So far, the basis for this idea that African Americans are killed by police at a higher percentage of their population is anecdotal.  Here’s an example: almost every Black man I know has a story of being arrested by the police and being very scared.  Although I’ve been stopped by police for several traffic issues, I never felt scared and perhaps, I have not been stopped as often as my black, male friends.  I’m going to assume this is true (people of color are stopped more often than whites) —at least for now.  When you read the editorial you may change your mind.  That fact leads many of us to conclude that killings of black offenders by police is also higher than is the case in the white criminal community.

Heather MacDonald is a smart, well educated (Yale and Stanford Law School), journalist who has actually done some empirical research to investigate the truth behind our assumptions of police conduct and racism.  She concludes that maybe cops aren’t all racist.  In her book, The War on Cops  https://www.amazon.com/War-Cops-Attack-Order-Everyone/dp/1594038759/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1482367510&sr=1-1&keywords=heather+macdonald+war+on+cops, she argues that the actual numbers show a very different picture.  For instance, she claims that in white/Hispanic homicides, 12% are caused by police.  In African American homicides, only 4% are caused by police.  Does this prove that cops aren’t racist?

So why are more black people stopped for traffic offenses and other petty crimes?  Is this still racism?

Many police departments now use a data-driven approach to fighting crime.  For instance, they may use a tool called ComStat in which police target high crime areas and put more patrols in those neighborhoods and, therefore, end up stopping more people.  And for whatever reasons, African American neighborhoods tend to have higher crime rates—which would trigger ComStat to direct more police onto the streets there.  Does this explain why more arrests are made in these communities?  Or do we come back to police racism again?

Of course, it’s not an easy question to answer.  At least Ms. MacDonald has attempted to clear-up some of the fog by researching and reporting her numbers.  I think it’s worth considering.

What do you think?

The post Maybe Cops Aren’t all Racist appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

Of course, like so many of these circumstances, there are always questions about police brutality and their behavior toward the black community.  It is important to acknowledge the long history of the brutal and unfair treatment the black community has received—that’s factual.

Just like the shooting in Ferguson, Missouri (Reported in the NY Times here:  http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/13/us/ferguson-missouri-town-under-siege-after-police-shooting.html?_r=0) where a white cop shot a black man, the same questions remain.

Why weren’t these cops charged with crimes?  Was there any responsibility of the victims?

As for the cop in Ferguson, the U.S. Justice Department did an exhaustive investigation and found he acted according to proper police procedure and the killing was what any “reasonable cop would do under the same circumstances.”

Understandably, people have anger and opinions as to the justice of these decisions.

Here’s my question:  in all the media coverage, all the protests, and all the discussion about these situations, why doesn’t anyone look at the responsibility of the victims?

Of course, it’s tragic when police intervention causes the death of anyone.  But there are actions that people take that can lead to the use of deadly force by the police.  Rarely, do the media or protesters look at the actions of the victim.  Do those actions give the police a reason to react with deadly force?  Many times, they do.

Let’s look not only at the actions of the police, but also at the actions of the deceased to see if there is any responsibility of the victims also.

The post Responsibility of the Victims appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

This argument has been going on for decades, but has taken center-stage with the shooting and death of a black man by a white cop in Ferguson, Missouri.  I’m not an expert, but here are some of my ideas after working with cops and people of color.

1.  The issue is really complex.  The media, by necessity or choice, always condenses these problems into a 60-second TV spot or even worse, a headline.  Viewers get the idea that if just one thing would change, the problem would go away.  Not true.  The problems between cops and people of color has been going on for decades and is very complex.  All of us need to think—something we hate to do—about what leads to these confrontations and devise ways to minimize them.

2.  Cops are trained to shoot first.  Not only isn’t this true, but think of how dumb it is:  let’s say the police are called to a domestic problem between a husband and wife.  Do you think the first thing the cops will do when they get to the home is start shooting??  Of course not.  The police I know are more social workers and psychologists than law enforcement.  They’re trained to de-escalate situations, calm people down, disarm people without violence, and only use violence themselves as a last course of action when they or someone else is threatened with harm.  I remember one investigator I worked with who retired as a police officer and had never drawn his weapon in the 20+ years he served as a cop.

3.  People of color have a legitimate complaint.  Every black male friend I have has a story . . . of how they were stopped for no reason by a cop.  Sometimes, they’ve been stopped many times and many of my friends tell me how scared they were because of the cop’s behavior.  The classic case was Harvard professor, Henry Louis Gates, who was stopped at his front door and arrested for suspicion of burglary.  

4.  Cops and people of color have a long, brutal history.  Black friends talk about the legacy of slavery and white friends say, “but that’s been over for a hundred and fifty years.”  Ironically, both are talking about the same thing.  During slavery, owners could patrol the roads and stop slaves any time they wanted and demand the slave’s identification.  Blacks also agree that slavery was abolished 150 years ago, so why are cops still stopping people of color and demanding identification—when they don’t do the same to whites?

Tell me what you think?  I’m sure every reader has an opinion and I’d like to hear from you!

The post Cops and People of Color appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

Without getting into the politics of this issue, I want to look at the legal process behind police violence investigations.  Here are seven things to consider:

1.  Police and law enforcement are the only people in our country who are authorized to use violence as part of their jobs.  If you and I stopped at Super America and found someone robbing it, we have no right to stop and, potentially, kill the robber.  Therefore, police are held to a different standard than the rest of us if they happen to kill someone while doing their jobs.

2.  If there’s a question about a killing, such as occurred in Ferguson, Missouri, the local prosecutor could call a grand jury to look at the case.  The prosecutor would gather evidence from the officer, other police, and any citizen witnesses.  Each of these people would be called to testify before the grand jury to help the grand jury decide, like Ferguson, can cops can be held responsible.

3.  The grand jury proceedings are held in secret.  These aren’t jury trials like we’re familiar with and see on TV.  The statutes of all the states establish the process for grand juries and most, as far as I know, are always held in secret.  Why?  It’s to protect potentially innocent people since, before the grand jury meets, no one has been charged yet.

4.  The most important thing to understand is that the standard of proof for a law enforcement person is different from that used with any other citizen.  Since the officer is allowed to use deadly force, the question becomes: was he justified in using deadly force under the circumstances?  Can the cop be held responsible—only will happen if the grand jury decides he acted beyond a justifiable level.

5.  The system, as a result, is tilted toward law enforcement.  Even in the Rodney King case, where many of us saw the video and were flabbergasted that a jury found all the cops not guilty of excessive brutality, it was probably because the police are held to a different standard.  The same was true in Ferguson, Mo.

6.  Is this a good idea?  Can cops ever be held responsible for going beyond their legal bounds and killing people?  Many think that a cop’s job is so difficult and dangerous, we as a society should give them this wide-ranging power.  Others, feel the police abuse their powers all the time and should be reined-in.

7.  Here’s a good analysis for more ideas thttp://http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/08/nyregion/grand-juries-seldom-charge-police-officers-in-fatal-actions.html?_r=0

What do you think?

The post Ferguson–Can Cops be Held Responsible? appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

1.  Perceptions.  The different perceptions between white clients and clients of color was astounding.  As a white person, I was often surprised at the attitudes of my minority clients—they were so different from the way I saw the world.  For instance, white defendants assume they will get fair treatment by the criminal justice system.  Clients of color assume they will get screwed—again.  White defendants talked about taking personal responsibility while clients of color talked about “The Man” and how no matter what they did (with personal responsibility) they would still get screwed.  White clients, although they didn’t like the police interfering with their criminal lives, accepted the authority and felt the police played fair with them.  Clients of color didn’t trust the police and could tell me endless stories of their family members who had been harassed, beaten, or killed by police.  Sounds like Ferguson, MO, doesn’t it?

2.  Unintended bias in the system.  Here’s a good example of bias from a practice that is intended to be fair but has the effect of treating people differently.  When people are arrested and make their first appearance in court, a carefully drafted questionnaire is used to recommend bail levels to the judge.  The questions are ones that wouldn’t surprise any of us: Are you a home owner?  How long have you lived at your present address?  Do you have a job?  How long have you worked?  Are you married?  Unfortunately, for many clients of color, these questions must be answered “no.”  They are poor, unemployed, must move around, and take whatever jobs they can get.  And since the levels of unemployment are higher among communities of color and home ownership in the same group is lower, of course they score badly on these bail evaluations.  Even if they pose no greater risk than a white defendant, the effect to is keep more people of color in jail.  These are the kinds of things that must frustrate people of color in Ferguson, MO, for instance.

3.  Poverty.  I know, it’s always used as an excuse.  It is true that many people are poor but still do not commit crime.  But here’s a startling example of something I experienced in my work.  In the late 70′ and early 80’s, Native American people made up a significant percentage of the criminals in the courts.  Suddenly, by the lat 80’s they had all disappeared.  Gone.  Today, it is rare to see a Native person in the court system even thought their population is high in Minnesota.  What happened?  The casinos opened.  That’s the only thing I can see that made a difference—these “criminals” got jobs and money—none of it provided by the government.  Could it be something as simple as that?  If people of color had jobs and money, maybe there would be a reduction in their presence in the criminal justice system.

I don’t pretend that these ideas will provide answers for tragedies like Ferguson, MO, but maybe my experiences can help others try to understand—from both sides—what this terrible divide is between the races and the criminal justice system.

The post 3 Ideas From Ferguson, MO. appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.