Skip to main content

Civil Rights

Ethics Panel Rips TV Drug Court

Arkansas' judicial officials are questioning whether Washington-Madison County Drug Court, a popular local television program, should be aired. An opinion from the Arkansas Supreme Court Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee, issued Thursday, appears to quash any thought of taking any version of the show national and questions whether it should continue to be broadcast locally. The committee members, two retired judges and a law professor, issued a scathing opinion saying they had concerns with any broadcast of drug court proceedings.

Race & Justice News: Segregation Behind Prison Bars

 

Race & Justice News

 

Race & Justice News

 

In This Issue:

  • Feature Story » GO
  • Putting Faces on Justice » GO
  • Segregation Behind Prison Bars  » GO
  • Upcoming Events » GO



    Search our Clearinghouse of over 450 books, articles, and reports on racial disparity in the criminal justice system.


Upcoming Events


Facing Race
"Define Justice and Make Change"
Chicago, IL, September 23-25, 2010

The Facing Race conference will include discussions of hot-button race issues while offering models for change.  It will serve as a focal point for organizations and individuals committed to crafting innovative strategies for changing policy and shaping culture to advance real racial justice. 

Symposium on Crime and Justice
"The Past and Future of Empirical Sentencing Research"
Albany, NY, September 23-24, 2010


The symposium is based on the premise that new advances in sentencing research will come in part from engaging with other disciplines that focus on sentencing issues, and engaging with ongoing public policy issues like prison overcrowding and risk assessment. The main topics will be the role of race in sentencing outcomes, discretion and decision making, managing the criminal justice population, and risk assessment in the sentencing process.

Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Justice Research and Statistics Association 2010 National Conference
"Using Statistics and "Research to Improve Justice Policies and Practices"
Portland, Maine, October 28-29, 2010

The program includes more than 20 panel sessions on topics, including, corrections, domestic violence, human trafficking, racial disparity, reentry, research using national incident based reporting system (NIBRS) data, sentencing, substance abuse, tribal crime data, and victimization, as well as plenary discussions on current justice issues. There will also be skill building seminars (October 26th, 27th, and 30th) on cost-benefit analysis, evaluation methods, and evidence-based programs and practices. 

Contact Us

Do you have a contribution or idea for Race & Justice News? Send an email to The Sentencing Project's research analyst, Valerie Wright.

 

The Sentencing Project
1705 DeSales Street, NW
8th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20036

 

September 1, 2010

Race & Justice News

"The biggest crime in the U.S. criminal justice system is that it is a race-based institution where African-Americans are directly targeted and punished in a much more aggressive way than white people.  Saying the U.S. criminal justice system is racist may be politically controversial in some circles. But the facts are overwhelming. No real debate about that."
-
- Dr. Nancy Heitzeg, Professor of Sociology and Co-Director of the Interdisciplinary Critical Studies of Race/Ethnicity Program at Saint Catherine University

FEATURED STORY

RACIAL PROFILING PART OF EVERYDAY LIFE IN BROOKLYN

Allegations of racial profiling have become common in many predominantly black neighborhoods across the country. The New York Times recently reviewed police data provided by the New York Police Department, the Center for Constitutional Rights and the New York Civil Liberties Union on police stops and found that the police made nearly 52,000 stops in an eight-block radius of Brownsville, Brooklyn between January 2006 and March 2010. Overall, 88% of individuals stopped were black or Hispanic. Despite the large number of stops only 1% yielded an arrest over a four-year period. Typically, squad cars with flashing lights cruise along the main avenues and officers use their controversial "Stop, Question, and Frisk" tactic on residents.  The encounters are so frequent that they amount to nearly one stop per year for the 14,000 residents over the four-year period.

The Times reports that if police think someone is carrying a weapon or entering a building without a key it is common for them to ask for identification and check to see if the individual has any warrants. In many encounters with police, residents were told that they fit the description of a suspect. However, the data show that less than 9% of stops were made based on "fit description." More often than not, the police listed "furtive movement," a vague category that equates to "other" as the grounds for the stop. This stop-and-frisk strategy has come under intense scrutiny and the New York Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights have filed lawsuits challenging the NYPD's current practices.  Click here to read more.

PUTTING FACES ON JUSTICE

VOICES FROM BROOKLYN

Watch and listen to the residents from a public housing community in Brownsville, Brooklyn speak for themselves about how they believe they have been unfairly targeted by police stop-and-frisk tactics. One young man states "If you see cops, they automatically search you." Several other residents say they feel "belittled," "violated" and "degraded" as a result of their contact with police.

SEGREGATION BEHIND PRISON BARS

INMATES STILL HOUSED BY RACE AFTER SUPREME COURT RULING

In a 5-3 decision reached in 2005 the U.S. Supreme Court decided that prison officials in California could not rely solely on racial classification when assigning inmate housing.  Historically, prison officials in the state have relied on race to separate male inmates. Five years after the ruling, approximately 165,000 inmates in California are still housed by race and critics argue that the state is not responding quickly enough to the ruling. Part of the problem is that the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation does not keep a record of integrated cells and therefore does not know how much change has occurred. In addition, only four of California's 30 prisons have implemented guidelines that consider additional factors such as gang affiliation and offense committed in determining housing location. 

One prison spokesman, Lt. Anthony Gentile, asserted that "These boundaries are determined by the inmate population." Another spokeswoman, Terry Thornton, emphasizes that there is no deadline for ending segregation by race in prisons and such changes should be implemented slowly. In addition, she points out that,  "The deficit-ridden state also has no money for additional training needed for prison staffers to learn the new ways to assign cellmates." Click here to read more.   

Back to top ^

The Sentencing Project is a national, nonprofit organization engaged in research and advocacy for criminal justice reform.

 
 

Facebook Censors Marijuana Legalization! (Action Alert)

SSDP Action Alert

SIGN OUR PETITION
Act now!

Dear Friends,

To draw attention to the need for ending marijuana prohibition, SSDP teamed up with Firedoglake for our Just Say Now campaign. The campaign has been gaining international media coverage but just yesterday, Facebook banned our ads that support marijuana legalization.

The social networking site says we can no longer advertise our campaign for marijuana legalization using our Just Say Now logo, because it has a pot leaf.

We need to fight back against Facebook's political censorship. Can you sign our petition protesting Facebook's unfair policy against legalization ads? We'll send the petition to Facebook and tell the media about the site's censorship of this popular political issue.

Click here to add your name.

Share the image to the right and make it your Facebook profile picture.

Facebook's decision is actually a flip-flop: the Just Say Now ads appeared more than 38 million times before Facebook issued a new policy banning them.

Our ads show marijuana leaves as part of a political campaign to change public policy. It's like telling a political candidate for office that it's unacceptable to show the candidate's face in advertising.

Sign our petition to Facebook and protest censorship of marijuana legalization.

Thank you for supporting marijuana legalization and SSDP's work. Please consider making a donationtoday.

Best,

Jonathan Perri

SSDP Associate Director

Donate to SSDP Today

Awesome Police Dept. Teaches Citizens to Flex Their Rights

Dear friends,

You and I are well-trained to refuse certain police requests. But when I was approached by Columbia, MO Police Chief Ken Burton the other month, I was happy to consent.

The Chief called to ask my permission to use 10 Rules for Dealing with Police as part of a department-backed public education campaign to inform the public of their rights. Enthusiastically, I said yes.

Within weeks, a new report was released showing that in 2009 black motorists in Columbia were 127% more likely to be stopped than white motorists. At a public forum hosted by NAACP and other groups concerned about racial profiling, Chief Burton put 10 Rules to work.

The Columbia Daily Tribune editorialized in favor of the event, specifically citing 10 Rules.

State NAACP President Mary Ratliff called the video "a powerful teaching tool for both sides" and urged its wide distribution.

This is quite a coming-together. Ratliff has been critical of police in their confrontations with black people, and police have defended themselves in standoffs typically without a mutually agreeable resolution. The video gives both sides a way to communicate outside the context of a traumatic incident and might help subjects avoid trouble with the police.

The police department deserves credit for taking action to bridge the understanding gap, and Ratliff deserves similar credit for responding positively. This is a big deal, and I commend both parties.

Let’s follow Chief Burton and Mary Ratliff's lead! If you or someone you know has a friendly relationship with your local police chief, why not give them a 10 Rules DVD and a copy of the Daily Tribune editorial? (Enter coupon code "10RULES4COPS" to get $5.00 off your DVD order between now and July 7.)

Let’s create hundreds of police-led screenings across the country!

Sincerely,

Steve

 

 

P.S. If you support this public education work, please consider making a small or large tax-deductible donation online. You may also send a check donation (made out to Flex Your Rights) to P.O. Box 21497, Washington, DC 20009.

Flex Gets Great Response at NAACP Nat’l Conf.

Dear friends,

Last week I presented 10 Rules for Dealing with Police at the NAACP National Conference. The panel hosted by NAACP's Criminal Justice Program was focused on youth and the criminal justice system.

The 200-member audience was mostly high school and college-aged, and I couldn’t have hoped for a better reception. The video got an enthusiastic round of applause. More importantly, everyone stayed for the Q&A, which went beyond the allotted hour.

Before the screening, I asked if anyone had received any kind of know-your-rights training. Only a handful raised their hands. But afterward, their new knowledge inspired sophisticated questions covering Miranda rights, PATRIOT Act, videotaping police and more.

Needless to say, I’m proud to see 10 Rules resonating with NAACP and communities of color in the way we hoped it would. We’ve long anticipated that our success would depend on the ability to meet the needs of diverse audiences. We’re excited to see the film earning praise from the NAACP, libertarians and police departments alike.

Sincerely,

Steve

 

 

P.S. If you support this public education work, please consider making a small or large tax-deductible donation online. You may also send a check donation (made out to Flex Your Rights) to P.O. Box 21497, Washington, DC 20009.

Supreme Court Limits Right Against Self-Incrimination

Dear friends,

Flex Your Rights' Associate Director and 10 Rules for Dealing with Police Co-creator Scott Morgan drafted this analysis of yesterday's decision. As is the case with most police-friendly court decisions, the key message is that asserting one's rights is a do-it-yourself job.

---------------------------------- 

The Supreme Court ruled today in Berghuis v. Thompkins that a criminal suspect must specifically invoke the right against self-incrimination in order for constitutional protections to apply.

The case centered around the interrogation of murder suspect Van Chester Thompkins, who remained virtually silent for hours, before giving a few brief responses to police questions. Most significantly, Thompkins answered "yes" when asked, "Do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down?" The statement was introduced at trial and Thompkins was convicted.

In a 5-4 ruling, the Court held that criminal suspects who do not clearly state their intention to remain silent are presumed to have waived their 5th Amendment rights. Ironically, suspects must literally open their mouths and speak in order for their silence to be legally protected. The new rule will defer to police in cases where the suspect fails to unambiguously assert their right to remain silent.

Naturally, Flex Your Rights is concerned about any retreat from the basic principle that criminal suspects should not be compelled or coerced into incriminating themselves. Today's ruling will undoubtedly create additional challenges for suspects who already understand too little about how their constitutional rights apply during police interrogations.

Fortunately, however, the Berghuis decision leaves intact the best strategy for handling any police interrogation: keeping your mouth shut. Requiring suspects with limited legal knowledge to clearly assert their rights may seem a bit strict, but it's irrelevant if the suspect never says a word to begin with. The point of the 5th Amendment isn't to protect you after you've foolishly incriminated yourself; it's to remind you that you're not obligated to answer police questions in the first place.

Ultimately, the burden is on each of us to understand our rights and use that information to make the best decisions. It's unlikely that any Supreme Court decision will ever change the fact that remaining silent is your best and only strategy if police ask you incriminating questions.

---------------------------------- 

Sincerely,

Steve