The Ferguson thread

[Bill of Rights]

I really hope the glass house isn't aimed at me. I think I've done a pretty good job (with the exception of the cycle comment) of stating my concerns with respect. I know I'm in the minority with my opinion, and I'm fine with that, but you (and other mods) asked, and I'll answer. The fact that you say it's not a threat doesn't help. Just saying.

Re-read my initial post, Rookie. Nothing was "aimed" at anyone. I was only saying that people get upset when someone is banned, until it's the guy giving them a ration of crap.

 

[Rookie]

He had many such opportunities. He squandered them all. If you want the ban reversed, that decision will have to come from Fenway, personally.

I'm a little confused. It's obvious vupdblue isn't happy with my input, but you, and others seem to want to hear it. Which way should I go?

...

 

[chipbennett]

DOJ Report, page 63:

The racially disparate impact of Ferguson’s practices is driven, at least in part, by intentional discrimination in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Racial bias and stereotyping is evident from the facts, taken together. This evidence includes: the consistency and magnitude of the racial disparities throughout Ferguson’s police and court enforcement actions; the selection and execution of police and court practices that disproportionately harm African Americans and do little to promote public safety; the persistent exercise of discretion to the detriment of African Americans; the apparent consideration of race in assessing threat; and the historical opposition to having African Americans live in Ferguson, which lingers among some today.

So far, this is a case study in asserting that correlation proves causation, as well as begging the question.

Still reading...

 

[Kutnupe14]

Exactly.

I've skimmed about 40 pages of the report, and thus far:

1. FPD sounds like just about any urban police department
2. There is lots of anecdotal evidence of violation of rights, but thus far, there is no evidence presented that those violations are racially based.

WHAT are YOU reading? Some of the stories in that report are absolutely ridiculous. Failure to identify change because the guy referred to himself a "Mike" rather than Michael? And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[VUPDblue]

Hornady is gone and will never be welcome here again. I banned him because he is a troll. I am not sorry. I am done discussing this now.

 

[THE BIG SITT]

You could always do the honors...

I'll run up to him on the street, taze him, and say "This is from mbills and the rest of the people of INGO!"

 

[KLB]

For anyone interested in actually discussing the thread topic, turn to page 62 of the DOJ report. That's where the discussion on racial disparity of police practices begins.

Thanks. I didn't have the fortitude to read all of that report.

Seems like a lot of circumstantial evidence. It could be evidence of racism, then again maybe it isn't. Without more in depth knowledge of all of those arrests, citations, etc., it is impossible to draw a real conclusion.

 

[HoughMade]

Disparate impact and disparate treatment are two vastly different things.

 

[KLB]

WHAT are YOU reading? Some of the stories in that report are absolutely ridiculous. Failure to identify change because the guy referred to himself a "Mike" rather than Michael? And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Is that evidence of racism or of a dept intent on squeezing every possible dollar out of the citizens there?

 

[chipbennett]

More on page 65:

Of all stopped black drivers, 91%, or 8,987, received citations, while 87%, or 1,501, of all stopped white drivers received a citation.

There doesn't appear to be much of a disparity here: 97% versus 87%?

891 stopped black drivers—10% of all stopped black drivers—were arrested as a result of the stop, whereas only 63 stopped white drivers—4% of all stopped white drivers—were arrested. This disparity is explainable in large part by the high number of black individuals arrested for outstanding municipal warrants issued for missed court payments and appearances. As we discuss below, African Americans are more likely to have warrants issued against them than whites and are more likely to be arrested for an outstanding warrant than their white counterparts.

So, it's apparently racist to arrest people for outstanding warrants? And it is equally racist to issue bench warrants for failure to appear in court, and/or failure to pay fines, for infractions committed?

Why am I not surprised that the FTP crowd are more likely to thumb their noses at the courts, too? Don't want an outstanding warrant? Show up for your court date.

 

[Kutnupe14]

And now I understand that warrant arrests. I initially thought, "well hell, you can't really cite being arrested on a warrant as biased," but the report makes clear that FPD wasn't arresting people on warrants, they were arresting them on the in-house "wanted" system, which seem to mostly lack PC, and was something other agencies wouldn't touch with a 10 ft pole. A detective applied for a warrant, was told that the PC wasn't there, so he says its "ok," and he'd put it in FPDs wanted system.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Is that evidence of racism or of a dept intent on squeezing every possible dollar out of the citizens there?

If it was a dollar and cents thing, why aren't whites targeted in numbers equal to their population?

 

[chipbennett]

WHAT are YOU reading? Some of the stories in that report are absolutely ridiculous. Failure to identify change because the guy referred to himself a "Mike" rather than Michael? And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

I'm looking for aggregate data that demonstrate racially biased police enforcement. Anecdote is not evidence. Anecdote does not prove systemic racism. You can find anecdote in any police department in the country, because police departments are populated by people, who have their own, individual biases.

By the way: the report also does a nice job of conflating police activity with municipal policy and court actions.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I'm a little confused. It's obvious vupdblue isn't happy with my input, but you, and others seem to want to hear it. Which way should I go?

EXCELLENT! GREAT approach... if you don't know, ask. Though asking that question privately might have been better, asking it here allows everyone to learn from it.

Before I was a mod, I had a post I wanted to make. I PMd esrice and asked. He advised me, essentially, if I had to ask, probably better not to make the post.

It's not, I think, that VUPDBlue is unhappy with your input. It's that your input is not based on all the relevant facts. I wasn't going to discuss the "prior discussions" issue he mentioned, but since he did, I will tell you that when he says "a long time", we're talking months. Horn got a lot of leniency. We're really slow on doing that lately, and I personally prefer it that way. VUPDBlue is right, though... he, like all of us, is a big boy, and can make his own calls. If I decided to drop the hammer on rhino, it would likely get questioned, because he's normally very much within the rules. I use his name only because he's a friend and also because it's not very likely it would happen. Same thing would apply, though... sole discretion. What gets forgotten when that's mentioned though, is the responsibility that goes with that. He did not abuse his authority in this ban.

Another example comes to mind. I forget which TV cop show it was that I saw many years back, but there was TV footage shown as part of a police-action shooting, of an officer with a rifle taking out a criminal who had taken hostages. It was a good shoot, but at the time he squeezed the trigger, the cop exclaimed, loudly, "Got you, you son of a b****!"

He faced a massive public outcry when the footage ran on the news, not because he saved the hostages, but because his shot was portrayed as punitive.

I see lots of parallel there. Right action for the right reason, made to look "wrong" based on a comment.

 

[chipbennett]

And now I understand that warrant arrests. I initially thought, "well hell, you can't really cite being arrested on a warrant as biased," but the report makes clear that FPD wasn't arresting people on warrants, they were arresting them on the in-house "wanted" system, which seem to mostly lack PC, and was something other agencies wouldn't touch with a 10 ft pole. A detective applied for a warrant, was told that the PC wasn't there, so he says its "ok," and he'd put it in FPDs wanted system.

Yep, that's definitely a problem - but is there evidence that such constitutional violations were racially biased/motivated?

But most traffic stop arrests resulted from outstanding bench warrants for failure to appear. Is being required to show up for a court date racist?

If it was a dollar and cents thing, why aren't whites targeted in numbers equal to their population?

There is a very fundamental question here, that is critical to establishing a baseline: who are the people actually committing crimes, and doing things that reasonably draw the attention of law enforcement? I have yet to find anywhere that this baseline is addressed in the report.

 

[Kutnupe14]

How, on your way to an apartment to make arrest, do you encounter a guy in the parking lot.... who you know isn't the guy you're looking for, cuff him, place him in a patrol car, run him, find out he has no warrants, find out he's the landlord of the apartments, and then ask for his help in making the arrest. And when the guy makes a complaint the response is that his detainment was "minimal?"

 

[Kutnupe14]

How is it not harassment to purposefully go to apartment complexes and conduct "ped checks" of people out in the open, and think your covered under Terry?

 

[Bill of Rights]

Since the subject was brought to my attention and since I answered it in the thread it happened in, I'll take responsibility for the threadjack. For those who have suggestions in response to my request, please PM them so we don't continue to threadjack.

 

[Kutnupe14]

How do you smell marijuana, and then arrest 5 people for "gathering in a group for the purposes of committing illegal activity," despite after a search of them and the car, no dope comes up?

 

[chipbennett]

Page 67:

Data on charges issued by FPD from 2011-2013 shows that, for numerous municipal offenses for which FPD officers have a high degree of discretion in charging, African Americans are disproportionately represented relative to their representation in Ferguson’s population. While African Americans make up 67% of Ferguson’s population, they make up 95% of Manner of Walking in Roadway charges; 94% of Failure to Comply charges; 92% of Resisting Arrest charges; 92% of Peace Disturbance charges; and 89% of Failure to Obey charges. Because these non-traffic offenses are more likely to be brought against persons who actually live in Ferguson than are vehicle stops, census data here does provide a useful benchmark for whether a pattern of racially disparate policing appears to exist. These disparities mean that African Americans in Ferguson bear the overwhelming burden of FPD’s pattern of unlawful stops, searches, and arrests with respect to these highly discretionary ordinances.

Or, alternatively, these data could simply mean that black residents of Ferguson are more likely to jaywalk, resist arrest, resist lawful orders, and disturb the peace. Is that a reasonable conclusion? Are the months of rioting, looting, arson, blocking roadways, impeding through traffic, and general peace disturbances in Ferguson indicative of general behavior and proclivities of residents?

Does the report even address such questions? So far: no. It merely asserts that correlation proves causation.