Racially Biased Policing - Critical Issues in Racially Biased Law Enforcement The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) released Racially Biased Policing: A Principled Response, which provides guidance to police agencies responding to "racial profiling" and the perceptions of its practice. Funded by the Department of Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, the report is based on a survey of more than 1,000 agency executives; materials from more than 250 agencies; focus groups; a literature review; advice from subject-matter experts; and an Advisory Board composed of law enforcement agency executives, Justice Department personnel, community activists, and civil rights leaders. Below is one of the chapters of this report that deals with racial profiling. The whole report is available at www.policeforum.org. INTRODUCTION American policing is facing a tremendous challenge-a widespread perception that the police are routinely guilty of bias in how they treat racial minorities. This comes at a time when crime rates have fallen almost everywhere in recent years, and when the police might otherwise be celebrating their contribution to reducing crime and creating safe communities. Instead, the police find themselves baffled and defensive. Racial and ethnic minorities constitute a substantial and growing segment of the U.S. population. Strength is in diversity, and we look to minority communities to participate fully in all aspects of society. Police are now looking to the public for partnerships and collaborative problem-solving solutions to community ills. If substantial segments of the community are the victims of police bias, or even perceive that they are, the likelihood of success is dim. We all know that racial profiling is unacceptable and is at variance with the standards and values inherent in ensuring fair and dignified police response to all. We believe that the vast majority of law enforcement in this country are hard-working men and women who are committed to serving all members of our communities with equity and dignity. Yet the challenges of addressing racially biased policing, and perceptions thereof, clearly indicate that police must do more to address the concerns of minority citizens. The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), with funding from the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, developed this report as a reference to help police leaders respond to the issues associated with racial profiling. The acknowledgments attest to the extensive participation of police leaders, academics, civil rights activists and others. THE STORIES Many minorities believe that the police routinely stop and search them because of their skin color. The evidence of this belief is found first in "stories," and the stories are legion. Many of these recounted tales ring with authenticity; they are compelling and devastating in their impact on people's lives. Racial bias distorts attitudes toward civil authority and the police, and blights the quality of everyday life. In addition to actual bias, a strong and ingrained perception of bias is a substantial barrier to full enjoyment of freedom and civil rights. It colors every aspect of life for minorities. At its root, bias is a denial of justice. These are accounts of people who have been stopped by police on questionable grounds and subjected to disrespectful behavior, intrusive questioning and disregard for their civil rights. The storytellers come from all walks of life: they are young men and women, the elderly, people from the middle and upper classes, professional athletes, lawyers, doctors, and police officers at every rank. This is how it goes: A young black woman, in desperation, finally trades her new sports car for an older model because police have repeatedly stopped her on suspicion of possession of a stolen vehicle. An elderly African-American couple returning from a social event in formal dress are stopped and questioned at length, allegedly because their car resembles one identified in a robbery. A prominent black lawyer driving a luxury car is frequently stopped on various pretexts. A Hispanic deputy police chief is stopped numerous times in neighboring jurisdictions, apparently on "suspicion." A young Hispanic man working evening shift drives home on the same route five nights a week after midnight, and is stopped for suspicious behavior almost every night. A black judge far removed from her home jurisdiction is stopped, handcuffed and laid facedown on the pavement while police search her car. They issue no citations. According to recent national surveys, the majority of white, as well as black, Americans say that racial profiling is widespread in the United States today. Law enforcement executives need to reflect seriously on this and respond to both the reality of, and the perceptions of, biased policing. This chapter provides a context for defining the issues, and previews our recommendations for an effective response. ISSUE DEFINITION We have chosen to avoid the term "racial profiling" and, instead, refer to "racially biased policing." We believe "racial profiling" has frequently been defined so restrictively that it does not fully capture the concerns of both police practitioners and citizens. For instance, racial profiling is frequently defined as law enforcement activities (e.g., detentions, arrests, searches) that are initiated solely on the basis of race. Central to the debate on the most frequently used definitions is the word "solely." In the realm of potential discriminatory actions, this definition likely references only a very small portion. Even a racially prejudiced officer likely uses more than the single factor of race when conducting biased law enforcement. For example, officers might make decisions based on the neighborhood and the race of the person, the age of the car and the race of the person, or the gender and the race of the person. Activities based on these sample pairs of factors would fall outside the most commonly used definition of racial profiling. Moreover, one could interpret the common definition of racial profiling to not include activities that are legally supportable in terms of reasonable suspicion or probable cause, but are nonetheless racially biased. As above, a definition that prohibits enforcement decisions based "solely" on race would not encompass decisions based on reasonable suspicion or probable cause plus race. That is, this definition could be interpreted to exclude, for instance, officers' pulling over black traffic violators and not white, or citing Hispanic, but not white, youth for noise violations. Such disparate treatment would not necessarily be encompassed by a definition that referred to actions based "solely" on race, because the officers would have acted on the basis of reasonable suspicion or probable cause, as well as race. In addition, using the word "profiling" to address the issue of bias not only creates confusion about an otherwise legitimate policing term, but also semantically limits the potential abuse to those instances in which an officer might use race as an indicator of criminal activity. While, indeed, this is a major concern and likely where the greatest potential for abuse lies, departments wish to prohibit biased law enforcement that is based not only on stereotypes regarding the link between race and crime, but also on other negative attitudes regarding race. For instance, an officer may be prejudiced against ethnic minorities and stop them for purposes of harassment, independent of any notion that their race is an indicator of criminal activity. The narrowest definitions of "racial profiling" refer to police activities in the context only of vehicle stops, ignoring the potential for police abuse of power in the many other activities in which they engage citizens. Most importantly, during the course of this project, it became clear that the term "racial profiling" hampered the national discussion of the problem. This was most clearly exemplified in project focus groups composed of both police and citizens. Project staff noted that most citizens were using the term "racial profiling" to discuss all manifestations of racial bias in policing. The police participants were likely to define "racial profiling" quite narrowly-as law enforcement activities (particularly vehicle stops) based solely on race. The citizens claimed that "racial profiling," as they defined it, was widespread. In contrast, the police, using their more narrow definition, were frequently quite adamant that police activities based solely on race were quite rare. These contrasting, but unspoken, definitions lead to police defensiveness and citizen frustration. We found that citizens and police can have constructive conversation on the topic of "racially biased policing." This term more accurately reflects the concerns expressed by citizens, and few police officers would deny that some officers are influenced by personal bias in performing their duties, whatever the motivation. Racially biased policing occurs when law enforcement inappropriately considers race or ethnicity in deciding with whom and how to intervene in an enforcement capacity. Racially biased policing and the perceptions thereof are the themes of this report. We hope the recommendations and guidance will facilitate an effective law enforcement response to both of these important issues. The report focuses only on racially biased policing, although some recommendations could apply to situations in which gender, age, economic status, or sexual preference are at issue. BALANCE IN THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE In charters and legislation across the country, we find primacy given to the role of the police as enforcers of the law. While law enforcement is undeniably essential to maintaining good government, policing in a democratic society demands more. The police are essential to the fabric of society, not only as enforcers of first resort for federal, state and local laws, but also as moderators of behavior, keepers of the public peace and agents of prevention. Increasingly, police are recognized for their capacity for community problem-solving, collaborating with a broad range of citizen groups, individuals and institutional partners to improve the quality of life. Law enforcement remains a prime responsibility, but as a means for attaining the goals of justice and the good of society, and not as an end in itself. Recognition of this principle is a shared responsibility of police, government and the community. Failure to achieve a balance in police priorities creates misunderstanding and misdirection. There are grave dangers in neglecting to take the issue of biased policing seriously and respond with effective initiatives. Societal division on racial grounds will leach the vigor from quality-of-life initiatives, regardless of how well-intended and well-funded. If a substantial part of the population comes to view the justice system as unjust, they are less likely to be cooperative with police, withholding participation in community problem-solving and demonstrating their disaffection in a variety of ways. The loss of moral authority could do permanent injury to the legal system, and deprive all of society of the protection of the law. PROGRAM FOR ACTION This report provides assistance to agencies so they may take responsibility for addressing the important issues of racially biased policing and the perceptions thereof. It is divided into six areas in which action is needed: accountability and supervision, policies prohibiting biased policing, recruitment and hiring, education and training, minority community outreach, and data collection and analysis. Accountability and Supervision Police accountability and supervision are important factors in reducing or eliminating bias in policing. The tasks of policing are most often performed by single officers or pairs of officers operating independently and without immediate institutional oversight or independent observers. Under these circumstances, accountability is difficult to ensure. One verdict appears clear from the most recent controversies regarding police misconduct: The "bad apple" analogy is no longer resonating as the only credible explanation. Increasingly, organizational culture is recognized as the most important factor influencing police behavior. Enlightened police leaders have learned that influencing the culture may be the most effective means of deterring bias and pursuing the goals of quality policing. Indeed, if we were to suggest a single focus for ameliorating the many problems surrounding the topic of biased policing, it would be to influence recognition of the centrality of human rights in the broadest sense. In addition, we provide recommendations for maintaining quality assurance, valuing diversity and managing public complaints. We discuss the roles and responsibilities of middle managers and supervisors, and include proposals for consideration. Policies Prohibiting Biased Policing Police policy gives direction and authority to mission and value statements. Procedures provide the operating details to guide personnel in conducting their duties. Policies and procedures are critical to achieving agency goals. In the wake of current events related to "racial profiling," police departments across the nation have adopted policies prohibiting "racial profiling." These policies represent an important effort to convey to both citizens and police that "racial profiling" will not be tolerated. Unfortunately, the vast majority of these policies do little to clarify how officers can conduct their activities in a racially neutral way (albeit some agencies may address this in training). Of particular concern is the lack of guidance that we provide officers with regard to whether and how they can use race as one factor in a set of factors to establish reasonable suspicion or probable cause and to make other law enforcement decisions. In this report, we propose a policy for agencies that addresses both racially biased policing and the perceptions thereof, and provide guidance to officers on using race as a factor in law enforcement decisions. Recruitment and Hiring In terms of recruitment and selection, police agencies have the potential to reduce racial bias by hiring officers who can police in an unbiased way, and by hiring a workforce that reflects the community's racial demographics. Communities expect their police officers to carry out their duties with fairness, integrity, diligence, and impartiality. Police agencies must ensure they recruit the best-suited women and men to meet these expectations. In developing a workforce that reflects the diversity of the community served, an agency conveys a sense of fairness and equity to the public; increases the probability that, as a whole, the agency will be able to understand the perspectives of its racial minorities and communicate effectively with them; and increases the likelihood that officers will come to better understand and respect various racial and cultural perspectives through their daily interactions with community members. In this report, we discuss police recruitment and hiring as they relate to the issue of biased policing, providing recommendations for police-community initiatives. Education and Training Education and training are essential components of a comprehensive strategy to reduce racially biased policing and perceptions thereof. They can be used to convey new information, provide and refine critical skills, encourage compliance with policies and rules, facilitate dialogue, and/or convey a commitment to addressing the problem. Programs can target citizens, as well as the police, and should be tailored to the particular needs, concerns and experiences of the local agency and community. A key theme to be conveyed to both academy and inservice practitioners is that respect for human rights is a central and affirmative part of the police mission. Within this context, police can benefit from understanding the dimensions, complexities and subtleties of racially biased policing, as well as the impact of these types of activities on individual citizens, the department and the community. Police should receive specific guidance regarding whether and how race can be used to make decisions and reflect upon not only officer-level decisions, but precinct- or department-level decisions that may manifest racially biased policing. In this report, we discuss these priority topics for police training and successful methods for conveying them. Minority Community Outreach In the absence of strong functional links to community groups and local institutions, the police mission will likely fail. Grave damage is inflicted on police-community relationships when the police become consciously disengaged from the public. An aloof police agency making decisions motivated by its own selfinterest risks alienation that often culminates in violence and disorder. The police hold primary responsibility for community outreach on many levels. The community bears a reciprocal responsibility to respond to opportunities for positive relationships. Policing with the community can function only in an environment of mutual engagement and respect. In the context of the issue we are addressing-racially biased policing- outreach to minority communities is imperative. This report lists necessary competencies for police agencies seeking to develop and maintain outreach to minority communities, and recommends that agencies form police-citizen task forces to identify how they can effectively respond to the issues of biased policing and the perceptions thereof. We also include a list of contemporary and progressive practices for consideration. To build and sustain relationships reflecting mutual trust and respect is the ultimate objective. GOVERNMENT SUPPORT The political system, courts, civilian administrators, and various oversight agencies share responsibility to hold law enforcement -police leaders and individual officers-accountable. While, historically, these accountability mechanisms have functioned unevenly, they remain central to initiating and strengthening any change process. This report focuses on the police, but other parties must be prepared to assume their responsibility. For instance, other government agencies must be prepared to provide support and guidance. Most notably, local, state and federal government must be prepared to provide the financial support police agencies will need to implement the recommendations in this report. Racial distinction is not a problem unique to policing; rather, it is a societal issue for which all government agencies must share responsibility. Many of the policy and behavioral changes recommended in this report may be achieved at negligible cost, but innovative recruitment and selection initiatives, data collection and analysis, in-car video equipment, curriculum development, and training will be added expenses to police budgets. State or local governments that mandate data collection and analysis and other changes must be prepared to offer financial support. CONCLUSION If prejudice, arbitrary decisions, treatment disparity, and disrespect are to be replaced by universal respect and equitable use of police powers, then we must begin a process of bringing all of policing into accord with democratic principles. We must insist that protection of human rights is a fundamental responsibility of police. We must ensure at all costs the primacy of the rule of law, and scrupulously monitor the use of police authority for compliance. We must carefully examine our beliefs regarding the role of the police, and eradicate from the police culture the mentality that leads to the use of bias in dealing with citizens. We must do this everywhere, and all of the time. The research and conclusions in this report are meant to further the process of thoughtful, ethically based revision and reform needed to ensure quality policing to all citizens, regardless of race or cultural background. In a society where race is inherently played out in all aspects of life, racially biased policing presents both a challenge and an opportunity for the police to exercise quiet determination and moral leadership, addressing the problem head-on. About the Rest of the Report While the report reviews the pros and cons of data collection, it recognizes the difficulties with interpreting the data. More importantly the report requires a comprehensive approach. The authors provide an anti-biased policing policy for agencies to adopt and call for multitiered responses. Nearly 50 recommendations are broken down into six areas in which action is needed: 1. accountability and supervision; 2. policies prohibiting biased policing; 3. recruitment and hiring; 4. education and training; 5. community outreach; and 6. data collection and analysis. "We hope that this report will advance the police response and facilitate better police-citizen collaborations that will result in fair and dignified treatment of all citizens," said PERF President Robert K. Olson, Chief of the Minneapolis Police Department. "This report reflects PERF's long-term commitment to this issue." "While we do not profess to have all the answers, we believe that this report will be an important step forward in helping police agencies take on the challenging issue of racially biased policing."

We hope you found this article helpful.

Search for more legal news articles related to:
"Racially Biased Policing - Critical Issues in Racially Biased Law Enforcement"

Bookmark this Page!