already challenged family structures and resources, and by making already disadvantaged families and communities
94 | P a g e
even less economically viable, incarceration helps to reify a social dynamic that is likely to encourage further involvement in crime.” This was the cycle that Judge Bazelon hoped to break, or at least expose, when he proposed the “rotten social background” defense. In addition to these dynamics, poverty is becoming increasingly criminalized. Cities across America are making the daily tasks of living for the homeless a crime, passing laws that forbid sleeping, eating, begging, or sitting in public spaces. In some cities, it is even illegal for groups or individuals to serve food to homeless people. At the same time, at least eighty percent of reporting jurisdictions that criminalize homelessness lack adequate shelter space, public toilets, or storage facilities for the homeless to keep their belongings. Thus, a lack of services creates the very conditions of lawlessness. In addition, states, while intensifying welfare fraud prosecutions, increasingly treat poor people who resort to public benefits as criminals, subjecting them to fingerprinting, biometric imaging, ongoing surveillance, and drug testing as a condition for receiving benefits. While debtors' prisons have formally been abolished, the reality is that courts are increasingly jailing poor people who cannot pay off their debts; and, in many cases, these debtors are not even aware that they are being pursued by creditors due to “sloppy, incomplete or even false documentation.” A poverty defense has the potential to serve as a corrective to these trends. Scholars have articulated at least three differing conceptions of a poverty defense, each of which are reflected in the child neglect case law. In some cases, the child neglect poverty defense most closely resembles traditional criminal law defenses of either necessity or duress, in which external forces that compel a defendant to engage in wrongful conduct lessen or extinguish culpability. Other approaches reflect Judge Bazelon's idea of rotten social background, in which an impoverished upbringing renders a parent unable to fulfill parenting duties. In a third approach, the poverty defense embodies social forfeit theory, in which society's tolerance of severe economic inequality deprives society of the moral authority to blame deprived defendants for their conduct. Regardless of the court's theoretical underpinning, the poverty defense rarely succeeds unless the court has a sophisticated understanding of poverty and how it leads to neglect. Thus, this article argues that not only is the poverty defense an established (albeit overlooked) feature of American law that can be expanded into other areas, but also that it will not fulfill its potential without a rich conception of poverty. The article proceeds as follows. Section I explains the major theoretical justifications for excusing poor defendants for committing wrongful conduct and sets forth the objections to a poverty defense. Section II provides the context for the poverty defense in child neglect cases, exploring the link between poverty and child neglect and the scope of the poverty defense. Section III analyzes how courts interpret the poverty defense in child neglect cases, demonstrating that all three theoretical approaches to a poverty defense are found in the case law. As Section III explains, a court's conception of poverty drives its interpretation of the poverty defense. Courts that see poverty as rooted in structural causes are more amenable to the defense than courts that view poverty as a result of behavioral failings. Section IV draws lessons from how the poverty defense is applied in child neglect cases in order to inform other areas of the law. Section IV concludes that the poverty defense is not the impossible pipedream painted by its critics.
95 | P a g e
Nevertheless, the defense has not fulfilled its potential because many courts lack a sophisticated understanding of how poverty is related to neglect. Moreover, courts are often uncomfortable with the implications of the poverty defense and how it conflicts with accepted norms of individual culpability. Accordingly, Section IV provides ideas for strengthening the poverty defense and suggests areas for its expansion.
Professor of Law; Director, Civil Advocacy Clinic; Co-Director, Center on Applied Feminism, University of Baltimore School of Law
On the other hand…The ‘Wealth’ Defense
CNN 'Affluenza': Is it real? A Texas teen claims "affluenza" rendered him blameless in a fatal DUI crash. (CNN) -- Attorneys for Texas teen Ethan Couch claimed that his “affluenza” meant he was blameless for driving drunk and causing a crash that left four people dead in June. Simply put, Couch, 16, claims that his condition stemmed from having wealthy, privileged parents who never set limits for him. Judge Jean Boyd sentenced him Tuesday to 10 years of probation but no jail time, saying she would work to find him a long-term treatment facility. But Eric Boyles, who lost his wife and daughter in the crash, said on CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360," "There are absolutely no consequences for what occurred that day. The primary message has to absolutely be that money and privilege can't buy justice in this country." Is "affluenza" real? Or is it a way for coddled children and adolescents to evade consequences for their actions? Not surprisingly, "affluenza" does not appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM, the "psychiatric Bible." Source: Ashley Hayes, CNN 'Affluenza': Is it real?
“Now is the time to build a movement to end mass incarceration.” Feb 14, 2014. Bipartisan support for criminal justice reform was strong at a symposium co-sponsored by Vera and The Leadership Conference Education Fund called “A Conversation on Criminal Justice: A Call to Action for the Nation.” The event, held at Georgetown Law School in Washington, DC on Tuesday, February 11, featured U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, members of Congress, and a panel of experts. “Now is the time to build a movement to end mass incarceration.” Source: Mary Crowley. AG Holder Makes News at Vera-Leadership Conference Event on Bipartisan Criminal Justice Reform. www.vera.org/blogs
Early disposition Early disposition or "fast-track" programs in federal sentencing allow a prosecutor to offer a reduced sentence in exchange for a defendant's prompt guilty plea and waiver of certain legal rights. Based on immigration cases in federal districts, this study finds that fast-track participants received a modest reduction in sentence length compared to otherwise similar non-participants. The estimated reduction in case processing time attributable to fast-track programs was also of moderate consequence to the government. The report discusses policy implications of fast-track processing in terms of organizational efficiency and fair treatment of defendants in federal court. Source: KiDeuk Kim. Organizational Efficiency and Early Disposition Programs in Federal Courts. January 24, 2014 www.urban.org/publications/413030.htm
96 | P a g e
Discussion Reference 8: The psychological effects of racial bias The Work of Poussaint, Alvin MD Psychiatrist, Harvard Medical School
Come On, People! On the Path from Victims to Victors “In his book, co-written with Dr. Bill Cosby, and in his presentation, Dr. Alvin Poussaint shares his vision for strengthening America by addressing the crisis of people frozen in feelings of low self-esteem, abandonment, fearfulness, sadness, and frustration. By addressing these issues and providing tools to deal with them, Dr. Poussaint helps empower people to make the daunting transition from victims to victors, helping them to become purposeful and effective citizens, actively engaged in shaping the lives of their children, caring for their physical and emotional health, and encouraging their families toward higher educational achievement.
Children's Resiliency: Coping with Violence “Many studies show that a significant number of children who are exposed to violence either by witnessing constant community violence, being victims of violence perpetrated by parents or others, or being exposed to domestic violence may develop stress disorders including Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, depression, and conduct disorders. Such children are likely to perform less well in school and to be at a higher risk of committing violence against others. However, for a high percentage of children exposed to violence, these disturbances do not occur and many show the resilience to successfully cope with a degree of psychological and physical abuse. These are children who, by dint of temperament, strong love, and nurturing in their early years, develop a strong sense of self and an ability to feel a sense of control over their environment that enables them to bounce back from adversity. Children's resilience is always enhanced when there is a strong, loving, and caring adult in the environment.
Breaking Down Segregation & Disparities in Healthcare: A Life and Death Issue “The continuing healthcare disparities among African Americans and other ethnic minorities in relation to white Americans are part of the legacy of a segregated healthcare system (which some called medical apartheid) existing in the United States until the mid-1960s. Segregated health facilities in the South were responsible for a "separate but equal" system that meant blacks received inferior care or no care at all. They were also abused and exploited for research without regard to protecting their lives and wellbeing. There are numerous examples from the past, including the infamous Tuskegee study, which illustrate the egregious and toxic nature of racism in American medicine. Blacks often put their lives at risk when they entered a segregated facility or were denied care altogether even in emergency situations. Because of these horrid experiences, a deep distrust developed in African Americans and other minorities that made them reluctant to seek healthcare, particularly when equal access was denied. “It is welcome that the government has come to recognize these disparities and the need to close the healthcare gap between African Americans and whites. Both in the burdens of death and illness, African Americans experience disparities which lessen their quality of life and life expectancy. There are disparities in infant mortality, life expectancy, diabetes, heart disease, cancer, HIV/AIDS, stroke, homicide, and mental health. Addressing these disparities must include improving healthcare access, introducing innovative health education programs, and addressing the social ills associated with poverty. The federal government has now taken on the disparity issue and is trying to empower people to adopt healthier lifestyles and improve public health initiatives. Many medical schools and hospitals around the
97 | P a g e country have put healthcare disparities high on their agendas in an effort to find effective solutions that will ultimately benefit large and neglected segments of our population.
The Media's Impact on Children & Society “Research demonstrates that media violence, particularly on television and in movies, influences the values, attitudes, and behavior of children. Children directly imitate behaviors seen on television; for instance, if they see a great deal of aggression, they imitate it in their own play and interactions. In television and the movies, conflict is too often resolved through the use of violence rather than through peaceful means such as discussion, negotiation, and mediation. Dr. Poussaint discusses this disturbing trend and offers solutions to counter it.
Lay My Burden Down: The Mental Health Crisis among African Americans “Suicide among African Americans, particularly young black men, has increased dramatically over the last 20 years. This increase in suicide is a symptom of the broader problem of mental health in the black community. The persistent presence of racism - despite the significant legal, social and political progress made during the last half of the 20th century - has created physiological and psychological risks for black people that drastically differ from white Americans. The negative impact of the past on African Americans produces multiple stresses that can best be described as a collective "Posttraumatic Slavery Syndrome," which is often manifested by a general mistrust of healthcare providers. Dr. Poussaint explains that we need to improve the mental health of African Americans by eliminating healthcare disparities, providing increased access to quality care, and emphasizing targeted outreach. Together, we must break through the barriers of fear and stigma to heal our communities. Source: apbspeakers.com/speaker/alvin-poussaint Poussaint, Alvin MD Psychiatrist, Harvard Medical School.
Treating toxic stress that leads to violence “Founded by innovative pediatrician Dr. Nadine Burke Harris, the Center for Youth Wellness San Francisco has been a pioneer in the treatment of “toxic stress” in children who are exposed to violence, neglect and other trauma, and who lack a support system. The federal government plans to treat toxic stress among youth in a violence-plagued San Francisco neighborhood following studies showing there are biological reasons for why a child who suffers chronic adversity might engage in high-risk behaviors as an adult. “To begin to explain this intense type of stress, CYW cites a person’s encounter with a bear in the forest. In that moment, the human body enters “fight-or-flight” mode and emergency stress hormones such as adrenaline and cortisol are released. While that reaction helps humans focus on a problem and survive, children who experience repeated intense stress often find it difficult to turn off their fight-or-flight reactions. The resulting high levels of emergency hormones can alter the structure and function of a child’s growing brain and other organs, studies show. Sitting still in a classroom can be difficult for children who suffer from toxic stress, said Suzy Loftus, “CYW’s chief operating officer. Research shows that children enduring repeated stress are at higher risk for developing a heart condition or cancer as adults. “A 2011 study of more than 700 children in the Bayview showed that more than 50 percent of the children who had suffered at least four of those adverse experiences ended up with learning or behavioral problems in school. “CYW and its lead pediatrician, Burke Harris, was also recently featured as part of Hillary Clinton’s philanthropic campaign Too Small to Fail, which promotes research into brain development and nutrition in children.
98 | P a g e
San Francisco police, having seen the cycle of violence afflicting generations of Bayview children, are supporting CYW’s work. Police Chief Greg Suhr, a former Bayview station captain, recently spoke about the center at a conference of police chiefs. “It was something that didn’t occur to a lot of the other chiefs,” Suhr said, adding that top brass in other cities plan to apply for the same $1 million grant The City already won. District Attorney George Gascón wants the three-year U.S. Department of Justice grant to test the theory that helping victims and witnesses can work to reduce future crimes. About 15 percent of San Franciscans who are on active probation live in the 94124 ZIP code, where exposure to violence is estimated to be four times higher than the citywide rate, according to Gascón. “Lots of funding has been provided for policing and prosecution,” Gascón said. “Too little attention has been given toward working with the victims. Source: Mike Aldax. Bayview center pioneers approach to crime prevention by fighting stress in youths See: sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/bayview-center-pioneers-approach-to-crime-prevention-by-fighting-stress-in-youth
RELIGION AND PRISON PROGRAMS
99 | P a g e
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, called the ‘sleeping giant’ of civil rights law addresses a “huge array of injustices: from environmental racism to discriminatory profiling…to inequalities in transportation, housing, and education.” -The Governor’s Task Force on Racial Profiling - Wisconsin 2000
Discussion Reference 9 Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Nullification of Stand Your Ground states’ law. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prevents discrimination by government agencies that receive federal funds. If an agency is found in violation of Title VI, that agency may lose its federal funding.
General This title declares it to be the policy of the United States that discrimination on the ground of race, color, or national origin shall not occur in connection with programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance and authorizes and directs the appropriate Federal departments and agencies to take action to carry out this policy. This title is not intended to apply to foreign assistance programs.
Section 601 – This section states the general principle that no person in the United States shall be excluded from participation in or otherwise discriminated against on the ground of race, color, or national origin under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
Section 602 directs each Federal agency administering a program of Federal financial assistance by way of grant, contract, or loan to take action pursuant to rule, regulation, or order of general applicability to effectuate the principle of section 601 in a manner consistent with the achievement of the objectives of the statute authorizing the assistance. In seeking the effect compliance with its requirements imposed under this section, an agency is authorized to terminate or to refuse to grant or to continue assistance under a program to any recipient as to whom there has been an express finding pursuant to a hearing of a failure to comply with the requirements under that program, and it may also employ any other means authorized by law. However, each agency is directed first to seek compliance with its requirements by voluntary means.
Section 603 provides that any agency action taken pursuant to section 602 shall be subject to such judicial review as would be available for similar actions by that agency on other grounds. Where the agency action consists of terminating or refusing to grant or to continue financial assistance because of a finding of a failure of the recipient to comply with the agency's requirements imposed under section 602, and the agency action would not otherwise be subject to judicial review under existing law, judicial review shall nevertheless be available to any person aggrieved as provided in section 10 of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. Section 1009). The section also states explicitly that in the latter situation such agency action shall not be deemed committed to unreviewable agency discretion within the meaning of section 10. The purpose of this provision is to obviate the possible argument that although section 603 provides for review in accordance with section 10, section 10 itself has an exception for action "committed to agency discretion," which might otherwise be carried over into section 603. It is not the purpose of this provision of section 603, however, otherwise to alter the scope of judicial review as presently provided in section 10(e) of the Administrative Procedure Act. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964
100 | P a g e
Rep. Alicia Reece of Cincinnati, president of the Ohio Legislative Black Caucus, called [H.B. 203] a “kill at will” bill that would lead to deaths…The bill has faced opposition from prosecutors and law enforcement who argued there is no evidence Ohio’s current self-defense law needs to be changed. The duty to retreat, they said, encourages people to avoid deadly confrontations, or avoid escalating disputes to the point where deadly force is used. “We cannot, should not and would not accept a law that allows someone to follow someone who has done nothing…and hunt them down, and then hide behind the law,” Reece said, making references to the Florida shooting involving George Zimmerman. –Source: The Columbus Dispatch. Stand Your Ground Moves to the Senate.
Discussion Reference 10 Self Defense Expanded – Ohio As Passed the House 130th General Assembly Regular Session 2013-2014 Sub. H.B. No. 203 Representative Johnson Cosponsors: Representatives Henne, Gonzales, Adams, J., Conditt, Retherford, Maag, Hottinger, Terhar, Brenner, Beck, Lynch, Sprague, Becker, Derickson, Wachtmann, Buchy, Perales, Amstutz, Blair, Boose, Burkley, Dovilla, Green, Hall, Hayes, Hood, Landis, McClain, Rosenberger, Ruhl, Sears, Smith, Young Speaker Batchelder
A BILL To amend sections 9.68, 109.69, 109.731, 109.85, 109.86, 311.41, 311.42, 2901.09, 2917.11, 2917.31, 2923.11, 2923.125, 2923.1213, 2923.13, and 2923.14 and to repeal sections 2923.1210 and 2923.22 of the Revised Code to modify concealed handgun law; to permit investigators employed by the Attorney General to investigate Medicaid fraud to go armed in the same manner as sheriffs and regularly appointed police officers; to expand the locations at which a person has no duty to retreat before using force in self-defense; and to provide that the exercise of a constitutional or statutory right is not, in itself, the offense of disorderly conduct or inducing panic and does not constitute reasonable, articulable suspicion of criminal activity.
Strengthens the existing criminal background check process to obtain an Ohio Concealed Handgun License (CHL) by requiring all CHL applicants to undergo a National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) compliant background check. This improvement is the first step in allowing Ohio CHL holders to qualify for a NICS exemption when purchasing a firearm. Establishes an automatic reciprocity system. Reduces the minimum training requirement to obtain a competency certificate required to apply for a CHL from 12 hours to 4 hours. Applies the same federal disqualifiers for the possession and purchase of a firearm to applicants for a CHL. Establishes a non-resident application process to obtain a CHL. Modifies the state’s self-defense law. Under current law, a person has no duty to retreat before using deadly force if that person is in their own home or automobile. This legislation would expand that to any place a person has a lawful right to be. Source: legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=130_HB_203
101 | P a g e
Other States
SYG Repeal: States’ Dissuading Stand Your Ground Vigilantism Many states have had enough of bloodshed and lawmakers have introduced legislation to repeal or limit the use of shoot first laws. Most notably, Alabama has introduced the “Trayvon Martin exception” as an amendment to its current shoot first law. The new legislation aims to protect innocent victims like Trayvon Martin, Jordan Davis, and Chad Oulson. The bill would prohibit use of the self-defense claim if a shooter pursued the victim who was behaving lawfully in a public place and the pursuit resulted in a deadly confrontation. …Arizona lawmakers have introduced two similar bills that would protect victims by stating that if an aggressor leaves a place of safety and actively pursues another who is engaged in a lawful activity, the aggressor cannot rely on the shoot first law to defend his or her use of deadly force in a resulting confrontation. The law also specifically bars the use of the shoot first defense if law enforcement instructs the aggressor to retreat to a place of safety and the aggressor continues the pursuit. Georgia, too, has introduced a bill to prevent a person from relying on the state’s shoot first law if he or she provokes the use of force against him or herself. The good news is that Alabama, Arizona and Georgia are not the only states taking this step. In an effort to dissuade vigilantism and protect innocent life, Florida, Maryland, Missouri, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have introduced legislation to weaken or repeal shoot first laws. If successful, these changes will undoubtedly help reduce the unnecessary gun violence that has arisen in light of these dangerous laws. Source: Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Developing Trend in Gun Legislation: The Trayvon Martin Exception to Stand Your Ground Laws. Posted on February 7, 2014.
FBI: Defining Hate Crime A hate crime is a traditional offense like murder, arson, or vandalism with an added element of bias. For the purposes of collecting statistics, Congress has defined a hate crime as a “criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.” Hate itself is not a crime—and the FBI is mindful of protecting freedom of speech and other civil liberties. Hate crimes add an element of bias to traditional crimes— and the mixture is toxic to our communities. Crimes of hatred and prejudice—from lynchings to cross burnings to vandalism of synagogues. The FBI’s Civil Rights Program cannot investigate groups, only individuals. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/hate_crimes/
Profiling the ‘Thug’ Merriam-Webster defines ‘thug’ as one who is a cutthroat or ruffian; a hoodlum; a common criminal, who treats others violently and roughly; assassin: gangster, tough. And the term ‘family’ can be defined as a fundamental social group in society typically consisting of one or two parents and their children; two or more people who share goals and values and having long-term commitments to one another. The dictionary defines the term ‘normal’ as according with, constituting, or not deviating from a rule or principle and conforming to a standard or regular pattern, [i.e., American Middle Class family]. Children are the products of their families and the communities that nurture them. Neither the fathers nor the sons of the Trayvon Martin and Jordan Davis families fit the Merriam dictionary profiles of ‘thug’. However, the Gospel of Mark describes the Christ as heavily involving himself with ‘the expendables’ of society, i.e., ‘thugs’.
102 | P a g e
Discussion Reference 11 U.S. Voting Rights Laws
Amendment XV to the United States Constitution Congress proposed a compromise amendment banning franchise restrictions on the basis of race, color, or previous servitude on February 26, 1869. The 15th amendment survived a difficult ratification fight and was adopted on March 30, 1870. U.S. Supreme Court decisions in the late nineteenth century interpreted the amendment narrowly, and by 1910, most black voters in the South faced obstacles such as poll taxes and literacy tests, from which white voters were exempted by grandfather clauses. Systems of whites-only primaries and violent reprisals by groups such as the Ku Klux Klan suppressed participation by black citizens. In the twentieth century the Court interpreted the amendment more broadly, striking down grandfather clauses in Guinn v. United States (1915) and dismantling the white primary system in the "Texas primary cases" (1927–1953). Along with later measures such as the XXIV Amendment which forbade poll taxes in federal elections, and Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections (1966), which forbade poll taxes in state elections, these decisions significantly increased black participation in the American political system. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Congress had found that case-by-case litigation was inadequate to combat wide-spread and persistent discrimination in voting, because of the inordinate amount of time and energy required to overcome the obstructionist tactics invariably encountered in these lawsuits. After enduring nearly a century of systematic resistance to the Fifteenth Amendment, Congress might well decide to shift the advantage of time and inertia from the perpetrators of the evil to its victims. South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301, 327-28 (1966). Source: The United States Department of Justice. http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/vot/intro/intro_b.php
History of Federal Voting Rights Laws The Voting Rights Act of 1965 The 1970 and 1975 Amendments White v. Regester, 412 U.S. 755 (1973), strongly shaped litigation through the 1970s against at-large systems and gerrymandered redistricting plans. Mobile v. Bolden, 446 U.S. 55 (1980) required that any constitutional claim of minority vote dilution must include proof of a racially discriminatory purpose. The 1982 Amendments Congress amended Section 2 to provide that a plaintiff could establish a violation of the Section without having to prove discriminatory purpose. The 2006 Amendments The 2006 legislation eliminated the provision for voting examiners.
103 | P a g e
12 Major Supreme Court cases decided in 2013 (Excerpt)
Shelby County v. Holder – decided 6/25/2013 Subjects: Voting rights, voter ID laws Description: The Supreme Court decides if parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 are still needed, which require states and local governments with a history of discrimination to get pre-clearance from the federal government before making any changes to voting laws. Outcome: The Supreme Court struck down a key part of the historic Voting Rights Act of 1965, sending the section that determines which states need extra attention about discrimination back to Congress to be re-written.
Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin – decided 6/24/2013 Subject: Affirmative action Description: The Supreme Court decides if a public university violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment by considering race in its admissions process. Decision could update or overturn parts of the historic 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger decision. Outcome: The Court rules in a 7-1 vote against how University of Texas’ affirmative action policy was considered by a lower court, and sends the case back to the lower court, avoiding a sweeping decision on affirmative action.
Arizona v. ITCA – decided 6/17/2013 Subject: Proof of citizenship, voter ID laws Description: The court considers Arizona’s decision to require voters to furnish proof of citizenship as it relates to the federal National Voter Registration Act, in a question of state versus federal jurisdiction over voting qualifications. Outcome: In Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council, the Court sided with the federal government, saying that Arizona’s evidence-of-citizenship requirement is pre-empted by the federal National Voter Registration Act. Source: National Constitution Center. 12 major Supreme Court cases decided in 2013. NCC Staff December 31, 2013. ______
2014 Update – Voter Rights Laws Fix for Voting Rights Act goes easy on voter ID By Zachary Rothe and Adam Serwer A new bill to strengthen the Voting Rights Act goes out of its way to make an exception for voter ID laws, in a bid to win Republican support. Still, voting rights advocates are expressing cautious support for the bipartisan measure unveiled Thursday—though its chances of passage are uncertain at best. A group of lawmakers, led by Reps. John Conyers (D-Mich.), James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.), and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), introduced the bill Thursday afternoon. It’s a response to June’s Supreme Court ruling, Shelby County v. Holder, which effectively freed from federal oversight certain jurisdictions with a history racial discrimination. In an opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court ruled that the formula – known as Section 4 – used by Congress to determine which areas were under federal supervision was outdated. “This bill modernizes the Voting Rights Act, will restore those protections that were gutted by the court, and will ensure that every citizen has an equal opportunity to participate in our democracy,” Sensenbrenner said at a Capitol Hill press conference.
104 | P a g e
The bill aims to address Roberts’ concern directly. Its core provision is an updated formula, which would place back under federal oversight any state with five violations of federal voting rights law in the last 15 years, using a rolling calendar. That would include not just court rulings, but objections by the Justice Department. Local jurisdictions would have to commit only three violations, or consistently suffer from low minority turnout. Currently, four states— Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas—would be under federal oversight by that standard, the lawmakers said. Source: msnbc.com/msnbc/fix-voting-rights-act-exempts-voter-id 01/16/14 04:30 PM—Updated 01/17/14 05:53 PM
Fifty Acres (and a Mule) Originally, the U.S. Constitution did not define who could vote and was simply built around a concept of rights of "person", with voting not explicitly included in the rights. When the country was founded, in most states, only non-Negro men with real property-usually of at least 50 acres- (land) or sufficient wealth for taxation were permitted to vote. [White] women could vote in New Jersey, provided they could meet the property requirement, and in some local jurisdictions in other northern states. Men and women of color could also vote in these jurisdictions, provided they could meet the property requirement. Freed slaves could vote in four states. Unpropertied men and women, including slaves, were largely denied the franchise. At the time of the American Civil War, most white men were allowed to vote, whether or not they owned property. Literacy tests, poll taxes, and even religious tests were used in various places, and most white women, people of color [men and women], and Native Americans [men and women] still could not vote. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_rights_in_the_United_States
Disparate Impact: Voting and Felony Convictions Holder: Felons should not lose their voting rights permanently. By Timothy Lange. Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:20 AM PST Nationwide, according to The Sentencing Project, 5.85 million Americans are barred from voting because of felony convictions. Because of disparities about who gets arrested, tried and convicted, one in 13 African Americans is disenfranchised. This has an impact not only on the individuals convicted but also on political power… In a 2012 article in the University of Richmond Law Review about felony disenfranchisement in Virginia, Dori Elizabeth Martin wrote: Felony disenfranchisement profoundly impacts the political opportunity available to minority communities. Using a procedure called the “usual residence rule,” the Census Bureau counts prisoners as residents of the district in which they are incarcerated. The result is often artificially inflated population totals in rural, majority white communities at the expense of the (largely minority) communities the inmates ordinarily would call home. Source:dailykos.com/story/2014/02/11/1276732/-Holder-Felons-should-not-lose-their-voting-rights-permanently?detail=action#
105 | P a g e
Discussion Reference 12 Voting Rights – Ohio 2013 130th General Assembly
Regular Session H. B. No. 13 2013-2014
Representative Reece Cosponsors: Representatives Letson, Driehaus, Strahorn, Hagan, R., Lundy, Pillich, Boyd, Williams, Antonio, Cera, Celebrezze, Clyde
A BILL To amend sections 3503.19, 3505.181, 3505.182, and 3505.183 of the Revised Code to require a provisional ballot to be remade and counted for the offices, questions, and issues for which the provisional voter was eligible to vote, if the election official assisting that provisional voter failed to direct the provisional voter to the correct precinct, and to revise the portion of the provisional ballot affirmation required to be completed by the election official. Replaces the portion of the provisional ballot affirmation form that is required to be completed by election officials with a shorter, simplified "Poll Worker Checklist" that is primarily in question and answer form. Requires the election official assisting a provisional voter to accurately complete the Poll Worker Checklist portion of the provisional ballot affirmation in the voter's presence, including identifying the individual's correct precinct if the individual is not voting in the correct precinct. Requires the election officials to remake a provisional voter's ballot if the voter casts a ballot in a precinct in which the voter is not registered and eligible to vote and the election officials failed to direct the provisional voter to the correct precinct. Specifies that the election official who signed the Poll Worker Checklist for a provisional voter must be deemed to have failed to direct the provisional voter to the correct precinct if the election official did not complete that checklist or did not correctly complete that checklist. Requires a board of elections that remakes a provisional ballot to remake the provisional ballot on a ballot for the appropriate precinct to reflect the offices, questions, and issues for which the provisional voter was eligible to cast a ballot and for which the provisional voter attempted to cast a provisional ballot, and requires the remade ballot to be counted for each office, question, and issue for which the provisional voter was eligible to vote. Source: legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=130_HB_13
The "right to vote" is not explicitly stated in the U.S. Constitution except in…referenced amendments, and only in reference to the fact that the franchise cannot be denied or abridged based solely on…mentioned qualifications. In other words, the "right to vote" is perhaps better understood, in layman's terms, as only prohibiting certain forms of legal discrimination in establishing qualifications for suffrage. States may deny the "right to vote" for other reasons. For example, many states require eligible citizens to register to vote a set number of days prior to the election in order to vote. More controversial restrictions include those laws that prohibit convicted felons from voting or, as seen in Bush v. Gore, disputes as to what rules should apply in counting or recounting ballots. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_rights_in_the_United_States 106 | P a g e
Likelihood: Mindset Bias a factor in suspending Black students March 19, 2014 By Freddie Allen, NNPA Washington Correspondent In the briefing paper titled, “Are Black Kids Worse? Myths and Facts about Racial Differences in Behavior,” researchers from the Equity Project at Indiana University in Bloomington found that “there is simply no good evidence that racial differences in discipline are due to differences in rates or types of misbehavior by students of different races.” “In other words, regardless of a school’s official disciplinary policy, there are a variety of factors involved in determining a student’s punishment, not the least of which is the mood, ideology, philosophy, values, and biases of the adults making that decision,” stated the briefing paper on implicit bias. “The more subjective the category of offense, i.e., insubordination, disobedience, disruption, defiance, the greater the risk that bias (either explicit or unconscious) will seep into the process.” Judith Browne Dianis, co-director of the Advancement Project testifying before Congress on the school-to-prison pipeline.
Final Word Quotation on Lingering Effects International
“For those who'd say the US and Canada are different, and therefore the findings of a US report on incarceration are not relevant, there are some similarities worth noting.
The first is that the…government's commitment to building more prisons and having lengthier sentences is very much the American model… Also, the report's concerns to a large extent focus on the Afro-American population, who are over-represented on a per capita basis in American prisons. In Canada, that's an unenviable distinction conferred on Aboriginal people.” Source: exuberanteclectic.com/2011/04/naacp-incarcertation-statisticsCriminal
South African prison population among world's highest South Africa has the world's seventh highest number of prisoners - outranking countries with up to nearly five times our population. Source: IOL News. April 26 2008 at 11:36am
Private individuals and foreigners own 80 percent. State owns 14% of South Africa land. Johannesburg - Private individuals and foreigners own close to 80 percent of South African land, according to the latest land audit. -Source: iol.co.za/news/politics/state-owns-14-of-sa-land-audit-1.1574347
KRIBI, Cameroon (Alertnet) – Forest dwellers forced off their land in southern Cameroon after it was leased to private companies have been allowed to return by the government, but many still fear for their livelihoods and the future of their homes. “Our lands have been taken away from us (and) our forest, which is our main source of living, destroyed, forcing us stay in poverty,” said Medjo Marcel, the village chief of Adjap, one of several villages affected by land takeovers. “We (still) have no right to possession,” Marcel added. “We cannot invest on the land for fear that foresters and other land grabbers may flush us out at any time.” -Source: Thomson Reuters Foundation - Thu, 28 Mar 2013 01:33 PM Author: Elias Ntungwe Ngalame
107 | P a g e
Bibliography 1. Peter A. Lyle. Racial Profiling and the Fourth Amendment: Applying Minority Victim Perspective to Ensure Equal Protection Under the Law Volume. 21; Issue 2; Article 2. 5-1-2001; PDF. www.bc.edu/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bctwj/21_2/02_FMS.htm 2. Peter Lyles. Notes on Racial Profiling in America: Searches, Seizures, and Driving While Black. Boston College Third World Law Journal. 3. Richard Stiller. Broken Promises: The strange case of the Fourteenth Amendment. May 1972 4. Oliver, Sarah. Atwater v. City of Lago Vista: The Disappearing Fourth Amendment and Its Impact on Racial Profiling; 23 Whittier Law Review 1099 (2001-2002) 5. Governor’s Task Force on Racial Profiling, Outreach to the Community. The State of Wisconsin January 2000 – November 2000 6. Jonathan Weisman. “Catholic Bishops Protest House Budget.” April 18, 2012 article. 7. Michelle Alexander. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. 2012. 8. Anthony A. Samad. 50 Years After Brown: The State of Black Equality in America. Kabili Press. 2005 9. Florida Task Force to Examine the State’s ‘Stand Your Ground’ Law. flgov.com/citizensafety 10. McMahon, et al. How to Correctly Collect and Analyze Racial Profiling Data. Final Project Report for Racial Profiling Data Collection and Analysis. DOJ 11. Basil Davidson. The African Genius: An Introduction to African Social and Cultural History. An Atlantic Monthly Press Book. Little, Brown and Company. Boston – Toronto. 12. Steven J. Kaminshine. Disparate Treatment as a Theory of Discrimination. Georgia State University College of Law; Georgia State University. Stanford Journal of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Vol. 2, p. 1, 2005 13. David M. Goldenberg, The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Princeton University Press, 2003 14. Felder, Cain Hope. Race, Racism, and the Biblical Narratives. Fortress Press. 2002 15. Stephen R. Haynes. Noah’s Curse: The Biblical Justification of American Slavery. Oxford University Press, 2002 16. Conrad, Joseph. Heart of Darkness. 1889. A complex exploration of the attitudes people hold on what constitutes a barbarian versus a civilized society and the attitudes on colonialism and racism that were part and parcel of European imperialism. 17. Allen, Richard and Jones, Absalom. A Narrative of the Proceedings of the Black People, During the Late Awful Calamity in Philadelphia, in the Year, 1793. Oshun Publishing. African American Series. 18. Niyonkuru, Lothaire. La survivance et le rôle de l’idéologie Bantu-Hamitique dans la crise Burundaise. [The survival and the role of Bantu-Hamitic ideology in the Burundi crisis]. Colloque international pour une culture de paix et de démocratie au Burundi, 1996. L’université de Burundi. PDF 19. Ray C. Stedman. The Three Families of Man: Understanding Society Series. Scripture: Genesis 9:18 www.raystedman.org/old-testament/genesis/the-three-families-of-man 20. Fleck, Ludwik (1979), Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact, Univ. of Chicago, ISBN 0-226- 25325-2 (written in German, 1935, Entstehung und Entwicke lung einer wissen schaftlichen Tatsache: Einführung in die Lehre vom Denkstil und Denkkollectiv) English translation, 1979. 21. John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm Shift to the Integrative Big-Five Trait Taxonomy: History, Measurement, and Conceptual Issues. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 114-158). New York, NY: Guilford Press 22. John, O. P. (1990). The "Big Five" factor taxonomy: Dimensions of personality in the natural language and in questionnaires. In L. Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 66-100). New York: Guilford Press 23. David A. Harris. Driving While Black: Racial Profiling On Our Nation's Highways. An American Civil Liberties Union Special Report. University of Toledo College of Law. June 7, 1999 24. Adam Winkler, The Secret History of Guns. Atlantic Magazine. September 2011
108 | P a g e
25. Jeffrey C. Sonntag. Probable Cause, Reasonable Suspicion, or Mere Speculation: Holding Police to a Higher Standard in Destruction of Evidence. 42 Washburn Law Journal 629 (2002-2003) 26. Trayvon Martin case: How 5 young black men see race and justice in US. The Christian Science Monitor. April 9, 2012 www.csmonitor.com/...5-young-black-men.../I-am-Trayvon-Martin 27. The Hijacking of the Fourteenth Amendment. Doug Hammerstrom, Attorney at Law, 2002 PDF. 28. A Blueprint for Federal Action on Illegal Guns: Regulation, Enforcement and Best Practices to combat Illegal Gun Trafficking. Recommendations from Mayors Against Illegal Guns. August 2009. PDF 29. [Athena Quotient] Values, Violence, and Our Future. Acquaviva, Gary J. Amsterdam/Atlanta, GA, 2000, IX, 208 pp.; Pb: 978-90-420-0559-4. Hartman Institute Axiology. Identifies the character of human predators who violate others or themselves. The contagion of violence infects values that affect behavior. The intrinsic values of love, compassion, and creativity oppose such violence. 30. Allen, Richard. Segregated Sabbaths. Methodist theology inapplicable to black problems. 1973. 31. AQ Statement of Statistical Validity. Athene Quotient (AQ). An assessment tool supposedly measures an individual’s judgment. 32. Public Narrative: Story-Telling to Move Others to Action. A Workshop. Crafting a narrative that motivates people to action is one of the most important aspects of advocacy work. 33. Bates-Mims, Merelyn B., State of Ohio Minority Business Enterprise Program 1980-1998. 34. Bates-Mims, Merelyn B., Immiseration: Deliberative Impoverishment and Racial Profiling. Race-Talk: A Kirwan Institute Project. June 2013. 35. Minneapolis Statewide Racial Profiling Report. 22 September 2002 Institute on Race & Poverty 36. Arkansas Racial Profiling Task Force. Jack T. Lassiter Chairman, December 2011 37. An Invitation to Abuse and Chaos. New York Times Editorial. Published April 21, 2012. Arizona Immigration Law (SB 1070). Police officers are required, “when practicable,” to detain people they “reasonably suspect” are in the country without authorization. 38. John Shearer. The experiences of Archon Harold A. Black. Beta Theta Boulé, Knoxville, Tennessee. February 20, 2012, Knoxville News-Sentinel. 39. Racial Profiling in Vermont. Briefing Report. June 2008:1-58. 40. Tallahassee. Jennifer Portman. Democrat senior writer. The formation of a new group that will begin collecting and analyzing data from each of Florida's 20 Judicial Circuits with respect to racial profiling as well as the broader issues of police and prosecutorial misconduct. 23 March 2012. 41. Cato Institute. The U.S. Catholic Bishops and the Pursuit of Justice. Paul Heyne. March 5, 1985 Policy Analysis no. 50 42. Cato Institute. Property Rights and the Constitution. Handbook for Policy Makers 7th edition. 43. Cato Institute. In Pursuit of Happiness: Is it Reliable? What does it imply for policy? Will Wilkinson. Policy Analysis no. 590. April 11, 2007 44. Walker Connor. “EthnoNationalism: The Quest for Understanding.” Princeton University Press. 1994 45. Higgins, George; Gennaro, Vito (2010). "Exploring the Influence of Race Relations and Public Safety on Public Support for Racial Profiling during Traffic Stops". International Journal of Police Science & Management. Results showed that race relations had a statistical correlation with the legitimacy of racial profiling…those who believed that racial profiling was widespread and that racial tension would never be fixed were more likely to be opposed to racial profiling than those who did not. 46. Gizzi, Michael C. Pretextual stops, vehicle searches, and crime control: An examination of strategies used on the frontline of the war on drugs. Department of Criminal Justice Sciences, Illinois State University, Normal, IL 61790 US 47. Fujimoto et al. (2013). Alternatives to the School-to-Prison Pipeline: The Role of Educational Leaders in Developing a College-Going Culture. Association of Mexican American Educators Journal (AMAE). 48. Behnken et al. (2014). Linking Early ADHD to Adolescent and Early Adult Outcomes Among African Americans Journal of Criminal Justice. 49. Krueger-Henny, P. (2013). Co-Researching School Spaces of Dispossession: A Story of Survival. Association of Mexican American Educators Journal (AMAE).
109 | P a g e
Fair Use Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107
Appendix
U.S. Supreme Court Beard v. United States, 158 U.S. 550 (1895) Beard v. United States No. 542 Submitted March 13, 1895 Decided May 27, 1895 158 U.S. 550 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS Syllabus A man assailed on his own grounds, without provocation, by a person armed with a deadly weapon and apparently seeking his life is not obliged to retreat, but may stand his ground and defend himself with such means as are within his control; and so long as there is no intent on his part to kill his antagonist, and no purpose of doing anything beyond what is necessary to save his own life, is not guilty of murder or manslaughter if death results to his antagonist from a blow given him under such circumstances. The case is stated in the opinion. MR. JUSTICE HARLAN delivered the opinion of the Court. The plaintiff in error, a white man, and not an Indian, was indicted in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Page 158 U. S. 551 Western District of Arkansas for the crime of having killed and murdered, in the Indian country, and within that district, one Will Jones, also a white person, and not an Indian. He was found guilty of manslaughter, and, a motion for a new trial having been overruled, it was adjudged that he be imprisoned in Kings County Penitentiary at Brooklyn, New York, for the term of eight years, and pay to the United States a fine of five hundred dollars. The record contains a bill of exceptions embodying all the evidence, as well as the charge of the court to the jury and the requests of the accused for instructions. To certain parts of the charge, and to the action of the court in refusing instructions asked by the defendant, exceptions were duly taken. The principal question in the case arises out of those parts of the charge in which the court instructed the jury as to the principles of the law of self-defense. There was evidence before the jury tending to establish the following facts: An angry dispute arose between Beard and three brothers by the name of Jones -- Will Jones, John Jones, and Edward Jones -- in reference to a cow, which a few years before that time, and just after the death of his mother, was set apart to Edward. The children, being without any means for their support, were distributed among their relatives, Edward being assigned to Beard, whose wife was a sister of Mrs. Jones. Beard took him into his family upon the condition that he should have the right to control him and the cow as if the lad were one of his own children and the cow his own property. At the time Edward went to live with Beard, he was only eight or nine years of age, poorly clad, and not in good physical condition. After remaining some years with his aunt and uncle, Edward Jones left the Beard house and determined, with the aid of his older brothers, to take the cow with him, each of them knowing that the accused objected to that's being done.
110 | P a g e
The Jones brothers, one of them taking a shotgun with him, went upon the premises of the accused for the purpose of taking the cow away whether Beard consented or not. Page 158 U. S. 552 But they were prevented by the accused from accomplishing that object, and he warned them not to come to his place again for such a purpose, informing them that if Edward Jones was entitled to the possession of the cow, he could have it provided his claim was successfully asserted through legal proceedings instituted by or in his behalf. Will Jones, the oldest of the brothers, and about 20 or 21 years of age, publicly avowed his intention to get the cow away from the Beard farm or kill Beard, and of that threat the latter was informed on the day preceding that on which the fatal difficulty in question occurred. In the afternoon of the day on which the Jones brothers were warned by Beard not again to come upon his premises for the cow unless attended by an officer of the law, and in defiance of that warning, they again went to his farm, in his absence, one of them, the deceased, being armed with a concealed deadly weapon, and attempted to take the cow away, but were prevented from doing so by Mrs. Beard, who drove it back into the lot from which it was being taken. While the Jones brothers were on the defendant's premises in the afternoon for the purpose of taking the cow away, Beard returned to his home from a town nearby, having with him a shotgun that he was in the habit of carrying when absent from home, and went at once from his dwelling into the lot called the "orchard lot," a distance of about 50 or 60 yards from his house and near to that part of an adjoining field or lot where the cow was and in which the Jones brothers and Mrs. Beard were at the time of the difficulty. Beard ordered the Jones brothers to leave his premises. They refused to leave. Thereupon Will Jones, who was on the opposite side of the orchard fence, ten or fifteen yards only from Beard, moved towards the latter with an angry manner and in a brisk walk, having his left hand (he being, as Beard knew, left- handed) in the left pocket of his trousers. When he got within five or six steps of Beard, the latter warned him to stop, but he did not do so. As he approached nearer the accused asked him what he intended to do, and he replied, "Damn you. I will show you," at the same time making a Page 158 U. S. 553 movement with his left hand as if to draw a pistol from his pocket, whereupon the accused struck him over the head with his gun, and knocked him down. "Believing," the defendant testified, "from his demonstrations just mentioned that he intended to shoot me, I struck him over the head with my gun, to prevent him killing me. As soon as I struck him, his brother John, who was a few steps behind him, started towards me with his hand in his pocket. Believing that he intended to take part in the difficulty, and was also armed, I struck him, and he stopped. I then at once jumped over the fence, caught Will Jones by the lapel of the coat, turned him rather to one side, and pulled his left hand out of his pocket. He had a pistol, which I found in his pocket, grasped in his left hand, and I pulled his pistol and his left hand out together. My purpose in doing this was to disarm him, to prevent him from shooting me, as I did not know how badly he was hurt. My gun was loaded, having ten cartridges in the magazine. I could have shot him, but did not want to kill him, believing that I could knock him down with the gun and disarm him, and protect myself without shooting him. After getting his pistol, John Jones said something to me about killing him, to which I replied that I had not killed him, and did not try to do so, for if I had I could have shot him. He said my gun was not loaded. Thereupon I shot the gun in the air to show him that it was loaded." Dr. Howard Hunt, a witness, on behalf of the government, testified that he called to see Will Jones soon after he was hurt, and found him in a serious condition; that he died from the effects of a wound given by the defendant; that the wound was across the head, rather on the right side, the skull being crushed by the blow. He saw the defendant soon after dressing the wound, and told him that the deceased's 111 | P a g e condition was serious, and that he, the witness, was sorry the occurrence had happened. The witness suggested to the accused that perhaps he had better get out of the way. The latter replied that he was sorry that it had happened, but that he acted in self-defense, and would not go away. Beard seemed Page 158 U. S. 554 a little offended at the suggestion that he should run off, and observed to the witness that the latter could not scare him, for he was perfectly justified in what he did. This witness further testified that he had known the defendant four or five years, was well acquainted in the neighborhood in which he lived, and knew his general reputation, which was that of a peaceable law-abiding man. The account we have given of the difficulty is not in harmony in every particular with the testimony of some of the witnesses, but it is sustained by what the accused and others testified to at the trial, so that if the jury had found the facts to be as we have detailed them, it could not have been said that their finding was contrary to the evidence. At any rate, it was the duty of the court to tell the jury by what principles of law they should be guided in the event they found the facts to be as stated by the accused. Assuming, then, that the facts were as we have represented them to be, we are to inquire whether the court erred in its charge to the jury. In the view we take of the case, it will be necessary to refer to those parts only of the charge relating to the law of self-defense. The court stated at considerable length the general rules that determine whether the killing of a human being is murder or manslaughter, and, among other things, said to the jury: "If these boys, or young men, or whatever you may consider them, went down there and they were there unlawfully -- if they had no right to go there -- you naturally inquire whether the defendant was placed in such a situation as that he could kill for that reason. Of course, he could not. He could not kill them because they were upon his place. . . . And if these young men were there in the act of attempting the larceny of this cow and calf, and the defendant killed because of that, because his mind was inflamed for the reason that they were seeking to do an act of that kind, that is manslaughter. That is all it is. There is nothing else in it. That is considered so far provocative as that it reduces the grade of the crime to manslaughter, and no further. If they had no intent to commit a larceny; if it was a bare, naked trespass; if they were there Page 158 U. S. 555 under a claim of right to get this cow, though they may not have had any right to it, but in good faith they were exercising their claim of that kind, and Will Jones was killed by the defendant for that reason -- that would be murder, because you cannot kill a man for bare trespass -- you cannot take his life for a bare trespass -- and say the act is mitigated." After restating the proposition that a man cannot take life because of mere fear on his part, or in order that he may prevent the commission of a bare trespass, the court proceeded: "Now a word further upon the proposition that I have already adverted to as to what was his duty at the time. If that danger was real, coming from the hands of Will Jones, or it was apparent as coming from his hands and as affecting this defendant by some overt act at the time, was the defendant called upon to avoid that danger by getting out of the way of it if he could? The court says he was. The court tells you that he was. There is but one place where he need not retreat any further, where he need not go away from the danger, and that is in his dwelling house. He may be upon his own premises, and if a man, while so situated, and upon his own premises, can do that which would reasonably put aside the danger short of taking life, if he can do that, I say, he is called upon to do so by retreating, by getting out of the way if he can, by avoiding a conflict that may be about to come upon him, and the law says that he must do so, and the fact that he is standing upon his own premises away from his own dwelling house does not take away from him the exercise of the duty of avoiding the danger if he can with a due regard to his own safety by getting away from there or by resorting to some other means of less violence than those resorted to. Now the rule as applicable to a man of that kind upon his own premises -- upon his own property, but outside of his dwelling house -- is as I have just stated." 112 | P a g e
Again: "You are to bear in mind that the first proposition of the law of self-defense was that the defendant in this case was in the lawful pursuit of his business -- that is to say, he was doing what he had a right to do at the time. If he was not, he deprives himself of the right of self-defense, and no matter what his adversary may do, if he, Page 158 U. S. 556 by his own conduct, creates certain conditions by his own wrongful conduct, he cannot take advantage of such conditions, created by his own wrongful act or acts. . . . Again, going to the place where the person slain is, with a deadly weapon, for the purpose of provoking a difficulty or with the intent of having an affray. Now, if a man does that, he is in the wrong, and he is cut off from the right of self- defense, no matter what his adversary may do, because the law says in the very language of these propositions relating to the law of self-defense that he must avoid taking life if he can with due regard to his own safety. Whenever he can do that, he must do it. Therefore, if he has an adversary, and he knows that there is a bitter feeling -- that there is a state of feeling that may precipitate a deadly conflict -- between himself and his adversary, while he has a right to pursue his usual daily avocations that are right and proper, going about his business, to go and do what is necessary to be done in that way, yet if he knows that condition I have named to exist, and he goes to the place where the slain person is with a deadly weapon for the purpose of provoking a difficulty or with the intent of having an affray -- if it comes up, he is there to have it -- and he acts for that purpose, the law says there is no self-defense for him. . . . If he went to the place where that young man was, armed with a deadly weapon, even if it was upon his own premises, with the purpose of provoking a difficulty with him in which he might use that deadly weapon, or of having a deadly affray with him, it does not make any difference what was done by the young man; there is no self-defense for the defendant. The law of self-defense does not apply to a case of that kind, because he cannot be the creator of a wrong -- of a wrong state of case -- and then act upon it. Now if either one of these conditions exists, I say, the law of self-defense does not apply in this case." Later in the charge, the court recurred to the inquiry as to what the law demanded of Beard before striking the deceased with his gun, and said: "If at the time of this killing it be true that the deceased was doing an act of apparent or real deadly violence, and that state of case existed, and yet that Page 158 U. S. 557 the defendant at the time could have avoided the necessity of taking his life by the exercise of any other reasonable means, and he did not do that, because he did not exercise other reasonable means that would have with equal certainty saved his life, but resorted to this dernier remedy, under those facts and circumstances the law says he is guilty of manslaughter. Now let us see what that requires. It requires first that the proof must show that Will Jones was doing an act of violence or about to do it, or apparently doing it or about to do it, but that it was an act that the defendant could have escaped from by doing something else other than taking the life of Jones, by getting out of the way of that danger, as he was called upon to do, as I have already told you, for he could not stand there as he could stand in his own dwelling house, and he must have reasonably sought to avoid that danger before he took the life of Jones, and if he did not do that, if you find that to be Jones' position from this testimony, and he could have done so, but did not do it, the defendant would be guilty of manslaughter when he took the life of Jones, because in that kind of a case the law says that the conduct of Jones would be so provocative as to reduce the grade of crime. Yet at the same time, it was a state of case that the defendant could have avoided without taking his life, and because he did not do it he is guilty of the crime of manslaughter." Further: 113 | P a g e
"If it be true that Will Jones at the time he was killed, was exercising deadly violence, or about to do so, or apparently exercising it, or apparently about to do so, and the defendant could have paralyzed the effect of that violence without taking the life of Jones, but he did not do it, but resorted to this deadly violence, when he could have protected his own life without resorting to that dernier remedy -- if that be the state of the case -- the law says he is guilty of manslaughter, because he is doing that which he had no right to do. This great law of self-defense commands him at all times to do that which he can do under the circumstances, to-wit, exercise reasonable care to avoid the danger by getting out of the way of it, or by exercising less violence than that which will produce death, and yet will be equally effective to secure his own life. If either of Page 158 U. S. 558 these propositions exist -- and they must exist to the extent I have defined to you, and the defendant took the life of Jones under these circumstances, the defendant would be guilty of manslaughter." We are of opinion that the charge of the court to the jury was objectionable in point of law on several grounds. There was no evidence tending to show that Beard went from his dwelling house to the orchard fence for the purpose of provoking a difficulty, or with the intent of having an affray with the Jones brothers, or with either of them. On the contrary, from the outset of the dispute, he evinced a purpose to avoid a difficulty or an affray. He expressed his willingness to abide by the law in respect to his right to retain the cow in his possession. He warned the Jones brothers, as he had a legal right to do, against coming upon his premises for the purpose of taking the cow away. They disregarded this warning, and determined to take the law into their own hands, whatever might be the consequences of such a course. Nevertheless, when Beard came to where they were, near the orchard fence, he did nothing to provoke a difficulty, and prior to the moment when he struck Will Jones with his gun he made no demonstration that indicated any desire whatever on his part to engage in an affray, or to have an angry controversy. He only commanded them, as he had the legal right to do, to leave his premises. He neither used, nor threatened to use, force against them. The court several times, in its charge, raised or suggested the inquiry whether Beard was in the lawful pursuit of his business -- that is, doing what he had a right to do -- when, after returning home in the afternoon, he went from his dwelling house to a part of his premises near the orchard fence, just outside of which his wife and the Jones brothers were engaged in a dispute; the former endeavoring to prevent the cow from being taken away, the latter trying to drive it off the premises. Was he not doing what he had the legal right to do, when, keeping within his own premises, and near his dwelling, he joined his wife, who was in dispute with others, one of whom, as he had been informed, had already threatened to take Page 158 U. S. 559 the cow away or kill him? We have no hesitation in answering this question in the affirmative. The court also said: "The use of provoking language, or, it seems, resorting to any other device, in order to get another to commence an assault so as to have a pretext for taking his life, agreeing with another to fight him with a deadly weapon, either one of these cases, if they exist as the facts in this case, puts the case in such an attitude that there is no self-defense in it." We are at a loss to understand why any such hypothetical cases were put before the jury. The jury must have supposed that, in the opinion of the court, there was evidence showing that Beard sought an opportunity to do physical harm to the Jones boys, or to some one of them. There was not the slightest foundation in the evidence for the intimation that Beard had used provoking language, or resorted to any device, in order to have a pretext to take the life of either of the brothers. Much less was there any reason to believe that there was an agreement to fight with deadly weapons.
114 | P a g e
But the court below committed an error of a more serious character when it told the jury, as in effect it did by different forms of expression, that if the accused could have saved his own life and avoided the taking of the life of Will Jones by retreating from and getting out of the way of the latter as he advanced upon him, the law made it his duty to do so, and if he did not, when it was in his power to do so without putting his own life or body in imminent peril, he was guilty of manslaughter. The court seemed to think, if the deceased had advanced upon the accused while the latter was in his dwelling house, and under such circumstances as indicated the intention of the former to take life or inflict great bodily injury, and if, without retreating, the accused had taken the life of his assailant, having at the time reasonable grounds to believe, and in good faith believing, that his own life would be taken, or great bodily harm done him, unless he killed the accused, the case would have been one of justifiable homicide. To that proposition we give our entire assent. But we cannot agree that the accused was under any greater obligation when on his own premises, near his dwelling house, to retreat or run away Page 158 U. S. 560 from his assailant, than he would have been if attacked within his dwelling house. The accused being where he had a right to be, on his own premises, constituting a part of his residence and home at the time the deceased approached him in a threatening manner, and not having by language or by conduct provoked the deceased to assault him, the question for the jury was whether, without fleeing from his adversary, he had at the moment he struck the deceased, reasonable grounds to believe, and in good faith believed, that he could not save his life or protect himself from great bodily harm except by doing what he did, namely, strike the deceased with his gun, and thus prevent his further advance upon him. Even if the jury had been prepared to answer this question in the affirmative -- and if it had been so answered the defendant should have been acquitted -- they were instructed that the accused could not properly be acquitted on the ground of self-defense if they believed that by retreating from his adversary, by "getting out of the way," he could have avoided taking life. We cannot give our assent to this doctrine. The application of the doctrine of "retreating to the wall" was carefully examined by the Supreme Court of Ohio in Erwin v. State, 29 Ohio St. 186, 193, 199. That was an indictment for murder; the defendant being found guilty. The trial court charged the jury that if the defendant was in the lawful pursuit of his business at the time the fatal shot was fired, and was attacked by the deceased under circumstances denoting an intention to take life or do great bodily harm, he could lawfully kill his assailant, provided he used all means "in his power" otherwise to save his own life or prevent the intended harm, "such as retreating as far as he can, or disabling his adversary without killing him, if it be in his power;" that if the attack was so sudden, fierce, and violent that a retreat would not diminish, but increase, the defendant's danger, he might kill his adversary without retreating; and, further that if from the character of the attack there was reasonable ground for the defendant to believe, and he did honestly believe, that his life was about to be taken, or he was to suffer great bodily harm, and that he believed honestly that he would be in equal danger Page 158 U. S. 561 by retreating, then, if he took the life of the assailant, he was excused. Of this charge the accused complained. Upon a full review of the authorities and looking to the principles of the common law as expounded by writers and courts of high authority, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that the charge was erroneous, saying: "It is true that all authorities agree that the taking of life in defense of one's person cannot be either justified or excused except on the ground of necessity, and that such necessity must be imminent at the time, and they also agree that no man can avail himself of such necessity if he brings it upon himself. The question, then, is simply this: does the law hold a man who is violently and feloniously assaulted responsible for having brought such necessity upon himself on the sole ground that he failed to fly from 115 | P a g e his assailant when he might safely have done so? The law, out of tenderness for human life and the frailties of human nature, will not permit the taking of it to repel a mere trespass, or even to save life where the assault is provoked; but a true man, who is without fault, is not obliged to fly from an assailant, who by violence or surprise maliciously seeks to take his life, or to do him enormous bodily harm. Now under the charge below, notwithstanding the defendant may have been without fault, and, so assaulted, with the necessity of taking life to save his own upon him, still the jury could not have acquitted if they found he failed to do all in his power otherwise to save his own life, or prevent the intended harm, as retreating as far as he could, etc. In this case, we think, the law was not correctly stated." In Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80, 83, which was an indictment for murder, and where the instructions of the trial court involved the present question, the court said: "A very brief examination of the American authorities makes it evident that the ancient doctrine as to the duty of a person assailed to retreat as far as he can before he is justified in repelling force by force has been greatly modified in this country, and has with us a much narrower application than formerly. Indeed, the tendency of the American mind seems to be very strongly against the enforcement of any rule which Page 158 U. S. 562 requires a person to flee when assailed, to avoid chastisement, or even to save human life, and that tendency is well illustrated by the recent decisions of our courts bearing on the general subject of the right of self-defense. The weight of modern authority, in our judgment, establishes the doctrine that when a person, being without fault and in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel force by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self- defense, his assailant is killed, he is justifiable. . . . It seems to us that the real question in the case, when it was given to the jury, was whether the defendant, under all the circumstances, was justified in the use of a deadly weapon in repelling the assault of the deceased. We mean by this did the defendant have reason to believe, and did he in fact believe, that what he did was necessary for the safety of his own life, or to protect him from great bodily harm? On that question, the law is simple and easy of solution, as has been already seen from the authorities cited above." In East's Pleas of the Crown, the author, considering what sort of an attack it was lawful and justifiable to resist even by the death of the assailant, says: "A man may repel force by force in defense of his person, habitation, or property against one who manifestly intends and endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a known felony, such as murder, rape, robbery, arson, burglary, and the like, upon either. In these cases he is not obliged to retreat, but may pursue his adversary until he has secured himself from all danger, and if he kill him in so doing, it is called justifiable self-defense, as, on the other hand, the killing by such felon of any person so lawfully defending himself will be murder. But a bare fear of any of these offenses, however well grounded -- as that another lies in wait to take away the party's life -- unaccompanied with any overt act indicative of such an intention, will not warrant in killing that other by way of prevention. There must be an actual danger at the time." P. 271. So in Foster's Crown Cases: "In the case of justifiable self-defense, the injured party may repel force with force in defense of his person, habitation, or property against one who manifestly intendeth and endeavoreth, with violence or surprise, to commit a known felony upon either. In these cases he is not obliged to retreat, but may pursue his adversary till he findeth himself out of danger, and if, in a conflict between them, he happeneth to kill, such killing is justifiable." C. 3, p. 273. In Bishop's New Criminal Law, the author, after observing that cases of mere assault and of mutual quarrel, where the attacking party has not the purpose of murder in his heart, are those to which is 116 | P a g e applied the doctrine of the books that one cannot justify the killing of another, though apparently in self-defense, unless he retreat to the wall or other interposing obstacle before resorting to this extreme right, says that: "Where an attack is made with murderous intent, there being sufficient overt act, the person attacked is under no duty to fly. He may stand his ground, and, if need be, kill his adversary. And it is the same where the attack is with a deadly weapon, for in this case a person attacked may well assume that the other intends murder, whether he does in fact or not." Vol. 1, § 850. The rule is thus expressed by Wharton: "A man may repel force by force in defense of his person, habitation, or property against anyone or many who manifestly intend and endeavor to commit a known felony by violence or surprise or either. In such case he is not compelled to retreat, but may pursue his adversary until he finds himself out of danger, and if, in the conflict between them he happen to kill him, such killing is justifiable." 2 Whart. Crim.Law, § 1019, 7th rev. ed. Phila. 1874. See also Gallagher v. State, 3 Minn. 270, 273; Pond v. People, 8 Mich. 150, 177; State v. Dixon, 75 N.C. 275, 279; State v. Sherman, 16 R.I. 631; Fields v. State, 32 N.E. 780; Eversole v. Commonwealth, 26 S.W. 816; Haynes v. State, 17 Ga. 465, 483; Long v. State, 52 Miss. 23, 35; State v. Tweedy, 5 Ia. 433; Baker v. Commonwealth, 19 S.W. 975; Tingle v. Commonwealth, 11 S.W. 812; 3 Rice's Ev. § 360. In our opinion, the court below erred in holding that the accused, while on his premises, outside of his dwelling house, was under a legal duty to get out of the way, if he could, of his assailant, who, according to one view of the evidence, had threatened to kill the defendant, in execution of that purpose had armed himself with a deadly weapon, with that weapon concealed upon his person went to the defendant's premises, despite the warning of the latter to keep away, and by word and act indicated his purpose to attack the accused. The defendant was where he had the right to be, when the deceased advanced upon him in a threatening manner and with a deadly weapon, and if the accused did not provoke the assault, and had at the time reasonable grounds to believe, and in good faith believed, that the deceased intended to take his life, or do him great bodily harm, he was not obliged to retreat nor to consider whether he could safely retreat, but was entitled to stand his ground and meet any attack made upon him with a deadly weapon in such way and with such force as, under all the circumstances, he at the moment, honestly believed, and had reasonable grounds to believe, were necessary to save his own life or to protect himself from great bodily injury. As the proceedings below were not conducted in accordance with these principles, the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to grant a new trial. Other objections to the charge of the court are raised by the assignments of error, but, as the questions which they present may not arise upon another trial, they will not be now examined. Judgment reversed. Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.
Terry v. Ohio 392 U.S. 1, 88 S. Ct. 1868, 20 L. Ed. 2d 889 (1968) The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution permits a law enforcement officer to stop, detain, and frisk persons who are suspected of criminal activity without first obtaining their consent, even though the officer may lack a warrant to conduct a search or Probable Cause to make an arrest. Now known as a Terry stop, this type of police encounter is constitutionally permissible only when an officer can articulate a particularized, objective, and reasonable basis for believing that criminal activity may be afoot or that a given suspect may be armed and dangerous. 117 | P a g e
The case stemmed from an incident in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1963. Police officer Martin McFadden observed three men engaging in suspicious behavior near the corner of Euclid Avenue and Huron Road. One of the suspects was the defendant, John Terry. Along with co-defendant Richard Chilton and a third man, known only as Katz, Terry was seen pacing in front of a downtown store. Occasionally, the men would pause to confer with each other. More often, McFadden witnessed the men peering into the store's front window. Over a period of ten to twelve minutes, the three men looked into the same store window approximately 24 times. Based on his training as an officer and 39 years of experience on the police force, including 35 as a detective, McFadden believed that the suspects were "casing" the store for a robbery. Attempting to forestall a possible robbery, McFadden approached the three men and identified himself as a police officer. Not being familiar with any of the suspects, McFadden asked for their names. When the men mumbled unintelligibly in response, McFadden grabbed Terry, quickly patted down his overcoat, and discovered a .38-caliber revolver. After removing the pistol from Terry's coat pocket, McFadden patted down the other two suspects, finding another revolver in Chilton's overcoat. Katz was not armed. Terry and Chilton were charged with carrying concealed weapons. Prior to trial the two defendants brought a motion to suppress the incriminating evidence seized by McFadden. The defendants argued that the weapons were inadmissible because McFadden had discovered them during an unlawful search. McFadden, the defendants pointed out, possessed neither a valid search warrant authorizing the pat down nor probable cause to detain them. Denying their motion to suppress, the court scheduled the matter for trial where both defendants were found guilty. The Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed the convictions, and the defendants appealed to the nation's highest court. The U.S. Supreme Court divided its opinion into three parts. First, the Supreme Court ruled that the defendants enjoyed qualified protection from temporary police detention under the Fourth Amendment. Before a court will examine the propriety of police activity under the Fourth Amendment, it must first determine whether the interests asserted by a defendant are constitutionally protected. The Fourth Amendment governs areas where individuals maintain a reasonable expectation of privacy, including a zone of personal freedom in which every individual is secure from unnecessary and unreasonable governmental intrusion. Walking down the streets of Cleveland, the Court said, Terry and Chilton held a reasonable expectation that their personal liberty would not be unlawfully restrained by law enforcement. Second, the Court ruled that the defendants' freedom was effectively impeded by their encounter with McFadden. Any time a police officer accosts an individual to detain him for questioning, the Court emphasized, the officer has "seized" that person within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. It would be nothing less than "torture of the English language," the Court added, to suggest that McFadden's pat down of the suspects' clothing was anything other than a "search" as that term is defined in the Constitution. Third, the Court ruled that McFadden acted reasonably during his encounter with the defendants. Acknowledging that the Constitution generally requires probable cause to effect an arrest and a lawfully executed warrant to conduct a search, the Court identified a third area of police activity that is permissible under the Fourth Amendment, though it may amount to neither a full-blown search nor a technical arrest. The central inquiry under the Fourth Amendment, the Court wrote, is whether the police have acted reasonably under the circumstances. The express language of the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit all warrantless searches performed without probable cause, but only those that are unreasonable. In dealing with rapidly unfolding and increasingly dangerous situations, the Court said, police may find it impractical or impossible to obtain a search warrant before choosing to intervene. In other situations, injury or harm may result to bystanders if law enforcement is made to wait until it has probable cause before acting. The Court indicated that the Fourth Amendment gives law enforcement flexibility to 118 | P a g e investigate, detect, and prevent criminal activity. According to Terry, this flexibility includes the right of police officers to stop persons suspected of criminal activity and detain them for questioning. If during questioning police are led to believe that a suspect is armed and dangerous, an officer may frisk the suspect without violating the Fourth Amendment. In this case the Court noted that McFadden personally witnessed the two defendants engaging in what appeared to be preparations for a robbery. It would have been negligent, the Court thought, for McFadden to have turned a blind eye to such behavior. Given that he chose to investigate further, the Court said, it was reasonable for McFadden to assure himself that none of the suspects was armed, especially after they failed to respond intelligibly to his request for identification. In patting down and frisking the defendants, McFadden chose a prudent course to stave off threats to his security and the security of others. The Court reached its holding by balancing the legitimate needs of law enforcement against the privacy interests of individuals. Forcible detention of individuals for questioning is far from a petty indignity. Even a limited search of outer clothing, the Court stressed, constitutes a "serious intrusion upon the sanctity of the person, which may inflict great indignity and arouse strong resentment, and it is not to be undertaken lightly." At the same time, law enforcement must not be restricted from performing its job in a proficient manner. The Fourth Amendment does not restrict police from intervening until after a crime has been committed. Crime prevention is a bona fide goal of law enforcement, the Court said, and the Fourth Amendment places only reasonable restrictions upon pursuit of that goal. Outlining these restrictions, the Court said that no police officer may lawfully stop and detain a person for questioning unless the officer first observes unusual conduct that arouses a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. A stop may be no longer than necessary to confirm or dispel an officer's suspicion and must not be unnecessarily restrictive or intrusive. During the period of detention, no searches may be performed unless the officer has an objective and particularized basis for believing the suspect is armed and dangerous. Any search must be limited to the suspect's outer clothing and may be performed only for the purpose of discovering concealed weapons. Evidence obtained during searches that comport with these restrictions, the Court said, is admissible under the Fourth Amendment. Evidence obtained in violation of the limitations set forth in Terry may be suppressed under the Exclusionary Rule.
Exclusionary Rule The principle based on federal Constitutional Law that evidence illegally seized by law enforcement officers in violation of a suspect's right to be free from unreasonable SEARCHES AND SEIZURES cannot be used against the suspect in a criminal prosecution.
The exclusionary rule is designed to exclude evidence obtained in violation of a criminal defendant's Fourth Amendment rights. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement personnel. If the search of a criminal suspect is unreasonable, the evidence obtained in the search will be excluded from trial. The exclusionary rule is a court-made rule. This means that it was created not in statutes passed by legislative bodies but rather by the U.S. Supreme Court. The exclusionary rule applies in federal courts by virtue of the Fourth Amendment. The Court has ruled that it applies in state courts [through] the DUE PROCESS CLAUSE of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Bill of Rights—the first ten amendments— applies to actions by the federal government. The Fourteenth Amendment, the Court has held, makes most of the protections in the Bill of Rights applicable to actions by the states. The exclusionary rule has been in existence since the early 1900s. Before the rule was fashioned, any evidence was admissible in a criminal trial if the judge found the evidence to be relevant. The manner in which the evidence had been seized was not an issue. This began to change in 1914, when the U.S. Supreme Court devised a way to enforce the Fourth Amendment. In Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383, 34 S. Ct. 341, 58 L. Ed. 652 (1914), a federal agent had conducted a warrantless search for evidence of gambling at the home of Fremont Weeks. The evidence seized in the search was used at trial, and Weeks was convicted. On appeal, the Court held that the Fourth Amendment barred the use of evidence secured through a warrantless search. Weeks's conviction was reversed, and thus was born the exclusionary rule. Source: legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Exclusionary+Rule 119 | P a g e
Rethinking School Discipline Remarks of U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan at the Release of the Joint DOJ-ED School Discipline Guidance Package January 8, 2014 The Academies at Frederick Douglass High School, Baltimore, MD
My thanks to CEO Edwards and President Dukes for their comments, and for that gracious introduction. I thank you for your unwavering commitment to equal opportunity for all students and your leadership in rethinking school discipline in Maryland. And I’m so pleased to be joined here today by my good friend and colleague, Attorney General Holder. The Attorney General and his team have been great partners in our work together to improve school climate and keep schools safe. I know this is a very personal issue for him--as it has been for me, and for the students we talked to just minutes ago at a roundtable here at Frederick Douglass. We’re gathered here today to talk about school discipline---which, far too often, is not applied equitably or as effectively as it could be in our nation’s schools. So today, the Departments of Education and Justice are joining together to release a guidance package on school discipline for a broad range of stakeholders--educators, principals, district administrators, school board members, charter school heads, school resource officers, counselors, social workers, parents, community leaders--and, importantly, students themselves. Our school discipline package has several elements, but I’ll just highlight two important ones. The first is a Dear Colleague Letter from Catherine Lhamon and Jocelyn Samuels, who head the civil rights offices, respectively, at ED and DOJ. Their joint letter provides information on how schools and districts can meet their legal obligations to administer student discipline without discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Racial discrimination in school discipline is a real problem today, and not just an issue from 40 to 50 years ago. I want to thank Catherine and Jocelyn and their staffs for their tremendous leadership and commitment in addressing inequities in discipline that have been much discussed but rarely addressed. We must tackle these brutal truths head on—that is the only way to change the reality that our children face every day. This is the first Administration to provide guidance to the public on discrimination in school discipline. And we want to continue to provide leadership on this critical problem going forward to ensure equal opportunity for all students. The second part of the guidance package that I want to highlight is a Guiding Principles document that provides voluntary action steps for local leaders and educators. It lays out three core principles and related action steps to guide efforts to improve school climate and school discipline. There is no single formula, no silver bullet for ensuring school discipline is equitable and effective. This work is too complex and too important to try to simplify it in that way. Our Guiding Principles document highlights the need for locally-developed approaches to promote positive school climates and equitable discipline practices. Yet at the same time, we think those locally- tailored approaches should be grounded in research and promising practices--instead of being based on indiscriminate zero tolerance policies, or, at the other extreme, ad-hoc approaches to discipline. The need to rethink and redesign school discipline practices is long overdue. Too many schools resort too quickly to exclusionary discipline, even for minor misbehaviors. Exclusionary discipline is so common that in some cases, pre-K students as young as three- and four- years old are getting suspended. Here in Maryland, 91 pre-K students were suspended or expelled during the 2011-12 school year. Schools should remove students from the classroom as a last resort, and only for appropriately serious infractions, like endangering the safety of other students, teachers, or themselves.
120 | P a g e
Unfortunately today, suspensions and expulsions are not primarily used as a last resort for serious infractions. A landmark study in Texas found nearly six in ten public school students—a majority of students-- were suspended or expelled at least once between 7th and 12th grade. Nationwide, as many as 95 percent of out-of-school suspensions are for nonviolent misbehavior--like being disruptive, acting disrespectfully, tardiness, profanity, and dress code violations. Let me be clear—these are all issues that must be dealt with clearly, effectively, and with a sense of urgency when they arise. But I would just ask, is putting children out of school the best remedy, the best solution to the problem? In California, nearly half of the more than 700,000 suspensions statewide in the 2011-12 school year were for, quote, “willful defiance.” Over time, the overreliance on exclusionary discipline has gotten much worse. The number of secondary school students suspended or expelled over the course of a school year has increased by roughly 40 percent in the last four decades. In recent years, secondary schools have suspended or expelled an estimated two million students a year. That is a staggering amount of lost learning time--and lost opportunity to provide support. Making matters worse, exclusionary discipline is applied disproportionately to children of color and students with disabilities. Educationally, and morally, that status quo is simply unacceptable. Our department’s Civil Rights Data Collection shows that African-American students without disabilities are more than three times as likely as their white peers to be expelled or suspended. And we know that discipline policy and practices matter tremendously—there is nothing inevitable about high rates of suspension and expulsion. We can, and must, do much better. According to CRDC data, schools in South Carolina suspended 12.7 percent of students—about one in eight students during the 2009-10 school year. By contrast, schools in North Dakota suspended 2.2 percent of students—about one out of every 50 students. I am absolutely confident that students in South Carolina are not six times more likely than their peers in North Dakota to pose serious discipline problems worthy of an out-of-school suspension. That huge disparity is not caused by differences in children; it’s caused by differences in training, professional development, and discipline policies. It is adult behavior that needs to change. The same gaping disparities show up at the district level. Across the country, more than 300 districts suspend over 25 percent of students with disabilities. Yet more than 600 districts suspend less than 3 percent of students with disabilities. So, state and local policies and practices are both enormously variable and have a huge impact on exclusionary discipline. Those are just two reasons why this guidance package--spelling out three guiding principles for equitable school discipline—is so important. Those three guiding principles are simple and straightforward. First, schools and districts should take deliberate steps to build positive school climates to prevent misbehavior and target student supports to children to help them address underlying causes of misbehavior--like trauma, substance abuse, and mental health issues. So often acting-out behavior is a symptom of underlying issues children are dealing with at school, at home, or in the community. We must get beyond the surface issue and get to the heart of the problem. Schools should be training staff, engaging families and community partners, and deploying real resources to help students develop the resolution skills they need to avoid or de-escalate problems. As Frederick Douglass famously said, “It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.” Grit, resilience, conflict resolution skills—these are all skills that can be taught and learned, and are as important to long-term success as reading, writing, and math. The second principle is that schools and districts should ensure that clear, appropriate, and consistent expectations and consequences are in place, both to prevent and to address misbehavior.
121 | P a g e
Students should face clear expectations about behaving appropriately and be held accountable for their actions. And schools should be seeking to provide differing levels of support and interventions to students, based on their needs—we know some students need more intensive support than others. The one-size- fits-all mentality simply doesn’t work. That will be the core premise of our School Climate Transformation Grants. The aim is to help more than a thousand schools train teachers and other school staff to implement evidence-based strategies with multi-tier behavioral frameworks to improve school climate and culture. The third and final principle is that school leaders and educators should strive to ensure fairness and equity for all students through continuous improvement. Using data and analysis, school leaders should continuously evaluate the impact of their discipline policies on all students and subgroups. If we are honestly tracking the data, it should not surprise us. Too many times, schools, districts, and states fail to follow these guiding principles. And the overuse of suspensions and expulsions has taken a terrible toll on students, families, schools, and communities. Suspended students are less likely to graduate on time--and are more likely to repeat a grade, drop out of school, and become involved in the juvenile justice system. The school-to-prison pipeline must be challenged every day. In Texas, a single suspension or expulsion for a discretionary offense that did not include a weapon almost tripled a student’s likelihood of becoming involved in the juvenile justice system the next school year. Now, nothing in this guidance package should be understood to minimize the cardinal importance of holding students to high expectations that are developmentally appropriate. Students want and need clear boundaries, structure, and consistency. They need to feel safe, cared for, and respected. It is always the right thing to set high expectations for students, not just in academic terms, but for their behavior and conduct. No school can be a great school if it is not first a safe school, and no teacher or student should ever feel unsafe or unable to concentrate on teaching and learning. Principals, teachers, families, and students all have a vested interest in minimizing disorder and disruptiveness in schools. Positive school climates not only minimize unnecessary suspensions and expulsions, but also reduce disorder in the classroom and bolster learning. Those goals are complementary, not conflicting—they reinforce each other. A new study of secondary schools in California identified 40 beating-the-odds schools that consistently performed better than would have been predicted; given the characteristics of the students they served. I don’t think it will surprise anyone here to learn that these 40 schools had much more positive school climates than their comparison schools. In fact, researchers concluded that a school’s climate may have more to do with its success than the resources at its disposal. The study reported that “things like high expectations for students, caring relationships between teachers and students, and feeling safe at school were more associated with success.” Now, creating positive school climates and equitable discipline practices is a school-by-school, community-by-community challenge. And this challenge is very real. Schools continue to be among our safest institutions for children, and violence and crime has declined in schools during the last decade. But a substantial subset of middle- and high schools still has unacceptable levels of violence, and bullying is far too common. It will take hard, collective action to dramatically reduce the overuse of exclusionary discipline and to consistently create positive school climates. But we know it can be done. There are amazing examples all across the country of leadership making a difference. And in fact, it’s being done right here in Baltimore, and right here at Frederick Douglass High School. No one here is shrugging off this challenge, saying “boys will be boys” or “kids will be kids.” 122 | P a g e
A decade ago, in 2004, principals and educators routinely suspended students for minor infractions in Baltimore City Schools. In a school system with about 88,000 students, school officials handed out more than 26,000 suspensions. A new CEO for the district, Andres Alonso, said that was unacceptable. He saw to it that the Code of Conduct governing student discipline was changed. Mental health professionals were placed in every school with middle grades. More discipline problems were handled through mediation, counseling, and parent-teacher conferences. As a result, the number of suspensions in Baltimore City Schools dropped by about two-thirds, from 26,300 suspensions to 8,600 last year. I’m proud to say that Jonathan Brice of our department played a central role in those reforms when he was here in Baltimore. And CEO Edwards has very much continued Andres’ work in reducing exclusionary discipline. In just the last school year, the number of suspensions district-wide fell by almost 25 percent to a modern-day low. It may be harder to work with a child who is struggling than to just kick them out of school, but the extra effort is so important. Many of you here today know that Frederick Douglass High has a storied past. But just a few years ago, the school had fallen on such hard times that an HBO documentary portrayed the school as a case study in educational dysfunction where less than 25 percent of students graduated. Today, under the leadership of Dr. Hurt, and the school’s wonderfully committed teachers and support staff, achievement and graduation rates are up dramatically. At the federal level, we have supported this turnaround with $4.2 million in school improvement grants that help students participating in an early college effort to travel to community college, and supports increased planning time for teachers and increased learning time for students. The grants help provide supports to meet the social and emotional needs of students, in keeping with the action steps outlined in today’s guidance package. Ultimately, the guiding principles and action steps we have outlined today are just a starting point for creating safe schools, where teachers can concentrate on teaching and where students are in class and learning. These principles will be made real only through the vision and commitment of dedicated teachers, school leaders, and school staff, working in partnership with students, families, and communities. Thurgood Marshall, a proud alum of Frederick Douglass High, said that “None of us got where we are solely by pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps. We got here because somebody—a parent, a teacher . . . bent down and helped us pick up our boots.” So, let us all reach out to help all our children pick up their boots and build positive futures for themselves. And now I’d like to turn this over to my friend, Attorney General Holder.
Further readings (CXW) Corrections Corporation of America $33.38 Volume 3,726 Jan 10, 2014, 4:35 p.m. (GEO) The GEO Group – Market cap $ 2,364,807,062. Management and Training Corp. - Market Cap $ 1,253,209,005 Bandes, Susan. 1999. "Terry v. Ohio in Hindsight: The Perils of Predicting the Past." Constitutional Commentary 16 (Winter). Lichtenberg, Illya D., Alisa Smith, and Michael Copeland. 2001. "Terry and Beyond: Testing the Underlying Assumption of Reasonable Suspicion." Touro Law Review 17 (Winter). Whitebread, Charles H., and Christopher Slobogin. 2000. Criminal Procedures: An Analysis of Cases and Concepts. New York: Foundation. There was only five (5) private prisons in the country ten years ago holding a prison population of around two thousand (2,000). Now there are over one hundred (100) private prisons exceeding sixty two thousand (62,000+) prisoners. Within the next ten (10) years that number will reach an astounding three hundred and sixty thousand (360,000+) inmates according to current trends. Source: reality-bytes.hubpages.com/hub/Is-The-Prison-Industrial-Complex-A-New-Form-Of-Slavery 123 | P a g e
Slavery and the American Economy By Waldron H. Giles, Ph.D. Slavery raises a host of negative images for Black people; so much so, they fail to realize the tremendous economic contributions they made, albeit forced, to the development of the United States into a world power. This lack of realization stems from the national shame of slavery and the concomitant national denial, which in reality has become a weak defense mechanism. To a large degree Blacks and whites have bought into this denial, albeit for different reasons. In spite of this contribution Blacks continue to vie for respect and acceptance by the very country that they practically own via a down payment with their own blood, sweat, and tears. Through the shame of slavery African Americans continue to increase the “Debt” they are owed instead of steadfastly demanding payment. The resulting hypothesis of this economic analysis of slavery is that the current “Debt” is too large to foster healthy discussions with whites and continued avoidance of such discussions has been and will continue to be disguised under a variety of racist manipulations. The purpose of this economic analysis is to enlighten African Americans and end the impotence produced by this shame and to undo those stereotypical images of laziness, ignorance, criminal behavior, and incompetence. The form of superiority imposed by self-pity continues to defeat the positive self-images and hinders the increased racial creativity and accomplishments that African Americans need in today’s jingoistic climate. Whether African descendants will be justly compensated for their sacrifices is not the principle issue, here. The paramount issue is that African Americans appreciate their contributions and constantly remind their heirs of the trillions of unpaid dollars earned by their ancestors. They and they alone made the largest national loan in history and financed the world’s greatest power. Most of that “loaned” money is still in circulation today and the “Debt” is still alive and real! The first African slaves hit the shores of the United States in 1619 and were constantly imported into the US until 1860 even though importation had been outlawed in 1808. Over those intervening 246 years they contributed more than 605 billion hours of free labor, which funded the Industrial Revolution, financed most of the fortune 500 companies, helped finance two World Wars, and left a negative sociological impact on an entire race of people. Slaves born in the US since slave importation started decreasing in 1810 supplied most of the labor. Importation as a source of free labor was replaced by forced breeding because it was a lot more profitable. However, the profits obtained from slave importation were phenomenal since slaves could be purchased in Africa for less than $40 and sold in the US for between $500 and $1,000. Profits obtained from a single ship traversing the golden triangle passage averaged greater than $175,000 even though as many as one in three of the slaves died during the middle passage. Commodities (cotton, tobacco, Bibles, and guns) were the cargoes on the other two legs of the triangle. To determine the economic value of slavery, the population of slaves in the US was obtained from the US Census Bureau. It was assumed that, on average, slaves worked some 60 hours per week for 51 weeks during the years with the average pay rate over the 164 years at $.10 per hour. All of these assumptions are conservative since underreporting was a common practice since state and local taxes had to be paid on the number of slaves. This practice was offset since congressional representation counted slaves as 3/5 of a person. The results of the economic value of this free labor are, when inflated conservatively at 3% to 2006 dollars, a staggering value of 20.3 trillion dollars or to put this number in a more visual perspective; it amounts to $563,450 per African American currently living in the US. This amount is low since slave labor was counted from the year 1700 instead of 1619 and, as mentioned previously, the census data, in all likelihood, is low for various taxing demands and for those members of the Black race that were able to pass for white or elude the census. The undercounting of Blacks still is a major problem for adequate representation, particularly in the South.
124 | P a g e
The 19.7 trillion dollar slave contribution is still within the US economy since the dollar has constantly inflated in value, and money like matter in never destroyed; it can be wasted but not destroyed, in an inflationary economy. This slave-induced contribution is still working and funding new ventures, within the US economy as we speak. Those who made this contribution, albeit forced, have been largely denied access to the very capital and business accouterments they developed. Following the thread of these dollars would be another interesting aspect of black economic research since even without detailed research it is known that Aetna Insurance Co., E.I. Dupont, and J.P. Morgan, Brown University, to name a very, very few, reaped substantial benefits from the grim business of slavery. For example, Pierre Bauduy purchased 4 out of the original 16 shares issued for the E.I. DuPont Company for $8,000. Pierre Bauduy obtained his money from the profits of a Haitian plantation which he was forced to vacate during the Haitian revolution. The manufacturers of slave ships and cotton merchants heavily financed Brown University in its early beginnings. Aetna Insurance Co. sold insurance policies on slaves to protect slave owners from the losses of run away slaves. The original capital for J.P. Morgan was derived from its cotton trading company in the South. So much fortune was amassed off the backs of the cotton, tobacco, and rice- picking slaves that J.P. Morgan loaned money to the US government during the Civil War. Another way to view the economic contribution of slavery to the US economy would be to assume that only 5% of the value of the slave labor was invested in the stock market in the year the labor was accrued. Five percent was chosen since this is the most common bottom line that is found in Fortune 500 income statements. Using market growth data provided by the Rittenhouse Trust data and the moneys are accumulated from 1700 through 1830 (the beginning of the Rittenhouse data), yields a value of $6.42 trillion current dollars. The subsequent moneys are invested at the time they accrued yields an additional $1.44 trillion. Combining these values leads to a staggering $7.86 quadrillion in 2006 dollars! With these staggering capital gains, we begin to gain insight into the US national avoidance on the subject of slave labor, reparations, and why African Americans are constantly being placed on the defensive around their monumental economic contribution. When one reflects on the magnitude of this capital, denial becomes a pitiful and yet effective excuse for continued domination of the people and nations that have been exploited. Whereas, only four major institutions and corporations have been mentioned here, considering the vast sums of money most, if not all, major corporations have benefited in varying degrees from the $7,860 trillion of profits accrued from slavery. Major endowments to universities that have reluctantly, at best, supported Affirmative Action are another major financial thread yet to be unwound. Education and the business of education are another twist of irony for those who have struggled long and hard to escape the yoke and stigma of slavery. The economic yields from slavery presented herein are for the United States only and covers only the period from 1700 through 1865. One must keep in mind that the first slaves came to North America almost 100 years prior to the time period of this economic evaluation. The majority of the slaves were imported to the Caribbean, Brazil, Columbia, the Guyanas, and other parts of South America, which more than doubles the economic figures, presented here when viewed on a global scale. Brazil alone has close to 100 million descendants of African slaves! The capital gained from slavery in the Americas was invested in colonialism, which further compounded the current economic enslavement of the African descendants on both sides of the Atlantic. The problem was further compounded considering some 20 to 25 million young souls (mostly male) were taken from the continent of Africa, leaving that continent devoid of military protection and agricultural productivity. This human capital deficit from slavery and its evil offspring, colonialism, is still being felt in all African countries and the Diaspora.
125 | P a g e
On a global scale the magnitude of the total “Debt” is so huge as to possibly destabilize capitalism as opposed to the continued economic exploitation of Africa. Under the enormity of this “Debt,” reparations, which in the future may be the cheapest way out, will be vigorously resisted by the former colonial powers. Continuing demands for a return on investment of $7.86 quadrillion will force African nations (ironically, the original unwilling investors) further into debt leading to deeper poverty, depravation, political instability and exploitation of their natural resources. The tragic irony of African national debts is that they were the original investors who should be seeking compensation for the egregious crimes of slavery instead of merely seeking debt relief. The sheer increasing weight of this global “Debt” is the force that must be reckoned with and surely will change world history in this the 21st century. The repayment will be extracted in one way or the other. As the saying goes, “What goes around comes around!” Source: Waldron H. Giles is a graduate of Rutgers University and New York University with BS, MS, and PhD degrees in Physical Chemistry. He has developed a global measurement system for the calculation of world power. [email protected]
Source (both charts): www.faireconomy.org/news/state_of_the_dream_2008_charts
126 | P a g e
Economics - Anglican Church receives compensation for its loss of slaves.
The purposes of the Slavery Abolition Act 1833 were described in the preamble to the Bill as: 1. “the abolition of slavery throughout the British colonies”; 2. “for promoting the industry of the manumitted slaves”; and 3. “for compensating the persons hitherto entitled to the services of such slaves”. The second purpose was achieved by providing for a period of apprenticeship.
Purpose #3 was achieved by appropriating £20 million — a huge sum in those days — to compensate slave owners. The Act came into force on 1 August 1834. On that date slavery was abolished throughout the vast British Empire. The Anglican Church received 8,823 pounds sterling in compensation for its loss of over 400 slaves. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_Abolition_Act_1833
Britain's anti-slavery stance was not viewed as benevolent In a January 24, 1842 letter to Senator John C. Calhoun, diplomat Duff Green wrote from Paris after recently visiting London: “England finds it impossible to maintain her commercial and manufacturing superiority, because she cannot raise cotton, sugar, etc., as cheap in India as it can be raised in the United States, Cuba, and Brazil, and that her war on slavery and the slave-trade is intended to increase the cost of producing the raw material in the United States, Brazil, and Cuba, that she can sell to other rival manufacturing, continental powers, the product of her East India possessions cheaper than they can purchase from us. If she can do this, having the power to compel her East India subjects to purchase her manufactures, and hers alone, she can, through her manufactures, command the supply of raw material, and thus compel rival manufacturing nations to pay her tribute, while she, in a great measure, controls the manufacture itself. ... Under the aspects of the case, you will find that England has much more than a work of benevolence in the suppression of the slave-trade. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_Abolition_Act_1833
Guns and the invasion of a continent Guns, Gorée Island famous for its role in slavery, near Dakar, Senegal, West Africa. The Maxim gun was first used by Britain's colonial forces in the First Matabele War [South Africa] in 1893-1894. In one engagement, 50 soldiers fought off 5,000 warriors with just four Maxim guns. The gun played an important role in the swift European colonization of Africa in the late 19th century. The extreme lethality was employed to devastating effect against obsolete charging tactics, when native opponents could be lured into pitched battles in open terrain.
It was the Portuguese who first took Africans as slaves to Europe after 1441. After 1460, they exported between 700 to 800 slaves to Portugal to work on the sugar plantation in Southern Portugal and Spain and the islands of Fernando Po, Sao Tome and Principe By the 1480's, the Portuguese interest in gold had changed to the purchase and sale of slaves. A Papal Bull authorized the opening of the slave market in Lisbon. The English Parliament also passed an Act legalizing the purchase of slaves in 1545. Even in 1452, the Pope declared that the possession of slaves was the right of all Christians. Sources: ss-inventionhistory.wikispaces.com/MachineGun. www.galenfrysinger.com/senegal_goree_island_house_of_slaves.htm
127 | P a g e
A FINAL WORD Transforming unjust structures of society. Introduction to How Profiling Works As the stars of true-crime documentaries, TV series and Hollywood thrillers, criminal profilers have one of the best-known law enforcement jobs in the world.
Basic profiling -- identifying the perpetrator of a crime based on an analysis of crime and the way it was committed -- is a common investigative tool. But some fear that police departments have taken profiling too far, harassing or even arresting people because of certain characteristics they might have in common with criminals -- or worse yet, because of their skin color. Others argue that in an age of terrorism and violent crime, we can't afford not to examine people based on crime patterns, even if that means suspicion based on race.
In this article, we'll look at the different types of profiling, see how police officers and criminal investigators create and use profiles and learn about the controversy surrounding the practice. The most basic kind of profiling is a ‘Be On the Lookout’ (BOLO) or ‘All-Points Bulletin’ (APB). You're probably familiar with these, although you might not have heard it referred to as a profile.
An APB is a description of a specific suspect accused of committing a specific crime or crimes, usually based on eyewitness accounts. For example, following a bank robbery, police might interview suspects and review surveillance camera footage before releasing the following APB: Suspect was last seen in a dark blue Ford pick-up truck. He was wearing a red T-shirt and black jeans. Suspect is described as a white male, 5-feet 10-inches tall and thin with receding blond hair. He has a tattoo of a snake on his left forearm. Including a suspect's skin color is common, and not usually controversial. It is simply a physical description based on visual evidence gathered at the crime scene. It doesn't make any judgments about other people with white skin (or with snake tattoos and receding blond hair, for that matter). The next step in profiling is the psychological profile. Investigators create this profile in the absence of physical evidence or eyewitness descriptions, or to supplement such descriptions. They take what they know about an unknown suspect and his actions and try to generate additional information. For example, if a serial murderer has been killing the female employees of a law firm, profilers might find it likely that the killer is a male former employee or client of the law firm.
Other evidence, such as notes left by the killer, the location of the killing, or the state of the crime scene can allow profilers to develop "educated guesses." These guesses might include things like the suspect's education level, psychological traumas he has suffered or where he lives. They are not always 100 percent accurate, and sometimes they can be rather vague. However, if the police have no idea who the suspect might be, it gives them somewhere to start looking. For example, interviewing former employees of the law firm might turn up more concrete clues that lead to direct evidence of the killer's identity.
Predictive Profiling Instead of seeking a particular suspect based on evidence, predictive profiling attempts to guess which people are likely to commit a crime that hasn't yet occurred.
128 | P a g e
With predictive profiling, criminal profiling gets more controversial. Instead of seeking a particular suspect based on evidence at a specific crime, predictive profiling attempts to guess which people are likely to commit a crime that hasn't happened yet. This isn't a revolutionary idea by itself. Police officers don't just react to crimes: They patrol, observe and try to spot suspicious behavior that could mean a crime is going to take place. Few people would question an officers' right to investigate a suspicious situation or question a suspicious person. Even when police departments use their criminal profiles as a justification for searches and arrests without warrants, those practices have been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Here's an example. State troopers are patrolling a stretch of highway known to be frequented by drug traffickers. The officers know from previous experience that drug traffickers often use rented cars (usually large sedans or SUVs), travel in the very early morning, and put the spare tire in the backseat to leave more room in the trunk for drugs. At 4:00 a.m., an officer notices a car that fits this profile. The driver is not breaking any major traffic rules, but the trooper pulls the car over anyway, hoping to spot some evidence that could lead to a search of the car. This is considered profiling. The practice of noting criminal tendencies and creating a written profile is sometimes attributed to Florida Highway Patrolman Bob Vogel, although it was probably carried out by others at the same time or prior to Vogel's use of "cumulative similarities."
This kind of profiling can occur when the high-level officials create a policy and program that instructs officers to investigate people who fit a predetermined profile. It can also be part of an unofficial policy, an aspect of the police department's culture passed down from veteran cops to newcomers on the force. Sometimes it simply results from an officer's experience. After years on the job, he has learned what signs might indicate criminal activity. To determine if such a profile justifies a warrantless arrest or search, the officer must be able to describe the specific factors that led him to believe the suspect was a criminal. A hunch or a feeling won't stand up in court.
The following statement probably would: The suspect appeared nervous and made several contradictory statements. In the back seat, I could see a shoebox full of 35mm film canisters, which drug couriers frequently use to store drugs. The car smelled like air freshener spray, which is often used to cover up the smell of illegal drugs. I spotted the suspect driving slowly up and down a block I know to be frequented by drug dealers.
That kind of profile is not only legal, it's considered good police work. Some profiling practices come under legal fire because they might violate the U.S. Constitution. Two amendments specifically relate to profiling activity.
The Fourth Amendment reads, in whole: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Probable cause means that police can't search a home, car or person without some kind of justification -- usually, a reasonable belief that they will find evidence of a crime there, or stop a crime in progress. Under most circumstances, a police officer can't determine this on his own. He needs a search warrant from a judge, or consent from the person being searched. The main question surrounding profiling is this: If a person fits a criminal profile, in the absence of any other evidence of a crime, does that by itself
129 | P a g e constitute probable cause? In the case of United States v. Sokolow, the U.S. Supreme Court did decide that a "totality" of evidence leading officers to conclude that the suspect is probably engaged criminal activity is enough to justify an arrest and a search.
The Fourteenth Amendment reads, in part: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. If police officers use criminal profiles that include race as factor, they violate both the Fourth and the Fourteenth Amendment.
Probable Cause Analysis During a traffic stop, an officer can take several different actions that require different kinds of probable cause for them to be legal. Here we'll examine each step and break down the elements of probable cause.
Pulling over a vehicle To legally pull someone over, an officer needs to have witnessed a traffic violation or another crime committed by someone in the car. He can also check the license plate number to see if the car is stolen or if there are arrest warrants out for the registered owner. If the car and its occupants fit a criminal profile, the officer can make a stop as long as he can describe specific factors that fit the profile. The race or skin color of the driver and occupants can't come into play, however.
Questioning the suspect Once the officer pulls over a vehicle, he doesn't necessarily have to write a ticket. If the vehicle seems suspicious, the officer may just want to question the occupants, check their licenses against the department database and look inside the car. He can look at anything in plain view in the car. However, he does not have sufficient cause yet to enter and search the car. To do so would violate the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure. However, if this preliminary investigation adds more weight to the officer's initial suspicion, he may have probable cause for an arrest and search. Again, this depends on the presence of specific factors in the profile, not just a "feeling," and race cannot be a factor. Once a suspect gives his consent, police officers can conduct a full search of his car.
Consent to search If the actions of the suspects or the contents of their car raise further suspicions, the officer can ask the driver for consent to search the car. No one is ever required to say yes, but if they do, the officer needs no additional cause. The suspect has waived his Fourth Amendment rights, and the officer can conduct a full search. The officer is not required to tell the suspect that he can refuse consent (at least, not under federal law -- some states may have laws requiring this notification). This aspect is controversial because not everyone is aware of their right to refuse consent, and many people say yes out of fear or the feeling that the officer will do the search anyway.
If consent is refused, the officer may detain the suspects for a reasonable amount of time. In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that using a drug-sniffing dog around the outside of a vehicle does not require a warrant nor any specific suspicion or probable cause, and does not violate the Fourth Amendment.
130 | P a g e
If the dog "alerts" to the presence of drugs, that creates enough probable cause for a full search, without consent or a warrant. The "reasonable" amount of time provision is vaguely defined, although wait times up to 90 minutes have been allowed by federal courts.
Full search with probable cause The alert of a drug-sniffing dog, or seeing drugs or weapons sitting in plain sight inside the car are the most commonly accepted forms of probable cause. If the officer performs any of these actions without probable cause, then any evidence gathered as a result will not be allowed court. This could make it very difficult to successfully prosecute the suspect.
Racial Profiling Racial profiling is a form of predictive profiling in which one of the factors (or the only factor) officers consider is the skin color or race of the suspect. Keep in mind that we are not talking about "rogue cops" with racist attitudes. Of course, racism exists in law enforcement just as with any large group of people. The real controversy erupts when police departments have policy-level profiling systems that include race as a factor, or a department-wide culture that teaches and reinforces the practice. Some people claim that racial profiling is blatant, institutionalized racism that leads to unfair harassment of minorities, while others claim that racial profiling either doesn't exist (i.e., police officers harass criminals, and if they happen to be minorities, that isn't the officers' fault) or that it is a necessary tool that simply reflects reality.
Separating fact from opinion can be difficult, because the same facts are used by both sides of the debate to support their own point of view. Opponents of racial profiling cite the disparity between the percentage of black inmates in the U.S. prison population and the percentage of the overall black population as a sign that blacks are unfairly targeted by police. U.S. census data for 2000 indicates that blacks make up 12.3 percent of the U.S. population, while Department of Justice statistics indicate that roughly 40 percent of all prison inmates are black. A similar disparity can be found among Hispanics. But some suggest that these statistics merely indicate that blacks and Hispanics are more likely to commit crimes.
Statistical analysis is even more difficult. According to those who say racial profiling doesn't happen, there are too many variables that would need to be taken into account to accurately compare general populations to prison populations. Even if traffic stops, roadside searches or arrests are broken down by race, these stats might be skewed because police make more traffic stops at times of day when more minorities are driving, or minorities might have a greater tendency to violate traffic laws. Higher accident and accident fatality rates are often cited as evidence of this. Advocates also point out that if racism were at the heart of minority stop and arrest rates, minority police officers would have different statistics than white officers. In fact, black cops on average pull over the same number of black drivers as white cops do.
The most high profile case of systematic racial profiling was uncovered in New Jersey in 1999. An analysis of New Jersey State Trooper practices was conducted by the state attorney general, revealing that blacks and Hispanics were pulled over and searched many more times than non-minority drivers. In fact, 80 percent of all traffic stops conducted by New Jersey State Troopers during a 10-year period were stops of minority drivers. The report also found that a "macho," elitist culture existed within the state trooper ranks. Although department policy officially forbade racial profiling, reports from many troopers indicated that it was common for veteran troopers to "coach" others on its practice. Authorities
131 | P a g e
assigned federal monitors to the troopers. In 2006, a report suggested that New Jersey had eliminated racial profiling actions completely, but whether or not they would still need federal monitors remained in question.
The New Jersey scandal brought profiling practices across the country into the spotlight. While Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) training materials pointed out that racial profiling was unethical and against agency rules, DEA intelligence passed to agents and police departments frequently contained information on the national origin of potential suspects, as well as racial information. The New Jersey District Attorney's office issued a statement, declaring that law enforcement officers should not use race as a factor in any way during any step of the process of stopping and investigating a potential suspect. Essentially, cops should be blind to race, ethnicity and skin color (except when they are trying to match a person to a description of a specific suspect).
Departmental policies are supposed to aid law enforcement by examining trends in criminal activity. However, they have had the unintended consequence of creating a hostile situation for members of minorities who were innocent. Such policies would be considered civil rights violations, and many police departments have adopted policies specifically outlawing the practice. Twenty-two states have laws that ban racial profiling of motorists.
Amidou Diallo In one infamous case, police were accused of racial profiling in the death of West African immigrant Amidou Diallo. In February 1999, NYPD officers were searching for a serial rapist when they spotted Diallo, whose skin color and clothing fit the description of the suspect. When the cops announced their presence, Diallo fled up the steps of his apartment building and reached for his wallet. Thinking he was going for a gun, the officers opened fire. In the confusion, they thought one of the officers was shot. The police fired 41 shots, hitting Diallo 19 times and killing him. In the subsequent trial, officers were acquitted of any charges stemming from the incident. Diallo's parents later won $3 million in a civil suit against the city.
Airline passengers have gotten used to stricter security measures at airports. After the September 11, 2001 attack on the United States (and subsequent terrorist attacks in the United States and elsewhere), the country is particularly sensitive to airport security screenings. Critics say that a disproportionate number of "Arab-looking" people have been detained, searched or questioned at airport security checkpoints. Some people claim this only makes sense, based on the ethnic backgrounds of the 9/11 attackers. However, such practices would violate civil rights law, and at least one expert has pointed out that focusing only on Middle- Eastern people would do more harm than good. Raphael Ron, former security head at Israel's Ben Gurion Airport, has stated, "The worst attack on Ben Gurion was carried out by Japanese in 1972. If we focus on ethnic groups, we will miss what the enemy already understands: using a non-Arab person to carry out an attack might succeed" . In the months immediately following 9/11, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee brought to court several cases involving people of Arabic descent who were removed from flights despite having passed other security checkpoints. Courts determined that the pilot's discretion to remove objectionable passengers cannot be exercised simply because of a passenger's ethnic origin or race. Still, the threat of terrorism made many Americans accept this tactic. Transportation Safety Authority rules have since been changed to clarify that racial profiling at airport security checkpoints is not legal, and newer security systems are designed to be race-neutral, focusing instead on behavior patterns. Source: Ed Grabianowski. How Profiling Works. people.howstuffworks.com/profiling1.htm 132 | P a g e
Mandatory Minimums at Heart of Unintended Consequences August 2009 Mandatory minimum sentencing has become “a blunt and inflexible tool,” said Chief Judge Julie Carnes (N.D. Ga.), chair of the Judicial Conference Committee on Criminal Law, at a House hearing last month. She told members of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security that such sentences lack “the ability to meaningfully distinguish between serious offenders and those who are substantially less culpable.” The subcommittee hearing topic was “Mandatory Minimums and Unintended Consequences.” Carnes provided a judicial perspective on the more than 170 federal mandatory minimum sentencing statutes now in effect. Testifying with Carnes on mandatory minimum sentencing were Grover G. Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform; Michael J. Sullivan, former director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; T. J. Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council; and Julie Stewart, president of Families Against Mandatory Minimums Foundation. Their testimony is available at http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/hear_090714.html. “For more than 50 years, the Judicial Conference has consistently and vigorously opposed mandatory minimum sentencing,” Carnes told the subcommittee. The Conference’s opposition derives “not from a narrow defense of a district judge’s prerogatives but from recognition, gained through years of experience, that mandatory minimum sentencing provisions have created untenable results and that they simply do not hang together in any coherent or rational way,” she said. Carnes noted that, because current mandatory minimum sentencing provisions “typically focus on one factor only, they sweep quite broadly. Therefore, a severe penalty that might be appropriate for the most egregious of offenders will likewise be required for the least culpable violator.” As an example, she cited a mandatory minimum statute that would impose a 20-year sentence not only on the kingpin who had organized and operated an extensive drug trafficking ring, but also on the manual laborer hired to off load a shipment of that kingpin’s drugs. Although in some cases the mandatory penalty may well be appropriate, according to Carnes, in many other cases the prescribed sentence will be disproportionate to the offense that was committed. “Some of these statutes do not produce merely questionable results; instead, a few produce truly bizarre outcomes,” she said. She cited the case of Weldon Angelos (United States v. Angelos), a 24-year old, first-time offender who was facing a term of six to eight years under the sentencing guidelines for his sale of marijuana to undercover agents on three occasions. However, because the defendant brought, but did not use, a gun to two of the drug deals, and because he kept firearms at his home, prosecutors invoked a mandatory minimum statute that required the trial judge to sentence this first-offender to 55 years in prison.
Noting the corrosive effect that some mandatory minimum statutes can have, Carnes indicated that the “robotic” imposition of sentences viewed as unfair or irrational greatly undermines respect for the judicial system and undercuts the sentencing guidelines system that Congress also has created. She concluded by expressing the Judicial Conference’s support of Congress’ efforts to ameliorate the “deleterious and unintended consequences” fostered by these statutes.
Read Carnes’ full House hearing testimony at www.uscourts.gov/Press_Releases/2009/JudgeCarnesMM0714.pdf www.uscourts.gov/News/TheThirdBranch/09-08-01/Mandatory_Minimums_at_Heart_of_Unintended_Consequences.aspx
133 | P a g e
Significant Dates and Decisions in the History of the Sentencing Guidelines Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 1984 Part of the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, the Sentencing Reform Act is signed into law by President Reagan on October 12, 1984. 1985 The U.S. Sentencing Commission meets for the first time in October 1985. 1987 The sentencing guidelines take effect on November 1, 1987. Mistretta v. United States, 488 U.S. 361 (1989) 1989 The Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of the U.S. Sentencing Commission as an independent agency in the judicial branch. Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) The Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment requires that “other than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed 2000 statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.” The decision primarily affects sentences for convictions in drug cases, since the maximum penalties in those cases vary depending on the type and amount of drugs involved. Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002) The Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial extends to the 2002 determination of any fact, other than a prior conviction, that increases the maximum punishment for first-degree murder from life imprisonment to death. Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004) 2004 The Supreme Court held that judicial application of an enhanced range under the Washington state guidelines violated the defendant’s right to a jury trial under the Sixth Amendment. U.S. v. Booker and U.S. v. Fanfan, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) The Supreme Court held in the consolidated cases of U.S. v. Booker and U.S. v. Fanfan that mandatory application of the federal sentencing guidelines violated the defendant’s right to a 2005 jury trial under the Sixth Amendment. The Court remedied the Sixth Amendment violation by making the guidelines advisory, and instructed the appellate courts to review sentences for “reasonableness.” Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338 (2007) 2007 The Supreme Court held that a court of appeals may apply a presumption of reasonableness to a district court sentence within the guidelines. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) The Supreme Court stated that the district court should begin all sentencing proceedings by 2007 correctly calculating the applicable guideline range. Furthermore, the Court held that courts of appeals must review all sentences—whether inside, just outside, or significantly outside the guideline range—under a deferential abuse of discretion standard. Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (2007) The Supreme Court ruled that a district judge must include the guideline range in the array of 2007 factors warranting consideration at sentencing, but the court may consider the disparity between the guidelines’ treatment of crack and powder offenses in determining the sentence. www.uscourts.gov/News/TheThirdBranch/09-08- 01/Significant_Dates_and_Decisions_in_the_History_of_the_Sentencing_Guidelines.aspx
2010 The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-220) an Act of Congress, was signed into law by U.S. President Barack Obama on August 3, 2010. See page 83 of this report.
134 | P a g e
Source: corporatejusticeblog.blogspot.com/2012/11/why-president-obama-should-get-behind.html
U.S. Prisons Thriving on Jim Crow Marijuana Arrests A startling scandal in our so-called criminal ‘justice’ system is largely unnoticed by most Americans because the media in all their forms ignore it. But the American Civil Liberties Union does not. According to a June 3 report from the ACLU, the “over-policing” of marijuana use combined with “staggering racial bias” are leading to appallingly high numbers of incarcerated African-Americans: “Between 2001 and 2010, there were over 8 million pot arrests in the U.S. That’s one bust every 37 seconds and hundreds of thousands ensnared in the criminal justice system … Marijuana use is roughly equal among blacks and whites, yet blacks are 3.73 times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession” (“The War on Marijuana in Black and White: Report,” aclu.org, June 3). Citing the ACLU’s grim statistics, an August report from The Economist says, “blacks are almost four times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession…in some places their arrest is over eight times more likely. “People with criminal records risk…suffering permanent gaps in employment and earning prospects.”. Source: Cato Institute. Nat Hentoff. November 20, 2013 Cato.org. “Waking life,” The Economist, Aug. 24
20 states and DC have enacted laws to legalize medical marijuana. Marijuana sales are still illegal under federal law. Source: procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000881
135 | P a g e
Source: Jenee Desmond-Harris. Why Are Black People Nearly 4 Times as Likely to Be Arrested for Weed? The Root. March 22, 2014.
136 | P a g e
Seeking to transform unjust structures of society. DEFINITIONS Think Tank - An organization that consists of a group of people who think of new ideas on a particular subject or who give advice about what should be done. Brain Trust - A group of people who give advice to a leader about what should be done. A group of experts from various fields who serve as unofficial consultants on matters of policy and strategy. Source: merriam-webster.com/dictionary/
Spring 2014 Proposal: The Ecumenical Commission on Racial Profiling The Ecumenical Commission on Racial Profiling proposal calls for the raising of a collection of diverse experts to focus on the topic of legal racial profiling and Stand Your Ground laws, in the interest of defining, discussing, and remedying the disparate impact of such unjust practices on certain citizen groups, particularly African American men and boys. The body of discussants should include religious leaders, academic and urban studies scholars, legal scholars and civil rights litigators; and a wide variety of economic, social, public policy professionals possessing knowledge in fields contributory to successful achievement of the goals of Ecumenical Commission on Racial Profiling initiative; the permission granted by means of public commissioning by the Bishop of the Diocese of Southern Ohio, The Right Reverend Thomas E. Breidenthal, in partnership with the Office of the Dean, The Very Reverend Gail E. Greenwell and the Vestry of Christ Church Cathedral Cincinnati.
REPLICATING NAACP 1954 HISTORICAL MODEL Road to overturning Stand Your Ground? “May 17, 1954 marks a defining moment in the history of the United States. On that day, the Supreme Court declared the doctrine of “separate but equal” unconstitutional and handed LDF the most celebrated victory in its storied history. Although the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown was ultimately unanimous, it occurred only after a hard-fought, multi-year campaign to persuade all nine justices to overturn the “separate but equal” doctrine that their predecessors had endorsed in the Court’s infamous 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision.
This campaign was conceived in the 1930s by Charles Hamilton Houston, then Dean of Howard Law School, and brilliantly executed in a series of cases over the next two decades by his star pupil, Thurgood Marshall, who became LDF’s first Director-Counsel. Brown itself was not a single case, but rather a coordinated group of five lawsuits against school districts in Kansas, South Carolina, Delaware, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. To litigate these cases, Marshall recruited the nation’s best attorneys, including Robert Carter, Jack Greenberg, Constance Baker Motley, Spotswood Robinson, Oliver Hill, Louis Redding, Charles and John Scott, Harold R. Boulware, James Nabrit, and George E.C. Hayes. These LDF lawyers were assisted by a brain trust of legal scholars, including future federal district court judges Louis Pollack and Jack Weinstein, along with William Coleman, the first black person to serve as a Supreme Court law clerk. In addition, LDF relied upon research by historians, such as John Hope Franklin, and an array of social science arguments. This research included psychologist Kenneth Clark’s now famous doll experiments, which demonstrated the impact of segregation on black children - Clark found black children were led to believe that black dolls were inferior to white dolls and, by extension, that they were inferior to their white peers.” Source: Desegregation Landmark: Brown v. Board of Education Case filed 12/09/52 http://www.naacpldf.org/case/brown-v-board-education 137 | P a g e
INITIATING TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION Lingering Effects: Sociology of Race and Crime in the United States
DEFINITION Sociology is the study of the origin, development, and structure of human societies and the behavior of individual people and groups in society; the study of a particular social institution and the part it plays in society. Source: Encarta Dictionary English (North America)
White-collar crime Some crime is only possible because of the identity of the offender, e.g., transnational money laundering requires the participation of senior officers employed in banks. Questions about sentencing disparity white-collar crime continue to be debated. By the type of offense, e.g., property crime, economic crime, and other corporate crimes like environmental and health and safety law violations. But the FBI has adopted the narrow approach, defining white-collar crime as "those illegal acts which are characterized by deceit, concealment, or violation of trust and which are not dependent upon the application or threat of physical force or violence" (1989, 3). This approach is relatively pervasive in the United States, the record-keeping does not adequately collect data on the socioeconomic status of offenders which, in turn, makes research and policy evaluation problematic. While the true extent and cost of white-collar crime are unknown, the FBI and the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners estimate the annual cost to the United States to fall between $300 and $660 billion. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White-collar_crime
State-corporate crime The negotiation of agreements between a state and a corporation will be at a relatively senior level on both sides; this is almost exclusively a white-collar "situation" which offers the opportunity for crime. Although law enforcement claims to have prioritized white-collar crime, evidence shows that it continues to be a low priority. Snider (1999) notes that capitalist states are often reluctant to pass laws to regulate large corporations, because this might threaten profitability, and that these states often use considerable sums to attract regional or national inward investment from large corporations. They offer new investors: Preferential tax concessions not available to the ordinary citizen or local business if foreign investment is sought; Loans, guarantees and other financial support on preferential terms; Directly targeted grants and other subsidies; and A purpose-built infrastructure to subsidize the set-up costs. Once the state is committed to this offer, it can be difficult to enforce local laws against pollution, health and safety, or monopolies. Harper and Israel (1999) comment: ...societies create crime because they construct the rules whose transgression constitutes crime. Aulette and Michalowski (1993) examined a fire in the Imperial Food Products chicken processing plant in Hamlet, North Carolina where twenty-five workers died, and uncovered "an interwoven pattern of regulatory failure on the part of several state and federal agencies" that had allowed the company's management to continue violating basic safety regulations in search of corporate profit. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-corporate_crime
Trafficking in Guns is not a federal crime Currently, prosecutions only happen through a law that prohibits selling guns without a federal license, which carries the same punishment as trafficking chicken or livestock. Source: faithsagainstgunviolence.org/
Social Disorganization theory and Black on Black Crime. Social disorganization theory proposes that high rates of crime are largely the result of a heterogeneous and impoverished social ecology. Proponents of the theory point to the process of urban decay as a major contributing factor to the breakdown of healthy urban communities which would normally curb the spread of many forms of 138 | P a g e criminal behavior. The diversity of minority cultures present in poverty-stricken neighborhoods prevents the formation of strong social bonds and leaves inhabitants uninterested in maintaining positive community relationships. This has been observed to increase the likelihood of crime in certain urban areas, which can lead to increased policing and a further breakdown of familial structures as a result of arrests, which, in turn, precipitates more crime. Social disorganization theory has been instrumental in establishing the notion that stable, culturally homogeneous communities have lower rates of delinquency and crime regardless of race. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Subculture_of_violence_theory
Macrostructural opportunity theory Phillippia Simmons reports that many of the studies which have investigated intra- and interracial crime seek to explain this through a theory of macrostructural opportunity which states that interracial violence is primarily a function of opportunity and access. According to this theory, intraracial crime rates remain relatively high due to the fact that much of the US remains residentially segregated. She notes that this theory predicts that, if residential areas were more racially integrated, intraracial crime would decrease and interracial crime would increase correspondingly. However, she also notes that not all researchers on the topic of intraracial crime agree with this result, with some pointing to other macrostructural factors, such as income and education, which may negate the effect of race on inter- and intraracial crime. Anthony Walsh criticizes the attempt to use the macrostructural opportunity model to explain interracial rape as has been done in studies conducted in the past few decades, pointing out that such a defense is directly contradicted by the data related to homicide. Walsh argues that the macrostructural opportunity model helps explain why black murderers almost always choose black victims. There are disparities in rates of reporting rape where victims of some races are statistically less likely or more likely to report their rape, especially depending on the race of the offender. Black women in America are more likely to report sexual assault that has been perpetrated by a stranger. White women are more likely to report the offense if the offender is black whereas black women are still more likely to under-report rapes overall as they are more likely to blame themselves, feel they will be blamed or feel they won't be believed. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Subculture_of_violence_theory
Transnational Organized Crime Transnational Organized Crime is organized criminal activity that takes place across national jurisdictions, and with advances in transportation and information technology, law enforcement officials and policymakers has needed to respond to this form of crime on a global scale. Some examples include human trafficking, money laundering, drug smuggling, illegal arms dealing, terrorism, and cyber crime. Although it is impossible to precisely gauge transnational crime, the Millennium Project, an international think tank, assembled statistics on several aspects of transnational crime in 2009: World illicit trade of almost $780 billion Counterfeiting and piracy of $300 billion to $1 trillion Global drug trade of $321 billion Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnational_organized_crime
Predatory Lending Predatory lenders are most likely to target the less educated, the poor, racial minorities, and the elderly. One less contentious definition of the term is "the practice of a lender deceptively convincing borrowers to agree to unfair and abusive loan terms, or systematically violating those terms in ways that make it difficult for the borrower to defend against." Other types of lending sometimes also referred to as predatory include payday loans, certain types of credit cards, overdraft loans, when the interest rates are considered unreasonably high. $100 payday advance with a $15 fee = 391% APR $100 bounced check with $54 NSF/merchant fees = 1,409% APR $100 credit card balance with a $37 late fee = 965% APR $100 utility bill with $46 late/reconnect fees = 1,203% APR Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_lending
139 | P a g e
Poverty Industry The terms poverty industry or poverty business refer to a wide range of money-making activities that attract a large portion of their business from the poor. Businesses in the poverty industry often include payday loans centers, pawnshops, rent-to-own centers, casinos, liquor stores, tobacco stores, and credit card companies. Illegal ventures such as loan sharking or drug-dealing or prostitution might also be included. The poverty industry makes roughly US$33 billion a year in the United States. In 2010, elected American federal officials received more than $1.5 million in campaign contributions from poverty industry donors. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_industry
The misery index: Misery and Crime The misery index is an economic indicator created by economist Arthur Okun, and found by adding the unemployment rate to the inflation rate. It is assumed that both a higher rate of unemployment and a worsening of inflation create economic and social costs for a country. Some economists posit that the components of the Misery Index drive the crime rate to a degree. Using data from 1960 to 2005, they have found that the Misery Index and the crime rate correlate strongly and that the Misery Index seems to lead the crime rate by a year or so. In fact, the correlation is so strong that the two can be said to be co-integrated, and stronger than correlation with either the unemployment rate or inflation rate alone. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_index_%28economics%29#Misery_and_crime
Economic Inequality: Wealth Gap Economic inequality (also described as the gap between rich and poor, income inequality, wealth disparity, wealth and income differences or wealth gap) is the difference between individuals or populations in the distribution of their assets, wealth, or income. The term typically refers to inequality among individuals and groups within a society, but can also refer to inequality among countries. The issue of economic inequality involves equity, equality of outcome, equality of opportunity, and life expectancy. Some studies have emphasized inequality as a growing social problem. While some inequality promotes investment, too much inequality is destructive. Income inequality can hinder long term growth. Statistical studies comparing inequality to year-over-year economic growth have been inconclusive International Monetary Fund published work which indicated that income equality increased the duration of countries' economic growth spells more than free trade, low government corruption, foreign investment, or low foreign debt. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_inequality#Wealth_concentration
Environmental discrimination and Likelihood People positioned in the poor socioeconomic level of their respective communities were exposed to more pollution than others, and those creating the most pollution live in the least polluted places. Environmental justice is the term used to describe the corrective measures needed to address this disparity. Poisoning farm workers with pesticides, lead poisoning in inner-city children, the zoning of toxic facilities such as landfills, polluting industrial complexes, and incinerators are some of the topics. In addition, many Americans questioned the placement of large numbers of nuclear waste dumps on Native-American reservations. Activists, scholars, and policymakers began investigating the link between race and exposure to environmental hazards. Two influential studies exploring this relationship—one by the U.S. General Accounting Office (US GAO) and the other by the United Church of Christ (UCC)—found that African-Americans and other people of color were more likely to live close to hazardous waste sites and facilities than whites. The study by the United Church of Christ was particularly important because it made an explicit connection between race and the increased likelihood of being exposed to hazardous wastes. The studies also made the issue of race and the environment more salient in communities of color. …Forms of environmental racism include but are not limited to greater probability of exposure to environmental hazards; uneven negative impacts of environmental procedures; uneven negative impacts of environmental policies; intentional targeting and zoning of toxic facilities in minority communities; segregation of minority workers in hazardous jobs; minority communities with little access to or insufficient maintenance of environmental amenities, for example, parks; and disproportionate access to environmental services such as garbage removal. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_racism#cite_note-10
140 | P a g e
The 2014 Education Summit at Morehouse College.
Excerpt: Ivory A. Toldson, PhD. The Root. March 31 2014 7:00 AM Achieving Success
Numbers That Count Instead of focusing on numbers that produce sensational sound bites, we need to focus on the numbers that count for a good education for black males.
1.Four and four units of math and science: For a school to prepare students for the most competitive colleges and universities, they need to offer four units of math and four units of science. As a minimum standard, in Challenge the Status Quo: Academic Success for School-Age Black Males (CTSQ) (pdf) we recommend PREPS (Public Reciprocity for Education for Postsecondary Success).
In other words, every high school should offer a curriculum that, at a minimum, meets the admissions requirements for the most competitive public university of the state.
The widespread practice of public schools omitting [not offering] classes required for public college admissions should be a violation of federal law.
Immediately, individual schools and their governing school districts should provide a disclosure statement to students’ parents and guardians, which specifies any courses required for admissions to the most competitive public universities of the state, which are not available in their curriculum. The disclosure statement should also provide educational options for students to access the necessary courses within the school district.
2. 3.0 collective GPA: The mean grade-point average of all students, regardless of race and gender, is a 3.0, according to the High School Transcript Study. In my Breaking Barriers research, I’ve found that a school’s collective GPA is a good measure of a myriad of positive outcomes, including reduced violence and increased college enrolment.
Many schools with the worst problems have a composite GPA that is closer to a 2.0, and the students in their 90th percentile barely have a 3.0. Many school leaders do not regularly monitor their collective GPA because, unlike standardized test scores, it is not required by law.
Every school should publish their composite GPA and make 3.0, or better, a benchmark of success. If the school has a composite GPA that is less than 3.0, they should have specific strategies to raise standards. One strategy could be the lifting tides approach, whereby a school gathers all students in the top quartile and challenge them to raise the bar. At the same time, provide learning supports and curriculum enhancement to other students.
3. Twenty-five percent or more black students in honors classes: Nationwide, 25 percent of high school students are enrolled in honors classes, according to the High School Longitudinal Survey. Thirty-three percent of white females take those types of courses, while it’s 27 percent for white males, 22 percent for black females and 15 percent for black males.
141 | P a g e
For a school to make adequate progress toward educating black children, they should offer them access to honors classes that meet or exceed honors class enrollment for all students nationally.
4. Six percent or fewer black students in special education: Nationwide, 6 percent of high school students are in special education. Our research in CTSQ demonstrates that black males are the most likely to be placed in special education, even in the absence of a learning or behavioral disorder. We also demonstrate that, in the right academic environment, even black males with disabilities can end up in honors classes.
Adequate strides toward educating black children require that schools eliminate the biases related to assigning black males to special education, and make a commitment to reducing the representation of black males in special education to be at or below the national average for all students.
5. Five percent or fewer black students have ever been suspended: No school can make adequate progress, unless they suspend students at a rate that is less than the national average for all students. In CTSQ we calculated the national suspension rate for all students at 10 percent, and 26 percent for black males, based on the High School Longitudinal Survey. However, after speaking with a variety of experts, I recommend that the benchmark for schools should be no more than 5 percent of students suspended.
They based this number on very extensive analyses that revealed that racial disparities in suspensions were so pervasive that a fair benchmark should only consider the rate of suspensions among white students. To address this, U.S. Departments of Education and Justice released a school discipline guidance package to enhance school climate and improve school discipline policies/practices.
6. One hundred percent of students involved in extracurricular activities: Schools should work to have nearly 100 percent of their students involved in extracurricular activities. In my first Breaking Barriers (pdf) report, I find that extracurricular activities promote skills and values that foster a sense of attachment, commitment and responsibility to the school. Implementing more extracurricular activities, particularly those that instill school pride, appreciation of art and culture and academic identity, can increase school performance and reduce violence at the school.
Unfortunately, when I ask school leaders, “What percent of your students are involved in an extracurricular activity?” the typical response is, “I don't know.”
Every school should take a homeroom survey of their students’ participation in extracurricular activities. In cases where the participation rate is low, the school should have targeted initiatives to increase involvement.
Specific examples of school activities are sports teams, band, orchestra, performing arts, debate teams, honor societies, foreign language clubs, math clubs and computers and robotics clubs.
Almost two years ago, The Root invited me to produce an education column called “Show Me the Numbers.” In this speech, I presented the numbers that count and the numbers that deceived. But none of these numbers matter if people of good conscience do not use them to act.
When releasing the first CRDC’s report, U.S. Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan expressed this best when he said, “The real power of the data is not only the truth behind the numbers, but in the impact that it can have when married with courage and will to challenge the status quo.” 142 | P a g e
Excerpt: Ivory A. Toldson, PhD. The Root. March 31 2014 7:00 AM 9 Biggest Lies About Black Males and Academic Success The 2014 Education Summit at Morehouse College looked at ways to improve outcomes for black males, but first exposed the myths and flaws in the system. The Root. March 31 2014 7:00 AM
Today, approximately 258,047 of the 4.1 million ninth graders in the United States are black males. Among them, about 23,000 are receiving special education services, and for nearly 46,000, a health care professional or school official has told them that they have at least one disability. If black male ninth graders follow current trends, about half of them will not graduate with their current ninth grade class (according to the Schott Foundation), about 20 percent will reach the age of 25 without obtaining a high school diploma or GED, 45 percent of black males will attempt college; however, only 16 percent obtain a bachelor’s degree by the age of 25 (according to the Annual Community Survey). Recently, the Department of Education released the second wave of data from the Civil Rights Data Collection (pdf). The study suggests that opportunity gaps that exist between black and white males across the country center around three key areas: 1. Schools routinely offer black children a less rigorous curriculum that omit classes required for college admission; 2. Schools discipline black males more harshly by suspending them for behaviors (e.g. tardiness) that rarely result in suspensions among white males, and 3. Black students are the most likely to have the lowest paid teachers with the fewest years of classroom experience, and who become teachers through alternative teacher-certification programs.
Notwithstanding, most black males persist through high school. In a national survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 87 percent of black students who were in the ninth grade in 2009 were in the 11th grade by 2012. In addition, black students were more likely to advance ahead than fall behind or drop out. Among students who dropped out of high school, 33 percent of black students left because they were suspended or expelled, compared to 19 percent for white students and 13 percent for Hispanic students.
Typically, when we attempt to address the so-called “dropout crisis,” we focus on black students’ motivation for dropping out.
Maybe we need to start focusing on schools’ intentions for putting them out…
Excerpt: Ivory A. Toldson, PhD. The Root. March 31 2014 7:00 AM The following are a few of the greatest lies ever told about black males: 1. There are more black men in prison than in college. Today there are approximately 600,000 more black men in college than in jail, and the best research evidence suggests that the line was never true to begin with.
143 | P a g e
2. Black boys can’t read. Before blindly accepting reports that less than a fifth of black boys (and less than half of white boys) can read, learn about the NAEP, take a practice test and learn about diverse learning styles.
3. Black youth of today are more violent than any generation in history. Today, the rate of violence among black youth is slightly less than it was before 1980 and less than half the rate that it was in the 1990s.
4. One third of black boys will serve time in prison. One in three black men will go to prison because a white man named Thomas P. Bonczar’s “double-decrement life table” (pdf) said they will. Actually, Dr. Bonczar was only referring to black males born in 2001. They were 2 years old when he predicted it. They are 12 years old now. So far, they are far from the "super predators" we forecasted them to be.
5. Black boys are at a natural disadvantage because most are from single-parent households. As a single variable, household composition carries little weight and appears to serve as a proxy for more serious issues, such as teenage pregnancy and incarcerated parents. A myriad of co-variants (e.g. parents’ education and parent practices) nullify the effects of household composition on academic progress.
6. Black students purposefully underachieve because they associate being smart with acting white. Consistent across decades of survey research, black students demonstrate more positive attitudes about education than their white student peers.
7. Black males are avoiding the teaching profession. Primary school teacher is the No. 1 profession of college-educated black men and No. 3 for white men. Secondary school teacher is No. 5 for black men and No. 14 for white men. Educational administrator is No. 6 for black men and No. 20 for white men and counselor is No. 7 for black men and No. 40 for white men.
8. Black men are underrepresented in institutions of higher education. The nation’s 12.7 million black men 18 years old and older make up 5.5 percent of the adult population, and 1.2 million black male college students make up 5.5 percent of all college students. By contrast, white males are 32.7 percent of the adult population and 27 percent of college students.
9. Black men are a “dying breed.” According to census figures, since 1980, there has been a 19.9 percent increase in the total number of black men age 15 to 25 in the U.S. population. By contrast, there has been a 22.5 percent decrease in the total number of white men age 15 to 25 in the U.S. population. This list does not suggest that no problems exist in the black community. However, the problems have everything to do with system inequities, not cultural pathology. We need to understand the true nature of the issues before we can begin to resolve them.
“Don’t cut off my foot, if my problem is a hole in the bottom of my shoe.” Excerpt: Ivory A. Toldson, PhD. The Root. March 31 2014 7:00 AM
Fair Use Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107
144 | P a g e