Bonnie Sweeten Proves I'm Still a Default Criminal

This is the last thing that I wanted to write this morning.

Over the last few days, the nation has been gripped by the story of a mother and daughter abducted. The family is from Bucks County, just outside of Philadelphia, the same region I have lived in my entire life.

Today, I awoke to find out that it was all a hoax. I also found out for the first time (although there were probably others paying closer attention who already knew) that an Amber Alert had been issued, and that the mother, Bonnie Sweeten, had lead police to believe that she had been abducted by two African American men.

This was incredibly disturbing for me. Sweeten became just another in a list of white women in high-profile cases who faked crimes and described her assailant as black. In 1994 Susan Smith murdered her children, but told police that they were abducted by a black man. At the hight of the last presidential election, Ashley Todd faked being attacked by a black, male Obama supporter. One would imagine that there are other, less known instances of similar things happening.

Why do I find this so disturbing? Well, I really worries me that the default description of a violent attacker is "black man." How often do people trying to fake an attack blame a white woman, unless they're trying to frame a specific individual? Clearly, these women believed the best way to make their false reports more believable was to blame black men. Black men are seen as they typical violent criminal in the United States.

Even more disturbing is that we believe them. Having the attacker described as a black man makes society more likely to believe them. We build archetypes of what a criminal is supposed to be like. When someone fakes an attack, describing the attacker as a black man is effective because it does not disturb our preconceived notion of what a violent attacker is like.

Statistically, this is not rational. In a past "Stat of the Day" feature, I pointed out that whites are five times more likely to be attacked by a white person than by a black person. Yet, while whites are more likely to be attacked by other whites, they are more likely to believe that someone was attacked by a black male. Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez points out the other side of this when discussing the Bostion-area Criagslist serial killer: we act shocked when white people committ crimes.

As I'm writing this, in the background Sara Jane Moore is being interviewed on the Today show. Matt Laurer points out how "unlikely" a criminal she is. How is that supposed to make me feel? What am I supposed to think when I hear that and realize that I do fit into the common conception of a violent criminal? How am I supposed to feel about the fact that, in this country, I'm still a violent criminal?

We have to realize that the way the media protrays black men - whether it's the latest in a long list of peretrators of violent crimes on the local evening news, or as out of controll thugs on white-owned BET - has a real impact on people's lives. It's the media that allows the majority of Americans to believe the myth that blacks are overwhelmingly more criminal than whites. For example, many justify racial profiling, saying that police are just targeting the groups that are more likely to comitt crimes. Yet, we know that whites are more likely to be found with contraband when stopped and searched by police. The media, especially those who claim to be real journalist, are being irresponsible by creating a false image of race and crime in the United States.

What's most disturbing for me is that this happened in Philadelphia. The idea that there are people living in my community who see someone like me as the typical criminal, and the fact that she believed that others in the area were disturbed enought that such a strategy would work - it all deeply troubles me.

Frankly, I'm sick and tired of hearing about how far we've come, or how Barack Obama is an achievement of Dr. King's dream, or how black people are not treated equally. I live in a country where the default definition of rapist or carjacker or mugger or kidnapper includes me because I'm a young black man. Is this supposed to make me proud. Is this supposed to make me feel like an equal member of this society? It doesn't. And I'm not ashamed to say that I'm not proud to live in a nation where I'm the default criminal.

Stat of the Day: Being Searched By the Police

According to the US Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2005, whites, African Americans, and Hispanics were essentially equally likely to be stopped by police for a traffic stop.

However, once stopped, blacks and Hispanics were more likely to be searched or to have their cars searched.

• 3.6% of whites were searched
• 9.5% of blacks were searched
• 8.8% of Hispanics were searched

This report does not provide information on what percentage of searches, disaggregated by race, produced illegal contraband. However, according to the Drug War Chronicle past reports which have included this information have shown that whites are more likely to have illegal contraband. This pattern is born out in various statewide studies, which, hopefully, will be included in future "Stat of the Day" features. The Drug War Chronicle also points out that a political powers sought to suppress information on racial profiling in a past report.

Read the full Bureau of Justice Statistics report for 2005 (pdf)
Read the full Drug War Chronicle article

From what I can see, there is at least a reason to suspect an intentional suppression of data that may reveal flaws in the so-called War on Drugs. This data would be a severe blow who are reluctant to condemn police action when it comes to race. Many argue that it's appropriate that blacks and Latinos make up a disproportionately high number of persons searched, as evidenced in the data above, because we're the ones with the illegal stuff to be searched for. However, the data seems to suggest that this is untrue. Whites are actually more likely to have contraband. This undercuts the rational used for racial profiling.

Now, of course blacks and Latinos make up a greater proportion of the persons searched, arrested, tried, convicted, and sent to prison, and we tend to receive harsher prison sentences than whites who commit the same crimes. So if you judge who has more contraband or commits more crime by simply looking at conviction rates or prison populations, of course it will appear that minorities commit most of the crimes in America. However, the data cited above and that I will continue to post in the near future, suggest that this may not be true.

An earlier "Stat of the Day" stated that only 13% of drug users are black, but 35% of the those arrested, 55% of those convicted, and 74% of those sent to prison for drug possession. It's easy to see how this could happen when blacks are more likely to be searched.

So, what should the take away be from this?

1. There are racial differences in the likelyhood of being searched.
   
2. Racial profiling is ineffective. What sense does it make to more frequently search a demographic that less frequently has contraband?
3. Considering all this, how can anyone refute the fact that there is still oppression of minorities and white privilege in the United States?
   

Stat of the Day: Incarceration Rates

Nationwide, black men are sent to prison on drug charges at 13 times the rate of white men.

Source:Human Rights Watch, "Racial Disparities in the War on Drugs" (Washington, DC: Human Rights Watch, 2000)

Stat of the Day: Racial Violence?

Ever hear people talk about how it's really black people who are so racist because they are so much more likely to commit violent crimes against white people then the other way around? Conservatives often use this argument to paint a picture of white America under attack from blacks. This is an image in which blacks are some great threat to the white community.

Well, according to the U.S. Department of Justice, withes are about 5 times more likely to be attacked by another white person than by a black person.

So, maybe instead of [some] white people being so afraid of blacks, instead of conservatives use this to argue that white racism isn't really that prevalent and "reverse racism" is the real problem, and instead of people trying to justify the over representation of blacks in America's prisons and jails, people should look a t the actual facts.

Source: United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2004, Statistical Tables, (U.S. Department of Justice, 2006)
*** Based on analysis of tables 40 and 42; originally found here; Justice Department tables here

Stat of the Day

Each day (hopefully), I'll bring in a new statistic that is in one way or another related to issues of race. For our innagural "stat of the day," we'll start with the criminal injustice system, where blacks and latinos are overrepresented.

Blacks constitute 13 percent of all drug users, but 35 percent of those arrested for drug possession, 55 percent of persons convicted, and 74 percent of people sent to prison.

Sources: Drug Policy Alliance Network / Human Rights Watch Report: Punishment and Prejudice: Racial Disparities in the Criminal Justice System, May 2000 Vol. 12, No. 2 (G).

Let Justice Prevail

Toady, a potentially innocent man is scheduled to be executed in Georgia. Troy Anthony Davis was convicted on killing an off-duty police officer in 1991. However, since that time seven of the nine key witnesses against Davis have recanted their testimony, helping to cast doubt on his guilt.

Click here to read the details from the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

Davis has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but they are not scheduled to hear his case until after he is executed. Courts in Georgia are not willing to postpone the execution until after the Supreme Court has made its ruling.

There are numerous problems with this situation. First, by going on with the execution, the state of Georgia is denying the opportunity for justice to be fully fulfilled. What should happen if the Supreme Court decides that Davis is innocent, or that he should receive a new trial or have his sentence commuted to life in prison? By then, it will be too late to administer this justice, because he will already be dead. By refusing to wait, Georgia is denying Davis his rights as a human being, closing off the opportunity for justice to be administered on his behalf.

Second, there is the fact that Davis may just be innocent. As stated above, most of the prosecution's witnesses recanted their testimony. In addition, ABC News reports that there was "no physical evidence tying Davis to the murder" and that "several new witnesses have come forward to implicate another man in the crime." Clearly, there is legitimate reason to believe that Davis is not guilty. How can one justify the execution of a man for a crime he may not have committed? The least the state can do is to wait for the Supreme Court to issue its ruling. To issue the ultimate, unending, irreversible punishment to a potentially innocent person is one of the greatest crimes that a government can commit. It betrays the lack of true justice in this country.

Although we will never know the answer to this question for sure, one can only wonder if a white man would receive the same treatment.

** Update: A good idea from another blog A La Gauche:

Please call the Georgia Parole Board at 404-651-6671. This is the direct line. A live person will pick up. Just give your name and your state and tell them that you disagree with their decision to deny clemency to Troy Davis. And even though it's easy to get angry with the situation, remember to be polite.