In Tuesday’s class we touched upon many flaws of the U.S. legal system. Essentially, American courts operate via an adversarial system where truth is sought by opposing sides presenting evidence to a neutral jury. As we know, this is not how guilt is determined in all countries. France, for example, runs on an inquisitorial system where the judge plays a more active role in the court room. Though I am no expert on Islamic Law, Ridhi brought up they also conduct criminal proceedings quite differently. Since it seems inevitable that these proceedings will always be flawed in some way, I would like to focus this discussion on how and why certain suspects make it to trial to begin with.
In my social and experimental psychology class (the class in which I wrote a study proposal using the assigned reading), my professor informed us that one of the major differences between the United States and Europe (and Canada as well, I believe) is that Europe is more willing to allow academics to do legal research “behind the scenes”. Not only this, but they are also more willing to embrace the findings of such studies if it means that it will improve their legal proceedings. Knowledge of this makes our country appear corrupt and rather primitive. In the U.S., the same types of research tend to be viewed as an intrusion, an invasion of privacy. One of the hardest fields to conduct research on in the U.S. is in the area of interrogations and confessions, as American’s police force happens to be the most unwilling to let people conduct research on their techniques. Unfortunately, such confessions are viewed as a strong indicator of guilt by a jury.
Prior to this process of interrogations and confessions is the arrest itself. I recently have been learning about issue of “consensual” searches (In the book Speaking of Crime, by Solan and Tiersma, 2005). The authors go into great detail as to how a search could never be consensual based on the nature of the relationship between suspect and law enforcement (the officer being in a high position of power, and the suspect often unaware of their rights). They point out that in this area, even the Supreme Court is unwilling to acknowledge this power dynamic, stating it “impractical” to inform drivers of their right to refuse a search (even though some states have required this). Adding to this issue is the fact that these searches happen as a result of race. According to one study done in Florida on a freeway in Volusia County, “Their analysis of over one thousand police videotapes revealed that even though only around 5 percent of all drivers on that freeway were African American or Hispanic, over 70 percent of traffic stops involved drivers of those two ethnic groups… approximately half of all stops were followed by a search, and 80 percent of all searched automobiles belonged to black and Hispanic drivers”.
I think one of the major issues with our system happens before any formal legal action takes place. Police look for people who they believe to look like “criminals”. Why do you think these types of issues exist despite knowledge of such? What do you think the United States has to gain by maintaining a flawed legal system? Lastly, how can we tie this in to our recent discussion on physical attractiveness? I am sure we all have heard of situations of people (especially females) not getting arrested or “getting off easy” as a result of being attractive. Feel free to follow any of these avenues or other thoughts!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Yes, yes, yes! I went to a symposium called '20 years after McCleskey v. Kemp' in '07 where I left being so overwhelmed by the evidence of racial injustice that I didn't understand how we could continue incarcerating anyone, especially young people of color. McCleskey v. Kemp is a case where a black man challenged his death sentence based on "The Baldus Study" which found that race of the victim and the accused played a huge factor in determining who would be sentenced to death. The court upheld his death sentence, and McCleskey was executed. The conference spoke about racial injustice at all stages of the system: from arrest, to sentencing, up to capital punishment and exoneration for the innocent (it showed the excellent documentary "The Trials of Darryl Hunt"- a ridiculous case like in Paradise Lost.)
Most mind-blowing, however, was after the conference. At the time I was an AmeriCorps volunteer and I shared the experience with my team. I was talking about racial disparities in arrest and "frisking". One of my teammates- a young black man laughed.. he said something like: 'you see a cop come around, you know what to do, you put your hands up and get against the wall'. He talked like that was just how it is.. My response was it's a problem that I have never had that kind of encounter before and he saw it as routine. He was expected to assume a submissive position before authority because of his skin, (and perhaps also his 'hip- hop swag').
Either way he was an 18 year old boy who was being taught a great deal every time he was told to face the wall.
In response to why police officers look for individuals that look like criminals. The job that police officers have is a dangerous one where decisions have to be made in split decisions. A major part of making the split decision is basing it on the "gut" instinct. Therefore to some extent I am sympathethic towards police officers. However, I do agree that police brutality is an issue and is grounded in stereotypes of the criminal. Then again the stereotype of the Black man or the Hispanic male as a criminal is rooted in the overwhelming numbers of males who are incarcerated in our criminal justice system. In addition what is the image of the black male in American society. Mass media coverage usually focuses on the violent and criminal acts of a few individuals. This is one reason I am interested in how Obama's coverage will impact the stereotype of black men.
My response to the flawed system in the United States. Frankly I was not born in this country and Pakistan's legal system is incompetent at best and oppression for the poor at worst. Therefore I personally like the American judicial system. The biggest reason is that the legal procedures guarentee an individual's right to an attorney and a trial. Most importantly it is the ideal that someone is innocent until proven guilty. While the American system is far from perfect, it is probably the best legal system in the world. In no other country will a regular person have the rights(if only in the law) that American citizens have in this country. In many countries if any of us had any debate on the wrongdoings of our legal system, we would probably end up in jail or worst. However I still believe we can amend our legal system.
I agree with Darakshan that the fundamentals of our legal system make it, at least in theory, one of the best systems of justice in the world. The problem seems to arise in the actual carrying out of these values. Unfortunately, this makes its problems harder to fix. On paper, we all have the same rights; in practice we don’t.
I found it interesting that the class overwhelmingly voted that we would rather have a bench trial or a panel of judges than a jury of our peers. Of course, we took this vote after our discussion and with the very real knowledge of how unfair juries can be. However, if we imagined (as our Founding Fathers did) that the jury system wasn’t so flawed, we might have a different opinion of how we would rather be judged. Our courts are supposed to enact the will of “the people”. By eliminating the jury, the people no longer play any role; the courts are acting on behalf of the courts.
We’re always discussing power dynamics. The way our citizens are tried seems to be one more means for oppressing marginalized and under-represented people. Until opportunity and status are more equalized, our interaction with the Criminal Justice System will not be equalized. After all, juries use in-group/out-group categorizations, and police use stereotyping and profiling. The dependence on these things relies on disunity and inequalities.
Having a unique relationship with the NYPD, I have had the opportunity to view first hand the various procedures and practices performed by the police men and women, both Blacks and Whites. Because the police department by nature is a paramilitary organization, the power dynamics are always in play: police officers obeying sergeants, sergeants obeying lieutenants, lieutenants obeying captains and so on. It appears that everyone is following orders and must do what they are told or else face the consequence of having their vacation days reduce, being suspended, being ostracized, having money taken from they paychecks or being passed over for a promotion (the worst).
It is well reported that there is racism and gender issues within society at large. The NYPD is no exception. My observation is that many women and black police officers are well aware of the discrimination that they are subjected to within the NYPD. These same police officers are aware of proven complaints of police brutality against minorities, more specifically, black men. Yet interestingly enough, they too participate in preying on the very minority groups that they belong to, by “following orders”: Last September, a day before the West Indian Day Parade, I witnessed a Sergeant gave orders to his team, which consisted of mostly black police men, to go into the West Indian community, because he thought there would be a pre-celebration, and make some “easy” arrests in order to get some “quick” overtime cash or time (time refers to overtime that is reserved to use for personal days off).
Immediately, I thought to myself, “how sad that they (even the black police officers) do not realize the negative impact that they inflict on the lives of minorities, who have already so much stacked against them. Instead, they (officers) are wrapped up in capitalizing on the misfortune of others. Sounds familiar?
No person within the NYPD can be an individual, he or she belongs to a culture; and there are mechanisms in place, such as the consequences he or she faces, that makes police officers of minority act against their greater interest: gaining equality and respect in the larger society. Essentially, it seems that they are building a house while at the same time tearing it down; making the house impossible to finish.
Sadly, in the end, the goals of many police officers, including Blacks, overshadow their responsibilities to the people. From my view, it seems that attractiveness plays a smaller role when it comes to arrests. For them, it is being able to take vacations, not being ostracized, salivating for the next paycheck; and if they had made a lot of arrests, anticipating an even bigger size paycheck; not getting suspended and most definitely, not being passed over for a promotion.
There is no doubt that the police department must change its priorities. There need to be some fundamental changes within the NYPD to ensure integrity. But how can we even get there if the Commissioner and the Mayor believe that there is nothing wrong with their police force?
Maureen,
You bring up such am interesting fact that police look for people that look like criminals. It’s interesting to think about because the question that comes to my head is does a criminal have to fit a specific description for the public? Is it through our own perceptions or better yet the media? Darakshan it is very true what you say that "the stereotype of the Black man or the Hispanic male as a criminal is rooted in the overwhelming numbers of males who are incarcerated in our criminal justice system." I feel that the media plays an impact because they constantly report crime with a CONSTANT NEED to report a picture with the offender as well. Since most of these crimes are committed by African Americans and Hispanics, the public begins to have a preconceived notion of what a criminal looks like. It is not what a criminal looks like on the other hand they are displaying the types of race that commits these acts.
Maureen, your mention of how citizens are often unaware of their rights was shocking the first time I heard it a few days ago. At CEO, I'm currently interviewing youths in order to correctly place them within CEO's programs. Interview after interview, I hear stories of how police officers just searched through cars and homes and these defendants had no idea that they could say no. Another defendant was sent to jail after stabbing her mother's boyfriend who was beating her mother, she had no idea that self-defense is not an excuse. Wouldn't the greatest flaw be the gap in knowledge that police officers and other authoritative figures have and the knowledge that members of society have? It would be a great start in fighting against being marginalized if society was well-educated in the matters of court and its proceedings.
While I still think that holding mandatory classes might not be the best way to go about this, I think one suggestion could be incorporating it into our education as students. Tackling the issue of power dynamics as Greta pointed out, could be much easier if society was aware of the issues and obstacles that they face and create for themselves. After all, how many people know that they judge others based on looks and attractiveness. Showing society how they subconsciously treat others and themselves would be a first step in reducing these issues.
Kerryann made my ears perk up when detailing the biases of minorities against their own. Kenneth Clark's groundbreaking work (cited in Brown v. Board of Education) long ago demonstrated the degree to which African American children had internalized the domiinant culture's notion of black unattractiveness, as demonstrated by their preference for "more attractive" white dolls, over black skinned ones. Thus, the cops' triple-whammy: Internalized stereotypes, pressure from their police subculture on top of the wider culture, and personal experience that reinforces cultural stereotypes at street level.
Regarding the preference (my own included) for bench trials: I hate to say this but each time I read that most Americans don't believe in evolution, it reminds me that I feel safest where education and empiricism reign, even though I am much a critic of the pretensions rampant in both fields.
While reading the initial post, and everyone’s comments, I scenes from the movie “Crash” keep playing in my mind. The film depicts exactly the types of real life scenarios that are being discussed this week. I highly recommend watching the film if you have not already seen it.
Darakshan: you said that the stereotype of black/Hispanic males as criminals is rooted in their overwhelming representation in the criminal justice system. I am wondering if it is not that they are being stereotyped as criminal because so many of them are in jail/prison (as in a massive number of blacks/Hispanics were incarcerated and then the stereotype of “criminals” was formed), but that so many of them are incarcerated because they are black/Hispanic (the stereotype LED to incarceration). This would mean the stereotype comes from somewhere else, somewhere more historical than the recent phenomenon of mass incarceration.
Police officers look for people who “look” like criminals, interrogators look for people who “look” like they are lying, juries look for people who “look” like they are guilty. We keep searching for that “look;” a tell-all appearance. I’m wondering where this comes from; who was it that first taught us that looks can reveal so much about someone? Is this based on luck? Truth? A little bit of both? Why have we chosen to believe it, and why do we continue to judge and make decisions based on appearances?
Just to respond to Professor Stein’s comment on African American children internalizing the dominant culture’s idea of attractiveness/unattractiveness: I thought of the little girl I watch, and how around Christmas two years ago her mother had me take her to the American Girl Doll store so we could create a doll that looked just like her. Just to describe the child (Julia), she is Portuguese and has olive skin, dark brown eyes, and dark brown curly hair. She wanted her “twin doll” to have fair skin, blue eyes, and straight blonde hair. Talk about internalizing society’s idea of attractiveness (though I do think that we have made a lot of progress in accepting different physical characteristics as beautiful). She was 3 years old at the time. I, immediately trying to understand the sociological context of what was occurring, also tried to think of other reasons as to why Julia might want these certain characteristics in her doll; her best friend hair fair skin and blonde hair, as did her brother. Could she have actually believed herself to have some of these characteristics? Whatever it was/is, I found that to be an intense moment, which of course resulted in me trying to have a discussion with her about all of this as though she were a 20-year-old equipped with the knowledge to understand society.
This week, I'd just like to share some references that you can look up and study at some later point, if you wish. These books have been helpful to me. I've shown the utube video, A Girl Like Me, to my classes--it's very powerful.
Cole, David. 1999. No Equal Justice: Race and Class in the American Criminal Justice System. Neww York: The New Press.
Lazarre, Jane. 1997. Beyond the Whiteness of Whiteness: Memoir of a White Mother of Black Sons. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Mauer, Marc. 1999. Race to Incarcertate. New York: The Sentencing Project (see their website too, for updated reports).
Wise, Tim. White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son. New York: Soft Skull Press.
ALSO: please see A Girl Like Me, on utube, an "update" on the Kenneth Clark study referred to by Prof. Stein: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17fEy0q6yqc
One of the classes I am taking this semester is about alcohol and drug abuse. My professor had been involved in many situations that dealt with what some people will call problematic population. So we were curious to find out if he ever got in trouble or arrested for being in so many police encounters. His answer was no and more than that he said that every time he was caught in such a situation, police will tell him to leave because he is not “one of them.” This may sound weird, but apparently even in what we call random police stops; they are able to identify potential suspects. I don’t know on what reasoning the police officers based their decision when made a stop, but the fact that in most cases their stop resulted in an arrest, shows that this reasoning works.
Yes, I can say that I have been in a situation in which I did not get a ticket when stopped by police. However, I think that this wasn’t because I was a women but because I approached and talked nice with the police officers. When I interned with CASES, I participated into a criminal justice seminar that was hold weekly for the youth in the CEP program. What shocked me was that when told that is important to have an ID in case you get stopped by police, some had a negative reaction. Moreover, they said that their first reaction, when police officers stop them would be to ask “why me” and treat them disrespectful. I think this is why most cops chose even if they have the discretion not to, to arrest them. It is their way to show their authority and teach the ones that disrespect them, a lesson.
I agree with Darkasan that even if this is not the most perfect criminal justice system in the world, it is better than most. In my native country, even though there was never an issue of racism, there were a lot of people that were discriminated because of their beliefs. To speak out loud against the communist regime translated in torture or death. It is true that we still have things that we need to work on but being able to express our thoughts is more that just a good beginning.
How Amada pointed out, we are all looking for the so called “guilty people.” But do we have anything better available to us to help us distinguish between “good” and “bad?” How many of us, because we are all women, when walking home late at night, look around and get scared if we see an old grandfather type of guy. Probably it is not how we associate his image with what we think that is dangerous or bad. We may need to learn more to overcome all these stereotypes. We react to external factors (such as appearance) in a specific way because these responses are deeply imbedded in our subconscious.
Post a Comment