Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 18, 2024 Thu
Time: 4:35 am
Time: 4:35 am
Results for bias
24 results foundAuthor: Dane County Task Force on Racial Disparities in the Criminal Justice System Title: Final Report Summary: The Task Force was directed to review the February 2008 report of the Governor's Commission and outline an action plan of specific recommendations and best practices to address and reduce disparities at various decicion points in Dane County's criminal justice system. Details: Madison, WI: Dane County Office of Equal Opportunity, 2009 Source: Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117372 Keywords: BiasCriminal Justice SystemsRace/Ethnicity |
Author: Morrison, Bronwyn Title: Identifying and Responding to Bias in the Criminal Justice System: A Review of International and New Zealand Research Summary: This review summarizes international and New Zealand research findings on bias against ethnic minority and indigenous people at key stages of the criminal justice system. The discretion points examined include: stop and search, arrest, charging, prosecution, conviction, sentencing, custodial sentence management decisions with the prison system, and parole. The review is based on research published during the last 40 years, and concentrates exclusively on literature from Australia, Canada, England and Wales, the United States, and New Zealand. It focuses predominantly on the adult criminal justice system and examines decisions affecting offenders rather than victims. Details: Wellington: New Zealand Ministry of Justice, 2009. 183p. Source: Year: 2009 Country: New Zealand URL: Shelf Number: 117795 Keywords: BiasIndigenous PeoplesMinority Groups |
Author: Stewart, Cam Title: Combating Hate and Bias Crime and Incidents in Alberta: Current Responses and Recommendation for the Future Summary: This report discusses the status of hate and bias crimes within Alberta, Canada. The report looks at the current demographic trends and strategies that are being used to respond to hate and bias crimes, and recommends that several ministries, including the Solicitor General, the Attorney General, the Human Rights and Citizenship Commission, and the Department of International Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations, form a strategic alliance to develop a provincial hate crime strategy. Details: Alberta, Canada: Alberta Hate and Bias Crime and Incidents Committee, 2007. 61p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2007 Country: Canada URL: Shelf Number: 118350 Keywords: BiasDiscriminationHate Crimes |
Author: Bandyopadhyay, Siddhartha Title: Crime Reporting: Profiling and Neighbourhood Observation Summary: We consider the effect of giving incentives to ordinary citizens to report potential criminal activity. Additionally we look at the effect of "profiling" and biased reporting. If police single out or profile a group for more investigation, then crime in the profiled group decreases. If a certain group is reported on more frequently through biased reporting by citizens, crime in the group reported on actually increases. In the second model, we consider a neighbourhood structure where individuals get information on possible criminal activity by neighbours on one side and decide whether to report or not based on the signal. When costs of reporting are low relative to the cost of being investigated, costs of investigation are increasing in the number of reports and there is at least one biased individual, we show there is a "contagion equilibrium" where everyone reports his or her neighbour. Details: Working Paper Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 9, 2011 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1691844 Year: 2010 Country: International URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1691844 Shelf Number: 120736 Keywords: BiasNeighbourhoods and CrimeRacial Profiling |
Author: Vermeire, Diana Tate Title: Balancing the Scales of Justice: An Exploration into How Lack of Education, Employment, and Housing Opportunities Contribute to Disparities in the Criminal Justice System Summary: At a time of growing need, California continues to slash basic safety net programs and underfund public education and other critical services. The state’s criminal justice system, however, does not turn anyone away. It has evolved into society’s catchall institution. As a result, California’s criminal justice system has experienced historic growth and a correlating mass incarceration of racial and ethnic minorities over the past 30 years. Consequently, people of color are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system, and the number of women in the criminal justice system is increasing at a disproportionate rate. Systemic bias within the criminal justice system contributes to this disproportionality, but it is not the sole cause of the expansion of the system and the disparities within the system. Instead, the racial, ethnic, and gender disparities found within our criminal justice system are created in part by external socio-economic factors. External socio-economic factors, including adequate educational, employment, and housing opportunities, protect privileged individuals from contact with the criminal justice system. However, for those living in concentrated areas of poverty, especially racial and ethnic minorities, lack of access to basic necessities such as quality education, employment, and housing, increases the likelihood of criminal justice system contact. Moreover, the interventions meant to address socio-economic inequities are failing and as a result the criminal justice system is assuming the responsibilities of these failed governmental programs and agencies. With significant budget cuts for all social service institutions, the number of individuals served and the scope of available services continues to decrease. Socio-economic inequities contribute to disparities in the criminal justice system. Yet, due to a lack of data and research, it is impossible to measure the force and impact of these external factors on criminal justice system involvement and the extent to which they exacerbate the systemic and institutional bias and racism within the criminal justice system. Details: San Francisco: ACLU of Northern California and the W. Haywood Burns Institute, 2010. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 10, 2011 at: http://www.aclunc.org/docs/racial_justice/balancing_the_scales_of_justice.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.aclunc.org/docs/racial_justice/balancing_the_scales_of_justice.pdf Shelf Number: 121702 Keywords: BiasCriminal Justice Systems (California)EducationEmploymentHousingMinoritiesRacial DisparitiesSocioeconomic Status |
Author: 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 |
Author: Great Britain. Equality and Human Rights Commission Title: How Fair is Britain? Equality, Human Rights and Good Relations in 2010. The First Triennial Review Summary: Britain is a country where we despise prejudice, embrace equality and believe in the fundamental right of the individual to make the most of his or her talents in a free society. We are increasingly at ease with diversity of all kinds, and intolerant of discrimination of any kind. Yet all too many of us remain trapped by the accident of our births, our destinies far too likely to be determined by our sex or race; our opportunities far too often conditioned by the fact that our age, or disability, our sexual preferences, or deeply held religion or belief make us lesser beings in the eyes of others. And far too many of us are still born into families without the material or social capital to give us the right start in life. In short, we twenty-first century Britons are a largely fair-minded people. But we are not yet a fair society. And we know that no individual can be truly free to realise their potential, or to exercise their inalienable human rights as long as they are imprisoned by the invisible, many-stranded web of prejudice, inertia and unfairness that holds so many back. This Review of our society’s progress in equality, human rights and good relations is the first comprehensive picture of its kind, enumerating the gaps between our ambitions for fairness and the actuality. There is much here that should make us hopeful; many of the old biases are, if not vanquished, on their way out. But there is also a great deal still to be done; and there are new challenges emerging. The Review is not a prescription for change. But it does aim to do three things. First, to amass objective evidence that will help us to decide where best to focus our resources and energies as a society, particularly at a time when we need to husband both carefully. Second, to provide a transparent, non-partisan account of where we stand now so we can judge whether decisions taken now might reduce fairness in the future. The Review’s findings provide benchmarks against which we can measure the impact of our actions, whether as members of public, private or voluntary bodies, or sometimes just as citizens. And finally, the picture here will, we hope, provide the basis for further debate and concerted action to decrease inequality, and increase fairness throughout our society. Details: London: Equality and Human Rights Commission, 2010. 751p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 19, 2012 at: http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/triennial_review/how_fair_is_britain_-_complete_report.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/how_fair_is_britain_-_complete_report.pdf Shelf Number: 123670 Keywords: BiasDiscriminationHate CrimesHuman Rights (U.K.) |
Author: Pennsylvania. Supreme Court. Committee on Racial and Gender Bias in the Justice System Title: Rinal Report of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Committee on Racial and Gender Bias in the Justice System Summary: This report reviews several areas of the criminal justice system in Pennsylvania in regards to racial and gender bias. Among the areas reviewed were: litigants with limited-English proficiency, employment practices within the courtroom workgroup, perceptions of bias by the courtroom workgroup, juvenile justice, and the death penalty. Along with an indepth analysis of several areas of the system, the report provides specific recommendations for reform. Details: Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Supreme Court, 2003 549p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 19, 2012 at: http://www.courts.state.pa.us/NR/rdonlyres/EC162941-F233-4FC6-9247-54BFE3D2840D/0/FinalReport.pdf Year: 2003 Country: United States URL: http://www.courts.state.pa.us/NR/rdonlyres/EC162941-F233-4FC6-9247-54BFE3D2840D/0/FinalReport.pdf Shelf Number: 123672 Keywords: BiasCourtsCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice Systems (Pennsylvania)DiscriminationGenderRacial Disparities |
Author: CASA de Maryland Title: Frederick County Immigration Enforcement: Fighting Crime of Just Fighting Immigrants? Summary: In February 2008, the Frederick County Sheriff’s Office finalized a formal agreement with U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and began training twenty-six Frederick County deputies in immigration enforcement. The agreement is known as a 287(g) agreement in reference to the section authorizing cooperation between local law enforcement agencies and federal immigration in the Immigration and Nationality Act. Frederick County also began participating in ICE’s Criminal Alien Program. This is the first 287(g) agreement in Maryland. CASA de Maryland, the largest immigrant service and advocacy organization in Maryland conducted an empirical and comparative analysis of current and predicted costs, incarceration rates and community impact, including crime fighting capacity. The study reveals that the Frederick County’s planned immigration enforcement program will result in negative consequences and cause unprecedented harm for residents of Frederick County and for Maryland. The report’s key findings: Frederick County is investing more per person and more per foreign-born person than any of the similar jurisdictions that have implemented such programs. In fact, Frederick County is investing about two times as much as the next closest jurisdiction per person and over three times as much as the next closest jurisdiction per foreign-born person; Frederick County has trained 14% of its force on immigration enforcement, compared to 3% and 1% of similar jurisdictions in Virginia; Frederick County’s immigration enforcement program will have a negative impact on public safety by discouraging trust and cooperation with law enforcement; The estimated cost of immigration enforcement, in contrast to the Sheriff’s publicly stated estimate of “zero”, is $3,217,220 per year, not including the cost of liability; Frederick County has an alarmingly high incarceration rate for Latinos. It has increased almost 400% in the last five years and is more than double the population of Latinos in the county; The Frederick County Sheriff’s Office already likely engages in racial profiling of Latinos, and obscures the problem by recording most Latinos as “white” during police stops. The program will result in an increase in racial profiling, which is harmful to all Latinos, all African-Americans and all foreign-born persons. Key recommendations include: Sheriff Jenkins and the Frederick County Sheriff's Office halt its immigration enforcement program by terminating the 287(g) agreement; Investigate racial profiling by the Frederick County Sheriff’s Office; Investigate the rise of Latino inmates in the Frederick County Adult Detention Center; Implement a community, school and social service response plan in the event of family separation caused by detention or deportation. Details: Silver Spring, MD: CASA de Maryland, 2008. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 20, 2012 at http://www.casademaryland.org/storage/documents/frederick%20report.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.casademaryland.org/storage/documents/frederick%20report.pdf Shelf Number: 124587 Keywords: BiasImmigrant Detention (Maryland)Immigration Enforcement (Maryland)LatinosPolice Behavior (Maryland)Policing (Maryland)Racial Disparities (Maryland) |
Author: Bolognani, Marta Title: A "Community Criminology". Perceptions of Crime and Social Control Amongst Bradford Pakistanis Summary: Despite the undeniable significance of the `race and crime' stream in criminology, knowledge held by minority ethnic groups on these matters is still much overlooked. It is this gap in the literature that this thesis begins to fill, based on both fieldwork and documentary research. The case-study through which the importance of minority ethnic views is investigated is a Bradford Pakistani one. The neglect by academic criminological accounts of a systematic analysis of minorities' views, and their cultural specificities, may be imputed in part to the fear of pathologisation. On the other hand, many media accounts seem to look at alleged `dysfunctionalities' of certain groups. After September 11th 2001 and July 7th 2005, Muslim communities seem particularly susceptible to negative stereotyping. The research looks at `cultural agency', avoiding ill-fitted generalisation and stereotypes based on an imposed essentialisation of the Bradford Pakistani community. This thesis analyses Bradford Pakistanis' perceptions of crime and its production, construction, sanctioning and prevention, through an `emic' approach. Thus, emic units are discovered by the analyst in the specific reality of a study and the social actors, rather than created by her/him a priori, or by imposing universal categories created for other settings. Through collecting perceptions around crime ethnographically, the research revealed that Bradford Pakistanis' perceptions of crime and control are a combination of the formal and informal, or British and `traditional' Pakistani, that are no longer separable in the diasporic context. The emic of cultural agency can be said to legitimise the term community criminology, but not in the sense that Bradford Pakistanis possess exclusive and monolithic criminological discourses, labelling, preventive strategies and rehabilitation practices. Rather, they engage with mainstream criminological and policy discourses in a way that might well be considered a kind of reflection representative of the position of their diaspora: community for them does not only include their traditional structures but all the intracommunal and intercommunal relations that are meaningful to them, both as resources and constraints. Details: Leeds, UK: University of Leeds, 2006. 317p. Source: Dissertation Available at the Gottfredson Library of Criminal Justice Year: 2006 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 125717 Keywords: BiasHate CrimesMinority GroupsMuslimsPakistanisSocial Control Theory (U.K.) |
Author: Anwar, Shamena Title: Testing for Racial Prejudice in the Parole Board Release Process: Theory and Evidence Summary: We develop a model of a Parole Board contemplating whether to grant parole release to a prisoner who has finished serving their minimum sentence. The model implies a simple outcome test for racial prejudice robust to the inframarginality problem. Our test involves running simple regressions of whether a prisoner recidivates on the exposure time to the risk of recidivism and its square, using only the sample of prisoners who are granted parole release strictly between their minimum and maximum sentences and separately by race. If the coefficient estimates on the exposure time term differ by race, then there is evidence of racial prejudice against the racial group with the smaller coefficient estimate. We implement our test for prejudice using data from Pennsylvania from January 1996 to December 31, 2001. Although we find racial differences in time served, we find no evidence for racial prejudice on the part of the Parole Board based on our outcome test. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2012. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper No. 18239: Accessed July 24, 2012 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w18239 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w18239 Shelf Number: 125756 Keywords: BiasParole (U.S.)Parole BoardParoleesRacial DisparitiesRacial Prejudice |
Author: European Network Against Racism (ENAR) Title: Recycling Hatred: Racism(s) in Europe Today. A Dialogue between Academics, Equality Experts and Civil Society Activists Summary: This publication aims to bring together various discussions between academics, equality experts, activists, policy makers, and foundation representatives, who participated in the ENAR/OSF symposium on the Varieties of European Racism(s) in Brussels on 27-28 September 2012. With the motto ‘only together will we be strong’, multiple stakeholders convened to reflect various understandings of racism and ways to influence public sentiment and bring about structural changes to achieve inclusive societies and ensure equality for all. The symposium thus enabled a platform to discuss new and different forms of racism and to reflect whether distinctive experiences of racism can be linked to particular minority populations. It also shed light on the structural and ideological aspects driving racism and hate on the ground in the different European Member States. Participants shared research outputs, personal testimonies, and examples from the different national contexts, bringing forward evidence of the varieties of European racism(s). The symposium additionally enabled a platform to address the interconnections between institutional racism (structures and laws that legislate for exclusion) and popular racist culture, as well as the role of state actors and civil society in countering this. By the end, strategies for improving measures to combat racism on the ground were collected, including approaches for mobilising civil society and for changing racist and xenophobic attitudes. Details: Brussels: European Network Against Racism (ENAR), 2013. 188p. Source: Internet Resource: ENAR Anti-Racism in Focus 1; Accessed July 16, 2013 at: http://cms.horus.be/files/99935/MediaArchive/publications/SymposiumReport_LR%20final%20final.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Europe URL: http://cms.horus.be/files/99935/MediaArchive/publications/SymposiumReport_LR%20final%20final.pdf Shelf Number: 129402 Keywords: BiasHate CrimesRacism (Europe) |
Author: Malcolm X Grassroots Movement. Every 36 Hours Campaign Title: Operation Ghetto Storm: 2012 Annual Report on the Extrajudicial Killings of 313 Black People by Police, Security Guards and Vigilantes Summary: The facts presented in Operation Ghetto Storm: 2012 Annual Report on the Extrajudicial Killing of Black People present us with a deeper understanding of the utter disregard held for Black life within the United States. Operation Ghetto Storm is a window offering a cold, hard, and fact‐based view into the thinking and practice of a government and a society that will spare no cost to control the lives of Black people. What Operation Ghetto Storm reveals is that the practice of executing Black people without pretense of a trial, jury, or judge is an integral part of the governments current overall strategy of containing the Black community in a state of perpetual colonial subjugation and exploitation. Details: Malcolm X Grassroots Movement, 2013. 130p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 28, 2013 at: www.mxgm.org Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 129441 Keywords: BiasExtrajudicial ExecutionsHomicidesRace/Ethnicity (U.S.)Racial ProfilingVigilantism |
Author: Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission Title: Working Together to Better Serve All Nova Scotians: A Report on Consumer Racial Profiling in Nova Scotia Summary: This report is the first report in Canada to address the issue of the experiences of customers and how they are treated by staff in retail and service establishments in Nova Scotia. More often than other ethnic groups in Nova Scotia, Aboriginal people and African Nova Scotians say they are treated poorly when they shop for goods and services. People from all racialized groups, including Asian, Latin American, and Middle Eastern people, reported being treated poorly by staff far more than white people. Racialized groups include people who are treated unequally because of their race, particularly in ways that matter to economic, political, and social life. In the report 1,219 people from Halifax Regional Municipality, Millbrook, Digby and Sydney were spoken with about their experiences in retail establishments in Nova Scotia. The study consists of information gathered through surveys and focus groups which were conducted between March 28 and August 21, 2012. Details: Halifax, N.S.: Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission, 2013. 133p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 21, 2014 at: http://humanrights.gov.ns.ca/sites/default/files/files/crp-report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Canada URL: http://humanrights.gov.ns.ca/sites/default/files/files/crp-report.pdf Shelf Number: 132103 Keywords: BiasConsumer Protection Racial Discrimination Racial Profiling |
Author: Californians for Safety and Justice Title: Latino Voices: The Impact of Crime and Criminal Justice Policies on Latinos Summary: Despite representing a larger portion of California's population than whites, Latinos are dramatically overrepresented as crime victims - and in our courts, jails and prisons. Research shows that Latinos receive harsher treatment in arrests, pretrial proceedings and sentencing than whites, even when charged with the same offenses. Other findings include: Victims of Crime - Latinos are murdered twice as much as whites in California -- and more by strangers. - Latinos are more likely to be shot and burglarized than whites. - Hate crimes against Latinos rise as immigration increases. - California Latinos experienced more repeat crimes than survivors overall. - Half of Latino survivors are unaware of recovery services. Unequal Treatment in the System - Latinos awaiting trial were more likely to be denied bail, or their bail was set higher than African Americans or whites. - Latinos were 44% more likely to be incarcerated than whites for the same crimes. Latinos Support Change - California Latino voters want officials to focus on less incarceration, not more - They want more supervised probation and rehabilitation by a five-to-one margin over sending more people to jail/prison. - Eight in 10 support shortening long sentences and using the savings for education, health services and prevention. Details: Oakland, CA: Californians for Safety and Justice, 2014. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 14, 2014 at: http://libcloud.s3.amazonaws.com/211/04/1/430/LatinoReport_7.8.14v1.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://libcloud.s3.amazonaws.com/211/04/1/430/LatinoReport_7.8.14v1.pdf Shelf Number: 133073 Keywords: Bias Criminal Justice PoliciesDiscriminationDisproportionate Minority ContactHispanicsLatinosRacial Disparities (California) |
Author: U.S. Department of Justice. Civil Rights Division Title: Investigation of the Ferguson Police Department Summary: The Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice opened its investigation of the Ferguson Police Department (FPD) on September 4, 2014. This investigation was initiated under the pattern-or-practice provision of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. - 14141, the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. - 3789d (Safe Streets Act), and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. - 2000d (Title VI). This investigation has revealed a pattern or practice of unlawful conduct within the Ferguson Police Department that violates the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and federal statutory law. Over the course of the investigation, we interviewed City officials, including City Manager John Shaw, Mayor James Knowles, Chief of Police Thomas Jackson, Municipal Judge Ronald Brockmeyer, the Municipal Court Clerk, Ferguson's Finance Director, half of FPD's sworn officers, and others. We spent, collectively, approximately 100 person-days onsite in Ferguson. We participated in ride-alongs with on-duty officers, reviewed over 35,000 pages of police records as well as thousands of emails and other electronic materials provided by the police department. Enlisting the assistance of statistical experts, we analyzed FPD's data on stops, searches, citations, and arrests, as well as data collected by the municipal court. We observed four separate sessions of Ferguson Municipal Court, interviewing dozens of people charged with local offenses, and we reviewed third-party studies regarding municipal court practices in Ferguson and St. Louis County more broadly. As in all of our investigations, we sought to engage the local community, conducting hundreds of in-person and telephone interviews of individuals who reside in Ferguson or who have had interactions with the police department. We contacted ten neighborhood associations and met with each group that responded to us, as well as several other community groups and advocacy organizations. Throughout the investigation, we relied on two police chiefs who accompanied us to Ferguson and who themselves interviewed City and police officials, spoke with community members, and reviewed FPD policies and incident reports. Ferguson's law enforcement practices are shaped by the City's focus on revenue rather than by public safety needs. This emphasis on revenue has compromised the institutional character of Ferguson's police department, contributing to a pattern of unconstitutional policing, and has also shaped its municipal court, leading to procedures that raise due process concerns and inflict unnecessary harm on members of the Ferguson community. Further, Ferguson's police and municipal court practices both reflect and exacerbate existing racial bias, including racial stereotypes. Ferguson's own data establish clear racial disparities that adversely impact African Americans. The evidence shows that discriminatory intent is part of the reason for these disparities. Over time, Ferguson's police and municipal court practices have sown deep mistrust between parts of the community and the police department, undermining law enforcement legitimacy among African Americans in particular. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2015. 105p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 9, 2015 at: http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf Shelf Number: 134756 Keywords: BiasDiscriminationPolice MisconductPolice Use of Force (Missouri)Racial DisparitiesRacial Profiling |
Author: Williams, Patrick Title: Dangerous associations: joint enterprise, gangs and racism. An analysis of the processes of criminalisation of Black, Asian and minority ethnic individuals Summary: Following the publication of Baroness Young's review Improving outcomes for young black and/or Muslim men in the Criminal Justice System in 2014, the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies commissioned the authors to write a research and policy project to explore the relationship between Joint Enterprise, gangs, and the police's gang database, and ethnicity. This study also forms part of the authors' response to a call by the House of Commons Justice Committee for a rigorous consideration of the possible relationship between the disproportionate application of collective punishments/sanctions and in particular, the Joint Enterprise (JE) upon BAME individuals and groups. The findings offer a critical analysis of contemporary responses to the 'gang', highlighting limitations in the evidence base that currently informs the pursuit of collective sanctions against alleged 'gang' members and their associates. This report reveals the dangerous associations of a series of negative constructs, signifying racialised stereotypes that endure and underpin contemporary policing and prosecution strategies in relation to serious youth violence in England and Wales. The net effect of criminal justice policies which are designed to 'disrupt' and 'end' the gang, is the disproportionate punishment of young people from minority ethnic (particularly black) groups while failing to adequately curtail levels of serious youth violence across England and Wales. Details: London: Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, 2016. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 27, 2016 at: http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/sites/crimeandjustice.org.uk/files/Dangerous%20assocations%20Joint%20Enterprise%20gangs%20and%20racism.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/sites/crimeandjustice.org.uk/files/Dangerous%20assocations%20Joint%20Enterprise%20gangs%20and%20racism.pdf Shelf Number: 137686 Keywords: BiasDisproportionate Minority ContactGangsMinority GroupsRace/EthnicityRacial Disparities |
Author: Denbeaux, Mark P. Title: Racial Profiling Report: Bloomfield Police and Bloomfield Municipal Court Summary: Seton Hall Law School's Center for Policy & Research selected Bloomfield, New Jersey as a setting for a study of potential racial profiling in its police practices. The results revealed a persistent and disproportionate representation of African Americans and Latinos in the courtroom as compared to their representation in either Bloomfield itself or in the State of New Jersey. Bloomfield, New Jersey is, in many ways, demographically representative of New Jersey itself. According to the most recent census data available, its population of 47,315 is roughly 60% white, 18.5% African American, and 24.5% Latino. In comparison, New Jersey's population is 68.6% white, 13.7% African American, and 17.7% Latino. Bloomfield is ringed on the north, east and west by towns that resemble its demographic makeup. Bloomfield's southern border, however, is a different story: Newark is 26.3% white, 52.3% African American and 33.8% Latino; East Orange is 4% white, 88.5% African American and 7.9% Latino. The study entailed hundreds of observations of court appearances for traffic offenses and a small number of other minor offenses in Bloomfield Municipal Court, conducted by a team of trained Seton Hall Law School students for 70 hours over the course of a month. Students also scrutinized a database of 9,715 tickets issued to unique drivers in Bloomfield during a 12-month period immediately preceding the courtroom observations. The individuals with Spanish surnames who were cited in the Bloomfield ticket database closely approximated the Latino percentage observed in court appearances. Given the demographics of both Bloomfield and New Jersey generally, the expected representation in the courtroom would have been around 60% white. Strikingly, the observers reported the inverse, plus: instead of 60% white, African-Americans and Latinos accounted for an astounding 78% of court appearances (43% African American, 35% Latino, 20% White, and 2% other) (n=799). Remarkably, this racial disproportion was found not only across the board but in various subgroupings - including Bloomfield itself whose African American and Latino residents accounted for 73% of Bloomfield residents observed before the court, as compared with only 24% white. Similarly, a racial disproportion in ticketing also existed across the five predominantly white border towns. Although the numbers are small (n=39), 64% of those with residences in the predominantly white border towns were African American or Latino while only 33% were white. Much of the explanation for the racial distribution of tickets is undoubtedly due to the issuance of citations to residents of the cities of Newark and East Orange. The borders of these cities with Bloomfield were overwhelmingly targeted by the Bloomfield Police. To determine areas of police targeting, the database of tickets from the year immediately prior to the observation aspect of the study, was also analyzed for patrolling patterns. Where it could be determined where the traffic stop occurred (which was in some 67% of the cases), the overwhelming majority -- 88.33% -- were in the third of Bloomfield nearest to Newark and East Orange. Added to the courtroom observation data showing a greatly disproportionate number of tickets issued to African Americans and Latinos (78%), this pattern of citations compels the conclusion that African Americans and Latinos are, collectively, Bloomfield Police's target group. Indeed, Bloomfield Police policing patterns suggest a de facto "border patrol." By plotting out ticket incidence and frequency, one can see what essentially amounts to a "wall" of police erected against the Newark and East Orange border areas and their predominantly African American and Latino residents. This pattern of police citations also resulted in a dramatic subsidy of Bloomfield by African American and Latinos, in large part from residents of Newark and East Orange. For each individual charged, the average cost was $137 plus any surcharges imposed. That suggests that, for African Americans and Latinos, as a group, 7,566 tickets and a total paid to Bloomfield Municipal Court of more than $1,000,000. From the residents of East Orange and Newark who, at 29% of the observed total, received 2,910 tickets, Bloomfield Municipal Court would have received nearly $400,000. The annual budget of the Court is about $500,000, suggesting a substantial "profit" from this pattern of law enforcement, most of it from nonresidents of Bloomfield, and heavily weighted on the backs of African Americans and Latinos as a group. Perhaps not coincidentally, the Municipal Court's budgeted salaries were projected to have more than doubled in 2015, from $350,600 in 2014 to an estimated $760,794 in 2015. Details: Newark, NJ: Seton Hall University School of Law, Center for Policy and Research, 2016. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2016 at: Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 138701 Keywords: Bias Racial DisparitiesRacial ProfilingRacial Profiling in Law EnforcementRacismTraffic Stops |
Author: Staats, Cheryl Title: State of the Science: Implicit Bias Review 2016 Summary: The 2016 State of the Science: Implicit Bias Review is the fourth edition of this annual publication. By carefully following the latest scholarly literature and public discourse on implicit bias, this document provides a snapshot of the field, both in terms of its current status and evolution as well as in the context of its relevant antecedents. As in previous editions, this publication highlights the new 2015 academic literature through the lenses of five main domain areas: criminal justice, health and health care, employment, education, and housing. Accompanying these five content areas is a discussion of the latest research-based strategies for mitigating the influence of implicit biases, as well as a recognition of major contributions that expand beyond these domain-specific boundaries. Given that implicit bias has become such a "hot topic" that it has begun to appear in seemingly innumerable arenas, our team set some parameters to limit the scope of pieces included in this publication. These parameters include: 1) With few exceptions, included articles and chapters must have focused on implicit racial and/or ethnic bias. 2) While we sought to be exhaustive whenever possible, we focused our efforts on articles and chapters published through formal channels (e.g., academic journals or publishing houses). This parameter admittedly excludes some scholarship, including Honors and Masters Theses, independent studies, and dissertations, at least some of which we anticipate including in subsequent editions once they are formally published. 3) Finally, while we aim to capture as many 2015 articles as possible, those that were published late in the year may be instead addressed in the subsequent year's edition of the State of the Science: Implicit Bias Review. Details: Columbus, OH: Kirwin Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity, Ohio State University, 2016. 108p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 17, 2016 at: http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/implicit-bias-2016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/implicit-bias-2016.pdf Shelf Number: 140321 Keywords: BiasDiscriminationRacial BiasRacial DiscriminationRacial Disparities |
Author: Police Executive Research Forum Title: Identifying and Preventing Gender Bias in Law Enforcement Response to Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Summary: On August 4, 2015, law enforcement executives and officers, crime victim advocates, academics, and other subject matter experts convened to discuss a draft of the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) Identifying and Preventing Gender Bias in Law Enforcement Response to Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence publication and to share promising practices and to develop effective strategies for serving victims of these crimes. The guidance in that publication aims to reflect and further the partnership between the DOJ and law enforcement executives, line officers, and supervisors, who work to uphold the civil and human rights of the communities they serve. Sexual assault and domestic violence constitute a significant portion of total violent crime, but two out of three victims of such offenses do not seek law enforcement assistance. It is incumbent upon law enforcement agencies to provide support for victims of sexual assault and domestic violence who wish to pursue criminal charges, and agencies should create an environment in which victims feel comfortable and respected. Law enforcement agencies are usually a crime victim's first point of contact with the larger criminal justice system, so they have a responsibility to establish their legitimacy with victims. Women and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people have been disproportionately affected by crimes of sexual assault and domestic violence, and unde-renforcement of such offenses can constitute a gender-based bias on the part of law enforcement agencies. This bias can be avoided with thoughtful and informed policy development, high-quality training, strong leadership, and established accountability measures. The DOJ released Identifying and Preventing Gender Bias in Law Enforcement Response to Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence on December 15, 2015 with the support and input of state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement agencies; advocates and experts in the field of domestic violence and sexual assault; and public service agencies and stakeholders. A replica of that document is included at end of this publication, and a related fact sheet is available online. Details: Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2016. 86p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 21, 2016 at: https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0796-pub.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0796-pub.pdf Shelf Number: 147771 Keywords: BiasDomestic ViolenceGender-Related BiasSexual AssaultVictims of CrimeViolence Against Women |
Author: Centre for Justice Innovation Title: Building Trust: How our courts can improve the criminal court experience for Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic defendants Summary: Widespread distrust among British-born Black, Asian and Minority ethnic (BAME) people towards the British justice system is having a negative impact on the legitimacy of our criminal courts. Our report looks at the origins of the lack of trust in the system, why perceptions of fairness and trust in the justice system matter and what can be done to improve the experience of court for BAME defendants. Why trust matters Trust in the fairness of our courts is key to the legitimacy of the criminal justice system. Our courts are charged with guaranteeing our fair and equal treatment before the law.While the British judicial system has a reputation as one of the fairest in the world, our criminal justice system does not command the trust of our Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic (BAME) citizens. A majority (51%) of British-born BAME people believe that the criminal justice system discriminates against particular groups and individuals, compared to only 35% of the British-born white population. This lack of trust has two specific negative consequences: It may be leading to BAME defendants receiving more severe sentences by making them less likely to plead guilty. Defendants who plead guilty at the first opportunity receive a one-third reduction in their sentence. But male BAME defendants are 52% more likely to plead not guilty in Crown Courts than similar white defendants. Perceptions of unfair treatment within the court process and lower levels of trust in the courts are likely to increase the chances that BAME offenders will go on to offend again. How to build trust We reviewed approaches to building trust and tackling racial disparity in four similar countries: Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the USA. Having analysed the way other countries address this issue, our report recommends that our courts can improve the experience of court in the following ways: Ministry of Justice should work with Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service(HMCTS) can expand the existing data on racial disparity in the adult criminal court system. The Ministry of Justice should require each local justice area bring together agencies from across the criminal justice system to look at their local rates of racial disparity and produce action plans. HMCTS should ensure that making the court process feel fairer for all defendants is at the heart of its court reform programme by providing clearer explanations of the court process, training judges, magistrates and court staff in better courtroom engagement and introducing more local, pop-up courts in civic buildings in accessible locations. HMCTS court reform programme should ensure that the criminal court system engages and understands the communities within which it works by introducing ways of measuring the perceptions of fairness of victims, witnesses, and defendants in the court process. Details: London: Centre for Justice Innovation, 2017. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 6, 2017 at: http://justiceinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Building-Trust.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://justiceinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Building-Trust.pdf Shelf Number: 144733 Keywords: BiasCourt ReformCriminal CourtCriminal DefendantsMinority GroupsRacial DiscriminationRacial DisparitiesTrust |
Author: Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area Title: Paying More for Being Poor: Bias and Disparity in California's Traffic Court System Summary: California's traffic fines and fees are some of the highest in the country, and new data shows that current California policies disproportionately impact people of color. This report looks at the most recent information available on California's current traffic court system, evaluates its impact on communities of color, examines the statewide fiscal impacts of these policies and practices, and offers some recommendations for how California could improve its traffic court system to become a national model for change. Californians who cannot afford to pay a fine for a traffic citation face harsher consequences than those who can: some Californians mail in a payment, while those who cannot pay experience license suspension, arrest, jail, wage garnishment, towing of their vehicles, and job loss - for the same minor offenses. In 2015, the California Department of Motor Vehicles reported that over 4 million driver licenses had been suspended in recent years for failure to pay or appear on a citation - affecting about one in six California drivers. In April 2017, a DMV point-in-time count showed that 588,939 Californians had lost their licenses because they could not pay or appear in court. To address this significant toll on Californians, Governor Jerry Brown signed an 18-month California Traffic Tickets / Infractions Amnesty Program that reduced fines on pre-2013 traffic tickets by 80% for indigent applicants and allowed people to get on payment plans to get their licenses back. The program allowed nearly 200,000 people to regain their driver licenses. That program ended in April 2017. California now faces the question of what to do next. With the expiration of the amnesty program, there is no longer a pathway by which people who cannot afford to pay fines may pursue license reinstatement. Californians lose the ability to drive legally as a punishment for being unable to pay a fine without any statewide system to make the punishment fit a person's ability to pay or to return a license if the person can make small payments. California has the opportunity to create permanent reforms to this inequitable system. In this report, we present data about the scope of the problem with license suspensions and traffic courts in California and offer some recommendations for policy solutions. We focused our research in the nine Bay Area counties and created fiscal analyses for statewide policy. Findings of note include: California traffic fines and fees are some of highest in country. Although the base fines for California Vehicle Code violations may be lower or comparable to many other states', the add-on fees - and particularly the $300 late penalty - make California one of the states with the steepest fines. 78% of Californians need a driver license to work or to get to work, which means California's current policy of suspending licenses for non-payment is putting at risk the ability of many California families to support themselves. In Bay Area counties, license suspension for failure to pay or appear is exacerbating the racial bias already present in traffic stops. As data show, people of color are more likely to be subjected to traffic stops. Once stopped, people of color are also more likely to be booked on arrests related to failure to appear or failure to pay. The available county-level data shows that African-American people in particular are four to sixteen times more likely to be booked on arrests related to failure to pay an infraction ticket. Even though traffic court is the most common point of contact with the court system - 60% of all court filings statewide are traffic or infraction citations - it is very difficult for someone who cannot afford to pay the full amount to resolve a ticket. None of the nine Bay Area counties surveyed had information about alternative options for low-income people on their websites, available by phone, or in person at the court clerk's office. Details: San Francisco: The Committee, 2017. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 5, 2017 at: https://www.lccr.com/wp-content/uploads/LCCR-Report-Paying-More-for-Being-Poor-May-2017.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.lccr.com/wp-content/uploads/LCCR-Report-Paying-More-for-Being-Poor-May-2017.pdf Shelf Number: 145317 Keywords: BiasFines and FeesPovertyRacial DiscriminationTraffic Fines |
Author: Carrera, Sergio Title: Combating Institutional Anti-Gypsyism: Responses and promising practices in the EU and selected Member States Summary: he notion of 'anti-Gypsyism' aims to refocus public policies addressing Roma discrimination in order to place responsibility for combating structural, historically-embedded and systemic forms of racism, discrimination and exclusion towards Roma squarely on state institutions and actors. This report examines the ways in which policies and funding combat 'anti-Gypsyism' in the European Union and selected Member States and assesses the added value of the 'anti-Gypsyism' concept, with particular reference to its institutional forms. It explores ways in which these institutional forms could be combated by identifying some "promising practices or experiences' found in five selected EU Member States (Germany, Romania, Spain, Sweden and the UK). These 'promising practices' include reactive and proactive measures organised around four main themes: i) national, regional and local institutional responses; ii) training and education activities; iii) access to justice and effective remedies; and iv) media, public attitudes and political discourse. The report further draws conclusions and provides a set of policy recommendations for EU and national policy-makers to effectively combat anti-Gypsyism. The authors highlight that discussions on anti-Gypsyism should focus not only on its definition, but on the actual outputs of current national and EU policies and a more robust application of EU rule of law and fundamental rights monitoring and reporting mechanisms. A key proposal put forward is to expand the scope of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies to become the EU Framework for National Roma Inclusion and Combating Anti-Gypsyism and to equip it with the necessary authority and means to tackle systematic and institutional manifestations of anti-Gypsyism. Details: Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies, 2017. 101p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 22, 2017 at: https://www.ceps.eu/publications/combating-institutional-anti-gypsyism-responses-and-promising-practices-eu-and-selected Year: 2017 Country: Europe URL: https://www.ceps.eu/publications/combating-institutional-anti-gypsyism-responses-and-promising-practices-eu-and-selected Shelf Number: 146338 Keywords: BiasDiscriminationGypsiesRacismRoma |
Author: Northern Ireland Criminal Justice Inspection Title: Hate Crime: An Inspection of the Criminal Justice System's Response to Hate Crime in Northern Ireland Summary: In Northern Ireland during 2016, there were over eight hate incidents reported to the police every single day. These equated to almost six (5.94) recorded hate crimes. When population is considered, this figure is higher than the equivalent rate in England and Wales (5.47) . Hate incidents are greatly underreported so the true rate of incidents perpetrated against people because they are perceived to be different in some way is much higher. Turning attitudes into behaviour, such as violence, based on skin colour, sexual identity, age, religion, nationality and other features used to label people is plainly wrong but not uncommon. This report looked into how hate crime in Northern Ireland was dealt with across the justice system. The statistics used to illustrate the report were those outlining hate crime reported during the 2015-16 financial year. Findings The prevalence and impacts of hate crime cannot be dealt with by the criminal justice system in isolation. Organisations within the system had worked together to align approaches and apply standard definitions in an effort to ensure a seamless service to victims. The Unite against Hate project and the Hate Crime Delivery Group (HCDG) had been instrumental in sharing practices across and beyond the criminal justice system itself. Organisations should ensure their continued support of these groups by committing staff at the appropriate level to attend group meetings. The Department of Justice (DoJ) approach to hate crime was contained within its Community Safety Strategy but there were no effective links to an overarching Northern Ireland Executive policy, such as 'Together: Building United Communities' (T:BUC) which would provide leadership at the highest level of government. The legislative approach to hate crime was not directly comparable across the United Kingdom (UK). A review of hate crime legislation in Northern Ireland would establish whether changes are required. England and Wales had statutory hate crimes of assault and damage, enhanced sentencing powers and relevant public order offences. In Scotland, there was a statutory obligation for hate crime cases to be opened and recorded as such in court. Most reports of hate crime forwarded by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) for prosecution decisions were in the 'aggravated by hostility' category with only a small number of the statutory public order hate crimes reported. Most criminal justice organisations had developed hate crime strategies, supported by internal governance arrangements. However, the Northern Ireland Prison Service (NIPS) and Youth Justice Agency (YJA) did not have hate crime specific strategies. Underreporting was acknowledged by the criminal justice organisations. Systems and process improvements by the police and prosecution service, outreach work and the support of hate crime advocates meant that knowledge among vulnerable communities of how and what to report had increased. However, not all potential victims engaged with support networks and victims spoken to by Inspectors identified many incidents which went unreported. This distorted the true picture of hate incidents and potentially impacted the effectiveness of police responses. Interpreter services were readily available and there was no suggestion that the standard of interpreters was an issue. However, investigation of hate crime required precise legal and technical language. No specific work had been undertaken with interpreter services to enhance skills specific to translating for hate crime, which added to the already high number of substantial barriers facing victims. The quality of hate crime files forwarded by the PSNI to the Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland (PPS) had been recognised as an area for improvement but enhanced measures to tackle this had not been operating long enough to assess their effectiveness at the time of inspection. Court recording of instances of enhanced sentencing had improved. However, there remained a risk that in busy Magistrates' and Youth Courts, the recording of enhanced sentences would be missed. The number of perpetrators receiving prison sentences was low. Support for victims of hate crime, following court cases rested mainly with the voluntary and community sector. Expansion of the hate crime advocacy service to include supporting victims at this stage would provide a more holistic service which may help improve future reporting rates. The NIPS used a generalist approach, supported by its anti-bullying policy, to deal with incidents of hate crime. This made it difficult to determine the extent of hate crime being perpetrated within the prison environment. The Probation Board for Northern Ireland (PBNI) had established a programme, Accepting Differences, following a pilot scheme. Numbers undertaking the programme were low, but Inspectors regarded the development as a positive one, challenging offenders' stereotypical attitudes and behaviour. Victims' views on how offenders were dealt with were generally based on their wish for the offending behaviour to be stopped. Victims were focused on the prevention of further instances of hate crime and favoured restorative approaches, such as education on the benefits of cultural and other differences. Inspectors believe that this will only be achieved when a hate crime strategy, becomes an integral part of an overall Northern Ireland Executive social cohesion strategy, robustly led and monitored using outcome based accountability measures. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2017. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 18, 2018 at: http://www.cjini.org/getattachment/a48b8a89-f32f-4b02-bd3c-8f77989630eb/picture.aspx Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cjini.org/getattachment/a48b8a89-f32f-4b02-bd3c-8f77989630eb/picture.aspx Shelf Number: 148861 Keywords: BiasCrime StatisticsHate CrimesVictim ServicesVictims of Crime |