;
  • Report:  #3640

Complaint Review: Criminal Justice System - Nationwide - CA, AR, GA, IL MI, NC, OK,

Reported By:
- Tempe, Arizona,
Submitted:
Updated:

Criminal Justice System
Nationwide - CA, AR, GA, IL MI, NC, OK,, U.S.A.
Web:
N/A
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good? What's this?
There is a major source of racial discrimination in our nation's criminal justice system, the selective prosecution of minorities, blacks in particular. The time has come for America to admit to the "dirty little secret" that has contaminated our criminal justice system. Our system of justice is a racially biased, two-tiered system; one for blacks and one for whites. Blacks are disproportionately targeted, stopped, arrested, prosecuted, sentenced to long mandatory prison terms and executed. In the nearly 30 years since the Kerner Commission warned us that America was moving toward "two societies, one black, one white - separate and unequal," our country's criminal justice system has certainly made it a reality. The focus here will be on only two areas of our criminal justice system that are obviously racially biased: mandatory federal drug sentences and the death penalty.

A study by the California Judicial Council Advisory Committee on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts found that the justice system gives little attention or resources to investigating crimes against minorities and that minority defendants receive harsh treatment compared to white defendants in similar circumstances. The study also found that black-on-black crime or Latino-on-Latino crime is not taken as seriously as crimes against whites. Minority and female attorneys believe they are viewed and/or treated less credibly than white counterparts. Judges seem to believe that violence is more "acceptable" to black women because they are viewed as coming from violent communities. Minorities were judged by white, middle-class values in family law matters, and were the victims of racial and cultural stereotypes, affecting the courts' decisions.

Sentencing matters were complicated by beliefs that there is no social stigma associated with going to jail among black communities.

According to a 1994 report from the American Bar Association's Criminal Justice section, minorities who are arrested are imprisoned more than non-minority arrestees, and make up more than half of the state prison population.

The most recent statistics show that blacks are arrested and incarcerated for drug use at a much higher rate than can be accounted for by their rate of drug use. Blacks, who comprise only 12% of the population and 13% of drug users, constitute some 35% of those arrested for drug possession, 55% of those convicted of possession, and 74% of those sentenced to prison for possession.

Blacks are strongly overrepresented in crime. They made up 65% of persons arrested for robbery, 56.4% of those apprehended for murder and non-negligent manslaughter, 46.6% of those arrested for forcible rape, and 32.3% of those involved in burglary. Blacks were much less frequently involved in other patterns of criminality, including liquor law violations, drunkenness, fraud, embezzlement, and sex offenses other than forcible rape. One factor that may account for these high crime statistics for blacks may be differential law enforcement by police. Sometimes police arrest blacks for offenses that would be handled informally if the same offenses were committed by whites. For example, police often harrass black streetwalkers but allow white prostitutes to conduct their criminal activities virtually ignored.

On any given day, about one in three blacks between the ages of 20 and 29 is in prison, on probation, or on parole. Between 1989 and 1994, there was a 78% increase in the number of black women under correctional supervision, the highest for all demographic groups within those years.

Some believe that just because a large percentage of black men are under criminal justice control, that doesn't automatically indict the system as racist. Blacks commit a disproportionate share of the violent crime in society. Blacks constitute 45% of all arrests for violent crime (differential law enforcement?), while representing only 12% of the total population. Some studies suggest that most black punishment disproportions, for violent crime in particular, result from patterns of black offending and not from racial bias or discrimination within the system.

However, other studies show arrest, prosecution, and incarceration differences based on skin color alone, particularly in the treatment of whites and blacks in the enforcement of our nation's drug laws.

A study by the Washington, D.C.-based Sentencing Project, which tracks the demographics of who in our society goes to prison and for what kinds of crimes, found that black men are going to jail in record numbers due to a surge in arrests for non-violent drug offenses.

The Sentencing Project also found that in 1993, 88% of those sentenced federally for crack cocaine distribution were black, while only 4.1% of the defendants were white. This, while there are studies showing that a majority of the nation's reported crack cocaine users are white.

Because of the irrational federal cocaine sentencing guidelines, the Sentencing Commission recommended amending its guidelines to reflect a one-to-one ratio at the current levels set for powder cocaine, but, for the first time in the Commission's history, the Congress and the President rejected the Sentencing Commission's recommendation and reinstated the illogical sentencing structure.

The study concluded that blacks are arrested for drug crimes way out of proportion to black drug use. Blacks accounted for about 13% of drug users, yet they also accounted for 35% of all arrests for drug possession, 55% of all convictions on those charges, and 74% of all drug possessors sentenced to prison. From 1986 to 1991, the number of black drug offenders in prison jumped nearly twice as fast as rates for any other group, with the number of black men imprisoned for drug offenses increasing 429%.

Since1979, our nation's "War on Drugs" has devastated black America like no other social policy, with incarceration rates for working class black drug offenders increasing six-fold. Drug enforcement most heavily effects black communities since that is where police often concentrate their efforts. Blacks and Hispanics are charged with and receive sentences at or above the mandatory minimum more often that whites arrested on the same charges. There is also unwarranted uniformity in sentencing, resulting in low level participants in drug trade receiving more jail time than "drug kingpins." Only 13% of the U.S. population is black, yet more than 90% of all defendants prosecuted in federal court are black. Blacks and Hispanics combined now represent nearly 90% of all offenders sentenced to state prison for drug offenses. A 1992 study of federal court cases found that, where a mandatory minimum could apply, black offenders were 21% more likely and Hispanic offnders 28% more likely than whites to receive at least the mandatory minimum prison sentence. Has the "war on drugs" driven our nation back to the days of Dred Scott ("separate but equal")?

The impact of severe mandatory minimum sentences for first time non-violent drug offenders and the contrast between crack and powder cocaine sentencing has aggravated the racial imbalance in drug enforcement even further. For example, federal sentencing guidelines impose a five year minimum sentence if one is convicted of selling five grams of crack, yet the sale of an equal amount of powder cocaine yields only a one year sentence. Crack defendants tend to be black, while powder cocaine defendants tend to be white. Simple possession of more than five grams of crack is a felony with a mandatory minimum sentence of five years for a first offender, while possession of the same amount of powder cocaine is a misdemeanor requiring no jail time.

In spite of this obvious racial bias, the Senate has rejected a proposal to eliminate the sentencing disparity.

How do prosecutors decide which of these drug cases to pursue in federal court? Drug trafficking indictments against five black men from Inglewood, California were thrown out after federal prosecutors refused to explain why the defendants were charged in federal court instead of state court. Federal sentences would be much stiffer for the offense than would state sentences.

The decision to charge the men in federal court instead of state court is very significant. Federal law sets a minimum 10 year sentence for people convicted of selling more than 50 grams of crack.

Under state law in California, the sentence for the same crime ranges from three to five years.

In claiming racial bias in the case, the defendants noted that in 1991, all 24 crack cocaine cases handled by the federal public defender's office in Los Angeles involved black defendants. It was also shown that between 1991 and 1993, the federal public defender represented 53 defendants in crack cocaine cases, none of the defendants were white. In 1992, two hundred twenty-two white defendants charged with crack cocaine offenses were prosecuted in state court, effectively avoiding the harsh sentences required under the federal sentencing guidelines. In Los Angeles, where the case against the fiive blacks arose, not a single white offender had been convicted of a crack cocaine offense in the federal courts since 1986, when Congress enacted stiff new penalties.

The Clinton administration argues that there is no proof of discrimination. Justice Department lawyers say anyone claiming selective prosecution based on race must prove that people of a different race have not been prosecuted. It seems that the information presented in the previous paragraph would prove that the treatment of these five defendants was biased.

Federal authorities say they can't help it if inner-city street gangs dominate the crack cocaine business. They say that white collar crime is dominated by Caucasians and criminal alien cases are dominated by Hispanics. U.S. Attorney Nora Manella says, "It's the job of law enforcement to prosecute those who engage in violations of federal law and let the chips fall where they may. There's simply no place for affirmative action in federal law enforcement."

In May of 1996, the Supreme Court made it harder for criminal defendants to make federal prosecutors respond to accusations that they are prosecuting someone because of their race. Ruling 8-1 in the California crack case involving the previously mentioned five black men, the court said that defendants who want to pursue selective-prosecution claims must show that people of other races were not prosecuted for the same crime. The five California men did not make such a showing. A federal judge ordered prosecutors to provide further racial data and explain how they chose which crack cases to pursue in federal court. Lower courts had dismissed charges against the five, and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision to dismiss, saying the men had presented enough information to warrant further inquiry into the government's actions. This decision by the Supreme Court allows the charges to be reinstated.

The costs to society of these racial inequities are impossible to calculate. Besides the out-of-pocket costs of imprisoning the offenders, the real cost lies in the ruination of black communities. Black men with criminal records have very little hope of being successful. As their job prospects dim, the likelihood that they will provide for their families also dims. Children of incarcerated men, brought up without a father, most likely in poverty, will grow up in an environment that will cultivate future offenders. The larger the rate of black incarceration, the greater the loss of its stigmatizing effect, making the prison experience a communal experience, nothing to be ashamed of.

The greatest price to be paid for an unjust system of justice in the expanding racial divide it causes, as witnessed by the celebratory reaction of many blacks to the O.J. Simpson verdict. The reactions to the verdict highlighted the disconnection between black and white perception of, and experience with the justice system. This can only be fueled by blacks seeing their neighbors hauled into court for drug offenses while white drug use is tolerated.

It's clear that drug laws are being enforced with extra zeal against blacks. Long prison terms are warranted for violent offenders, and if that falls disproportionately on the black community, so be it. However, an obvious weakness in the system is the unequal prosecution and sentencing of blacks to prison for non-violent drug offenses.

In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 5-4 ruling that invalidated virtually every death penalty statute in the country. The Court held, in the case of Fuhrman v. Georgia, that the death penalty constituted "cruel and inhuman punishment" and was a violation of the Eighth Amendment, and that the unlimited discretion allowed judges and juries in death penalty cases caused the penalty to be applied in an arbitrary manner. Several of the justices involved in this decision cited evidence of racial bias in their written opinions.

Four years later, the Court resurrected the death penalty by upholding a statute that required judges and juries to take specific factors into consideration when deciding whether to impose a death sentence (Gregg v. Georgia). The Court believed that this so-called "guided discretion" requirement would adequately guard against arbitrartiness and discrimination.

However, abundant evidence domonstrates that racial bias continues to influence death sentencing. The race of the victim, in particular, remains a crucial factor in determining who will and will not receive the death penalty.

Studies confirm the prevalence of racial discrimination in death sentencing. For instance, a 1990 report released by the federal government's General Accounting Office found a "pattern of evidence indicating racial disparities in the charging, sentencing, and imposition of the death penalty after the Fuhrman decision."

Professor David Baldus examined sentencing patterns in Georgia in the 1970's. After reviewing over 2,500 homicide cases in the state, controlling for 230 non-racial factors, he concluded that a person accused of killing a white was 4.3 times more likely to be sentenced to death than a person accused of killing a black. The Stanford Law Review published a study that found similar patterns of racial disparity, based on the race of the victim, in Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Virginia.

In Arkansas findings showed that defendants in a case involving a white victim are 3 1/2 times more likely to be sentenced to death; in Illinois, four times; in North Carolina, 4.4 times, and in Mississippi five times more likely to be sentenced to death than defendants convicted of murdering blacks. In a study by the Florida Law Review, examining all himicides committed and death sentences rendered in Florida between 1976 and 1987, it was found that, in that state, the odds of receiving a death sentence are 3.4 times higher for defendants convicted of killing whites than for those convicted of killing blacks.

Recent statistics show that half of those confined to death row are minorities. As of January 31, 1995, the U.S. had 2,976 prisoners under sentence of death. Fifty-one percent, or 1,532, are non-white. Black inmates make up 40.29% of death row's population, but in several states-mostly in the South-they outnumber white inmates. These percentages are high when you consider that just about 13% of the U.S. total population are blacks.

Is the death penalty racist? I think the statistics speak for themselves. Are mandatory drug sentences targeted at the minority/black population of the United States? Those statistics also speak for themselves. People who feel they are picked on or singled out for differential treatment by authorities because of their race become alienated and angry with the system that is supposed to be protecting them. If drugs are such a problem in our society, then all citizens should be inconvenienced; a question mark should not be placed over the head of every black/minority person. Is it any wonder that many blacks/minorities feel a deep sense of mistrust for our criminal justice system?



12 Updates & Rebuttals

Robert

Dallas,
Texas,
U.S.A.
I WAS at the pool

#2Consumer Comment

Mon, June 05, 2006

In response to Jane, I was at the pool, so was my wife, our adult nieghbors and two other older children of ours. I was just making a comment that I try to teach my children what is right and that speaking foul language is not right. I encourage my children to explore, to reach out to other peoples and cultures. The point I was trying to make, and obviously didn't, was that if you dont' want to be called something, then don't use it. Other wise what you are doing is diluting the weight of the word. By the way, when I was living in Barbados, to be "niggerly" meant to have a rather lazy feeling, which we all get and it was equally utilized by both blacks and whites. The only people to ever take exception to it were american blacks.


Jim

Flagstaff,
Arizona,
U.S.A.
To Jane - the police were brought in and apparently no body was arrested.

#3Consumer Comment

Mon, June 05, 2006

I believe that Bob in Quinlan, in his post, apparently was at the pool since he and two other men in the group at the pool. While he doesn't exactly say the men were at the pool, he doesn't say they weren't either. Obviously, since the group could be pointed out they had to be rather close. Also, as far as the post went, you don't know that the child's mother wasn't watching the girl, or some other adult. I too have see where there are a great number of times, whether on TV, in movies, music or what ever where blacks refer to each other using the supposedly racial slur. It is interesting to note, the police were brought in and apparently no body was arrested. As far as being Christian, I saw no hyprocracy in what he said. He was just trying to point out if you live in a glass house, you shouldn't be throwing rocks at anybody else's house.


Cory

San Antonio,
Texas,
U.S.A.
Cops

#4Consumer Comment

Mon, June 05, 2006

Watched cops last Saturday night. The police stop a young black man because he has a large bulge in his shirt. It's a tec-9 pistol. He can't run very well because his pants are down around his knees, as is the fashion. They catch him with a pouch full of crack. I know, I know, they're picking on him cause he's black. Watch the show a few times. Read an interesting report about the difference between crack and powder coke. The crack is much cheaper but only lasts a very short time. The users need to buy much more often to maintain a high. If you buy ten times as often, it increases your chances of getting caught.


Joseph

Ladson,
South Carolina,
U.S.A.
blacks do not have the license for using the race card

#5Consumer Comment

Sat, June 03, 2006

I was working for a major gasoline station namely Hess station in columbia south carolina near the super walmart on sumter highway years ago and I was the only token white at that time. And I noticed the mgr aka Danny Deucebag as I call him take the white applicants applications to the side of the store inside and the black applicants to the ofc in the back. Well, he tried to fire me because he said I stole 50.00 however, I asked to see the video tape and was refused. So I called the home ofce and I got my job back however, it was never the same. three months later, I was fired for calling a woman a b***h and that was 4 months before hand. Well, I went to go for unemployment and the rep who assisted me who was black by the way asked why I was fired and I told her that I was white and she looked at me and almost laughed and I told her that, that do you think the black community has the only license on that sentence. Well, to make a long story short I did get my unemployment Danny D bag never showed and the department of labor findings were inconclusive which is a win for me in my eyes. Ofcourse the rep in the department of labor was black also. So go figure. Blacks need to get off their high horse and deal with life as it comes. Stop thinking you are entitled to something that you had no part in. and accept that life is what you make it. Thank you


Robert

Jacksonville,
Florida,
U.S.A.
Here's a thought...

#6Consumer Comment

Sat, June 03, 2006

Maybe blacks make up a larger percentage of the prison population, because they commit more than their fair share of crime. In reality, the majority of blacks in prison are there for drug crimes. Stop the idiotic "war on drugs", and most of them will be out of prison. ALL drug laws should be repealed. Stupid is, as stupid does, and you just cannot fix stupid! If there wasn't a law against it, would YOU jam a heroin needle in your arm? Well, there is a law against it, and people still do it. So much for effective laws. Also, the majority of people on death row are white. Most of the people on death row committed crimes against blacks, not whites. A white man is more likely to get a death sentence for killing a black, than a black man is for killing a white. I know drug dealers, black and white. The difference is their style. The black dealers drive $50K Escalades with another $10K in "pimping", while the white ones drive $2000 beaters. Guess which ones the cops look at. A guy with no visible means of support driving a set of wheels that costs more than ahouse payment each month, or the guy driving something that is held together by hope and prayers? If you don't want to go to prison, stop committing crime.


Jane

Chicago,
Illinois,
U.S.A.
I hate the word as much as the next person but at least I am not a hypocrite claiming to be a "GOOD CHRISTIAN"!

#7Consumer Comment

Sat, June 03, 2006

BOB, on the assumption that this silly story is true, you sound like a horrible parent. YOU LEAVE YOUR DAUGHTER AT A POOL AND YOU ARE NOT WATCHING HER? You are lucky that they even came up to you or your 'friends'? If not for that, the poor girl could have very easily drowned. You stated that your daughter walked up to these people who were singing and repeating these torrid lyrics...again I ask, where were you? Does your daughter normally walk up to strangers seeking answers to her questions? Sounds like you have a great rapport with her.... your quote: My daughter, who has never been taught or shown anything but good christian values, walked up to one and asked "hey, "N" what does "N" mean?". Sounds silly at best...why would she walk up to a group of people and say hey 'n' what does 'n' mean? Please, the story would read slightly better if she did not say (as you state) 'HEY N'. Assuming that that IS true, the do as I say rule really is the order of the day. Same thing if you call your wife 'Baby' or 'honey' in front of the guy at the gas station or the waiter at your local red lobster or where ever. If bubba or stud waiter or whomever were to say the same thing to your wife, (HEY baby what would you like tonight) you would be livid or at the very least feel disrepected! Why should it be any less emotion for a group of teenagers what ever the color. I hate the word as much as the next person but at least I am not a hypocrite claiming to be a "GOOD CHRISTIAN"!


Bob

Quinlan,
Texas,
U.S.A.
Question about rap music

#8Consumer Suggestion

Fri, February 25, 2005

My 5 year old daughter was at the swimming pool, a group of blacks were playing rap music and were talking among themselves, the music was foul mouthed and the group kept referring to each other using the "N" word. (note, only in the US is the "N" word a bad word) My daughter, who has never been taught or shown anything but good christian values, walked up to one and asked "hey, "N" what does "N" mean?". I wasn't privey to any of this, however, it was all caught on tape by someone in the group. Anyway, someone asked the girl who her father was, i.e. me, and several came over to where a three of us men were standing and they tried to thrash the wrong man. The police came, all black, and they were given a copy of the tape and were allowed to view it. They ended up scolding both groups. Moral of the story, if you don't want people to call you names, don't use them. It's not a "do as I say and not as I do" world. I teach the same values to and about Christains too. If you don't want others to treat you in a manner you dispise, then don't participate in that very same act or acts. In other words, to unto others as you would have them do to you.


Bob

Quinlan,
Texas,
U.S.A.
Question about rap music

#9Consumer Suggestion

Fri, February 25, 2005

My 5 year old daughter was at the swimming pool, a group of blacks were playing rap music and were talking among themselves, the music was foul mouthed and the group kept referring to each other using the "N" word. (note, only in the US is the "N" word a bad word) My daughter, who has never been taught or shown anything but good christian values, walked up to one and asked "hey, "N" what does "N" mean?". I wasn't privey to any of this, however, it was all caught on tape by someone in the group. Anyway, someone asked the girl who her father was, i.e. me, and several came over to where a three of us men were standing and they tried to thrash the wrong man. The police came, all black, and they were given a copy of the tape and were allowed to view it. They ended up scolding both groups. Moral of the story, if you don't want people to call you names, don't use them. It's not a "do as I say and not as I do" world. I teach the same values to and about Christains too. If you don't want others to treat you in a manner you dispise, then don't participate in that very same act or acts. In other words, to unto others as you would have them do to you.


Bob

Quinlan,
Texas,
U.S.A.
Question about rap music

#10Consumer Suggestion

Fri, February 25, 2005

My 5 year old daughter was at the swimming pool, a group of blacks were playing rap music and were talking among themselves, the music was foul mouthed and the group kept referring to each other using the "N" word. (note, only in the US is the "N" word a bad word) My daughter, who has never been taught or shown anything but good christian values, walked up to one and asked "hey, "N" what does "N" mean?". I wasn't privey to any of this, however, it was all caught on tape by someone in the group. Anyway, someone asked the girl who her father was, i.e. me, and several came over to where a three of us men were standing and they tried to thrash the wrong man. The police came, all black, and they were given a copy of the tape and were allowed to view it. They ended up scolding both groups. Moral of the story, if you don't want people to call you names, don't use them. It's not a "do as I say and not as I do" world. I teach the same values to and about Christains too. If you don't want others to treat you in a manner you dispise, then don't participate in that very same act or acts. In other words, to unto others as you would have them do to you.


Bob

Quinlan,
Texas,
U.S.A.
Question about rap music

#11Consumer Suggestion

Fri, February 25, 2005

My 5 year old daughter was at the swimming pool, a group of blacks were playing rap music and were talking among themselves, the music was foul mouthed and the group kept referring to each other using the "N" word. (note, only in the US is the "N" word a bad word) My daughter, who has never been taught or shown anything but good christian values, walked up to one and asked "hey, "N" what does "N" mean?". I wasn't privey to any of this, however, it was all caught on tape by someone in the group. Anyway, someone asked the girl who her father was, i.e. me, and several came over to where a three of us men were standing and they tried to thrash the wrong man. The police came, all black, and they were given a copy of the tape and were allowed to view it. They ended up scolding both groups. Moral of the story, if you don't want people to call you names, don't use them. It's not a "do as I say and not as I do" world. I teach the same values to and about Christains too. If you don't want others to treat you in a manner you dispise, then don't participate in that very same act or acts. In other words, to unto others as you would have them do to you.


Paul

Phoenix,
Arizona,
U.S.A.
BLACKS ARE MORE RACIST THAN WHITES!!!!!

#12Consumer Comment

Thu, February 24, 2005

Black people have been using the f****g "racist & discrimination" card far too long. Sure,there are alot of whites who don't like blacks but,believe me,there's alot more blacks that hate whites (and for what?) slavery ended a long time ago. I'm sorry it happened but it's past history.GET OVER IT!!!!!As for the black population in prison being higher than any other race,it's not because of unequal justice or prejudice,it's because more blacks get caught breaking the law than any other race!they just need to become smarter criminals!I did 3 years in several california prisons and you can bet your a*s there are just as many innocent whites,innocent latinos,and innocent chinos,as there are blacks!!!Same goes for the guilty,too! There is no such thing as "JUSTICE" for any race unless you have money or power you get screwed like the rest of us. So,quit your whining already,enough is enough!!!!!!


You are confused. It's the poor who get the shaft, not blacks.

#130

Wed, July 11, 2001

This email is a rebuttal to RipOff #3640. It was sent by Officer Black at [email protected]. Criminal justice system .. Unequal Justice for Minorities (#3640) They filed the following rebuttal to the above Rip-Off Report: Their email: [email protected] Their name: Officer Black Their phone number: 517-332-2072 Their relationship to the company: Supporter Rebuttal: You are confused. It's the poor who get the shaft, not blacks. OJ Simpson is a good example. Apply all your statistics using income as a comparison and you will find rich blacks fare much better than poor whites. Poor people as a group constitute a higher percentage of criminals and drug users. It's not necessarily their fault. Growing up surrounded by poverty, drug use, and crime can have a direct impact on the probability that a child will end up a criminal. However, many poor people, including the majority of blacks, have not become criminals. The statistics speak for themselves. People in general tend to get convicted more often if the composition of the jury is racially or politically different from the defendant. White people are more leinient with white people and blacks are more leinient with blacks. Conservatives would convict a liberal and liberals would convict a conservative. The best place to commit a crime is where the jury is made up of people like yourself. People with money tend to convict people without money. As for the police, certain types of people are attracted to certain jobs. Scientists and University professors tend to be liberal and socialist. Librarians tend to be introverts. Marines tend to be patriotic and anti-gay. Police tend to be conservative and authoritarian. Social reformers are not interested in the mundane tasks of law enforcement so they are not represented in the police department. Yes, the police in general have big problems with bullying, unfair treatment, and discrimination. What do you expect from a low paid job that doesn't require a skill or college degree? They personally remind me of McDonalds managers with guns.

Reports & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
Also a victim?
Repair Your Reputation!
//