Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 1:36 am
Time: 1:36 am
Results for racial profiling (texas)
2 results foundAuthor: Tolman, Molly Title: Smarter Policing Practices: Creating a Safer, More Unified Texas. 2007 Racial Profiling Report Summary: Texas’ racial profiling law (S.B. 1074, passed in 2001) requires every Texas law enforcement agency to annually create a report on the race of individuals they stop and search and submit it to their local governing body. Because no central repository was written into the law to collect and analyze the data on a statewide level, the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition (TCJC) has served since the inaugural year of data reporting as the sole statewide repository and analyst of required, annual racial profiling reports from Texas law enforcement agencies. In this role, TCJC obtains valuable feedback from law enforcement and community members and has assisted agencies in understanding their data, streamlining their reporting practices, and improving the way they protect the public through the implementation of needed policy changes. We also offer technical assistance to agencies regarding the requirements of the law. To obtain the pool of agencies analyzed in this report, TCJC sent open records requests to 1,074 law enforcement agencies in October, 2006; we requested a copy of each agency’s racial profiling report containing racial profiling data for calendar year 2005, as well as the racial profiling policy in use by each agency during 2005. Of agencies that responded with usable information prior to the data analysis process, 221 agencies issued 3,000 or more citations, accounting for 4.9 million stops. Though in some ways 3,000 is an arbitrary number, we chose these 221 agencies to avoid small samples that were not statistically significant. This report focuses on 2005-year data regarding disparities in consent search rates. Consent searches occur when law enforcement officers have no legal basis for a search (such as reasonable suspicion, probable cause, or a warrant). Because requesting these searches falls fully within an officer’s discretion, analysis of consent search rates comes closest to measuring, from the available data, how officers use their discretion differently depending on places and races. We determined that some law enforcement agencies continue to have problems complying with the data collection and reporting requirements of Texas’ racial profiling law. Law enforcement, the public, and key stakeholders need a more comprehensive picture of what is happening at Texas traffic stops in order to create better community policing models. As the sole statewide repository of Texas racial profiling reports, TCJC is well positioned to offer recommendations about what works – and what doesn’t work – when it comes to the data collection and reporting provisions of Texas’ racial profiling law. As such, throughout the pages of this report we have suggested solutions to the problems facing law enforcement as they undergo data collection and reporting processes, as well as recommendations related to other provisions within the law. Details: Austin, TX: Texas Criminal Justice Coalition, 2007. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 23, 2011 at: http://www.criminaljusticecoalition.org/files/userfiles/publicsafety/Reports_manuals/2007_racial_profiling_report.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://www.criminaljusticecoalition.org/files/userfiles/publicsafety/Reports_manuals/2007_racial_profiling_report.pdf Shelf Number: 121110 Keywords: Police DiscretionRacial DisparitiesRacial Profiling (Texas)Stop and Search |
Author: Steward, Dwight Title: Don't Mind If I Take a Look, Do Ya? An Examination of Consent Searches and Contraband Hit Rates at Texas Traffic Stops Summary: With the passage of Texas Senate Bill 1074 (S.B. 1074) in 2001, law enforcement agencies must now annually report detailed statistics concerning the race of individuals who are stopped and searched in their jurisdictions. For this study, reports from 1,060 agencies were collected, with a focus on search and contraband data. Specifically, analyses were conducted of total search figures, consent search figures, and contraband figures to determine if racial disparities existed – if so, such would indicate the targeting of certain racial groups for selective enforcement. Particular attention was given to examining potential racial disparities in consent searches, thereby eliminating from the analysis searches which may be outside of an officer’s discretion. Analyses of search data – combined with contraband hit rate data – would also help gauge the efficiency and legitimacy of current police practices. The entire dataset collected for this study includes several million police-civilian contacts representing the majority of traffic stops in Texas. This report analyzes each contributing agency’s self-reported statistics, as well as the quality of the reports produced, in order to better inform policy leaders, law enforcement agencies, and community members as they address the problem and the perception of racial profiling. This is the largest set of racial profiling data that has ever been collected and analyzed, and it is the first inter-department review of contraband data collected by Texas law enforcement agencies. The goals of this report are three-fold: • Analyze the racial distribution of total searches, consent searches, and contraband hit rates in Texas using self-reported data submitted by police and sheriff’s departments. • Review the quality of the racial profiling data collected and reported by law enforcement agencies. • Recommend solutions to better analyze and monitor racial profiling figures and deter ineffective law enforcement practices. Key Findings include the following: (1) Texas law enforcement agencies continue to search Blacks and Latinos at higher rates than Anglos: approximately 2 out of 3 agencies reported searching Blacks and Latinos at higher rates than Anglos following a traffic stop. 66% of agencies searched Blacks at higher rates than Anglos, while 69% of agencies searched Latinos at higher rates than Anglos. (2) Of the agencies that searched Blacks at higher rates often, 7 out of 10 (71%) searched Blacks at least 50% more frequently than they searched Anglos, representing a significant disparity in treatment between Anglos and Blacks. Of the agencies that searched Latinos at higher rates, 9 out of 10 (90%) searched Latinos at least 50% more frequently than they searched Anglos, representing a significant disparity in treatment between Anglos and Latinos. (3) Consent searches – performed without any legal basis to search – contributed significantly to general search disparities: approximately 3 out of 5 agencies reported consent searching Blacks and Latinos at higher rates than Anglos following a traffic stop. 61% of agencies consent searched Blacks at higher rates than Anglos, while 59% of agencies consent searched Latinos at higher rates than Anglos. (4) Of the agencies that consent searched Blacks at higher rates often, 3 out of 4 (75%) consent searched Blacks at least 50% more frequently than they consent searched Anglos, representing a significant disparity in treatment between Anglos and Blacks. Of the agencies that consent searched Latinos at higher rates, 3 out of 4 (74%) consent searched Latinos at least 50% more frequently than they consent searched Anglos, representing a significant disparity in treatment between Anglos and Latinos. (5) Patterns of over-searching Blacks and Latinos are consistent. Approximately 3 out of 4 agencies that searched Blacks at higher rates than Anglos also searched Latinos at higher rates than Anglos (75%), while 3 out of 5 agencies that consent searched Blacks at higher rates than Anglos also consent searched Latinos at higher rates than Anglos (61%). (6) Of the agencies that searched Blacks at higher rates, 51% were likely to find contraband in the possession of Anglos at higher rates than Blacks – meaning Anglos and Blacks were equally likely to be found with contraband. Of the agencies that searched Latinos at higher rates, 58% were likely to find contraband in the possession of Anglos at higher rates than Latinos – meaning Anglos were slightly more likely than Latinos to be found with contraband. (7) Racial disparities in search rates appear to be growing. Approximately 3 out of 5 agencies reported searching Blacks or Latinos at higher rates in 2003 than 2002 (60%). Note: this figure includes agencies with any increase in rates for Blacks or Latinos from 2002 to 2003. (8) The vast majority of agencies provided no mitigating information or insight to explain disparate search rates between Anglos and minorities, nor did contraband hit rates suggest efficient law enforcement practices were being utilized. (9) Auditing of data is non-existent or unreliable. Over half of agencies did not report using any data auditing procedures or audio-video review to ensure against human errors, technical errors, or data falsification. (10) Imprecision in both data quality and reporting restricts the usefulness of analysis. Ultimately, the lack of a generally accepted uniform reporting standard limited the accuracy of analysis involved for some reports filed by law enforcement agencies. Initial findings show that Blacks and Latinos in Texas communities are more likely to be searched, though Anglos are equally likely or more likely to be found with contraband during searches. High minority search rates are particularly evident in the area of consent searches – where searches cannot be explained by outside factors such as probable cause or outstanding warrants. Without some explanation of mitigating factors by law enforcement agencies, this would indicate that police are not only engaging in race-based policing but are ineffectively and inefficiently utilizing law enforcement resources. Agencies should identify and authenticate legitimate law enforcement practices that may be contributing to racial disparities in their data. Furthermore, in the absence of an explanation for disparate search and contraband rates, law enforcement leadership and policy-makers should take steps to monitor and reduce race-based policing. Details: Austin, TX: Texas Criminal Justice Colition, 2005. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2011 at: http://www.criminaljusticecoalition.org/files/userfiles/publicsafety/racial_profiling_report_2005.pdf Year: 2005 Country: United States URL: http://www.criminaljusticecoalition.org/files/userfiles/publicsafety/racial_profiling_report_2005.pdf Shelf Number: 121457 Keywords: Consent SearchesContrabandIllegal GoodsPolice DiscretionRacial DisparitiesRacial Profiling (Texas)Search and SeizureTraffic Stops |