Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 11:56 pm
Time: 11:56 pm
Results for criminal justice systems (washington state)
1 results foundAuthor: Washington (State). Task Force on Race and the Criminal Justice System. Research Working Group Title: Preliminary Report on Race and Washington’s Criminal Justice System Summary: In 1980, of all states, Washington had the highest rate of disproportionate minority representation in its prisons. Today, minority racial and ethnic groups remain disproportionately represented in Washington State’s court, prison, and jail populations, relative to their share of the state’s general population. The fact of racial and ethnic disproportionality in our criminal justice system is indisputable. Our research focused on trying to answer why these disproportionalities exist. We examined differential commission rates, facially neutral policies, and bias as possible contributing causes. We found that the assertion attributed to then-Justice Sanders, that “African Americans are overrepresented in the prison population because they commit a disproportionate number of crimes,” is a gross oversimplification. Many studies of particular Washington State criminal justice practices and institutions find that race and ethnicity influence criminal justice outcomes over and above commission rates. Moreover, global assertions about differential crime commission rates are difficult to substantiate. Most crime victims do not report crimes and most criminal offenders are never arrested. We never truly know exact commission rates. If problematic arrest rates are used as a proxy for underlying commission rates, 2009 data shows that 36% of Washington’s imprisonment disproportionality cannot be accounted for by disproportionality at arrest. We reviewed research that focused on particular areas of Washington’s criminal justice system, and conclude that much of the disproportionality is explained by facially neutral policies that have racially disparate effects. For the areas, agencies, and time periods that were studied, the following disparities were found: In Washington’s juvenile justice system, it has been found that similarly situated minority juveniles face harsher sentencing outcomes and disparate treatment by probation officers. Defendants of color were significantly less likely than similarly situated White defendants to receive sentences that fell below the standard range. Among felony drug offenders, Black defendants were 62% more likely to be sentenced to prison than similarly situated White defendants. With regard to legal financial obligations, which are now a common though largely discretionary supplement to prison, jail, and probation sentences for people convicted of crimes, similarly situated Latino defendants receive significantly greater legal financial obligations than their White counterparts. 2011). Disparate treatment has been discovered in the context of pretrial release decisions, which systematically disfavor minority defendants. Regarding the enforcement of drug laws, researchers have discovered a focus on crack cocaine – a drug associated with Blacks stereotypically and in practice – at the expense of other drugs, and the focus on crack cocaine results in greater disproportionality, without a legitimate policy justification. This disparity in drug law enforcement informs related asset forfeitures, which involve distorted financial incentives for seizing agencies and facilitate further disparity. With regard to the Washington State Patrol, researchers have found that although racial groups are subject to traffic stops at equitable rates, minorities are more likely to be subjected to searches, while the rate at which searches result in seizures is lower for minorities. This disparity in traffic law enforcement informs the disproportionate imposition of “Driving While License Suspended” charges, which inflicts disparate financial costs. In all of these areas, facially neutral policies resulted in disparate treatment of minorities over time. Disproportionality also is explained in part by the prevalence of racial bias – whether explicit or implicit – and the influence of bias on decision-making within the criminal justice system. Race (and in particular racial stereotypes) plays a role in the judgments and decision-making of human actors within the criminal justice system. The influence of such bias is subtle and often undetectable in any given case, but its effects are significant and observable over time. When policymakers determine policy, when official actors exercise discretion, and when citizens proffer testimony or jury-service, bias often plays a role. To sum up: We find the assertion that Black disproportionality in incarceration is due solely to differential crime commission rates is inaccurate. We find that facially neutral policies that have a disparate impact on people of color contribute significantly to disproportionalities in the criminal justice system. We find that racial and ethnic bias distorts decision-making at various stages in the criminal justice system, thus contributing to disproportionalities in the criminal justice system. We find that race and racial bias matter in ways that are not fair, that do not advance legitimate public safety objectives, that produce disparities in the criminal justice system, and that undermine public confidence in our legal system. Details: Seattle, WA: Task Force on Race and the Criminal Justice System, 2011. 83p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 18, 2012 at: http://www.law.washington.edu/About/RaceTaskForce/preliminary_report_race_criminal_justice_030111.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.law.washington.edu/About/RaceTaskForce/preliminary_report_race_criminal_justice_030111.pdf Shelf Number: 123658 Keywords: BiasCriminal Justice Systems (Washington State)Race and CrimeRacial Disparities |