(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



Putting the "Few Bad Cop Apples" myth to bed - Systemic Police Bias is Real [1]

['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.', 'Backgroundurl Avatar_Large', 'Nickname', 'Joined', 'Created_At', 'Story Count', 'N_Stories', 'Comment Count', 'N_Comments', 'Popular Tags']

Date: 2023-03-09

Maricopa County Sheriff's Office

In March 2009, we opened an investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) pursuant to Section 14141 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI). MCSO refused to cooperate with our investigation, and we filed suit under Title VI to obtain the information we needed, which MCSO agreed to provide in June 2011, settling this suit. After completing our investigation, on December 15, 2011, we announced our findings. We found that MCSO engaged in a pattern of misconduct that violated the Constitution and federal law. Specifically, we found that MCSO engaged in a policy of stopping, detaining, and investigating persons of Hispanic ancestry based on their race, in traffic and during worksite raids; failed to provide language access assistance to Hispanic jail inmates with Limited English Proficiency (LEP); and unlawfully retaliated against individuals who complained about or criticized MCSO’s practices.

City of Miami Police Department

On November 17, 2011, the Civil Rights Division and the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida opened an investigation of the Miami Police Department (MPD) under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Our investigation focused on excessive use of deadly force by firearms. On July 9, 2013, we notified MPD that our investigation showed that MPD had engaged in a pattern or practice of excessive force that violated the Constitution and federal law. On March 10, 2016, the United States and the City of Miami and MPD entered into a Settlement Agreement with the goal of ensuring that police services are provided to all members of the City of Miami in a manner that complies with the Constitution and laws of the United States.

New Orleans Police Department

On May 15, 2010, we opened an investigation of the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) pursuant to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Following a comprehensive investigation, on March 17, 2011, we announced our findings. We found that the NOPD has engaged in patterns of misconduct that violate the Constitution and federal law, including a pattern or practice of excessive force, and of illegal stops, searches, and arrests. We found also a pattern or practice of gender discrimination in the Department's under-enforcement and under-investigation of violence against women. We further found strong indications of discriminatory policing based on racial, ethnic, and LGBT bias, as well as a failure to provide critical police services to language minority communities. On July 24, 2012, we reached a settlement resolving our investigation and asked the Court to make our settlement an order enforceable by the Court.

Mount Vernon Police Department

On December 3, 2021, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Kristen Clarke and U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Damian Williams announced that the Department of Justice opened a civil pattern or practice investigation into the Mount Vernon Police Department, pursuant to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The DOJ investigation will assess whether there is reasonable cause to believe that MVPD engages in a pattern or practice of: (1) discriminatory policing, in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Safe Streets Act, and the Fourteenth Amendment; (2) using excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment; (3) conducting unlawful strip and body cavity searches, in violation of the Fourth Amendment; or (4) mishandling evidence, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The investigation will be conducted by a team of career civil attorneys from the Special Litigation Section of the Civil Rights Division and the Civil Division of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.

Newark Police Department

On May 9, 2011, we and the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey opened an investigation of the Newark Police Division (formerly the Newark Police Department) (NPD) into allegations that NPD engaged in a pattern or practice of unlawful conduct. The investigation focused on allegations of excessive force, unconstitutional stops, searches, arrests, and seizures, and discriminatory policing. On July 22, 2014, the United States announced the results of the investigation, finding that NPD had engaged in a pattern or practice of unconstitutional stops, and that NPD’s law enforcement activities had disproportionately affected black people in Newark. The Department also found a pattern or practice of excessive force, as well as the theft of property by police officers. On April 5, 2016, the United States and the City of Newark jointly filed a proposed consent decree in federal court. On May 5, 2016, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey approved and entered the consent decree.

Phoenix Police Department

In August 2021, the Civil Rights Division opened an investigation of the City of Phoenix and the Phoenix Police Department (PhxPD) under the pattern or practice provision of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. This law prohibits state and local governments from engaging in a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers that deprives individuals of rights protected by the Constitution or federal law. The investigation will assess all types of use of force by PhxPD officers, including deadly force and force used against individuals with behavioral health disabilities. The investigation will also evaluate whether PhxPD engages in retaliatory activity through arresting or using force against individuals engaged in activities protected by the First Amendment. In addition, the investigation will assess whether PhxPD engages in discriminatory policing on the basis of race, ethnicity, or disability; and whether PhxPD violates the rights of individuals experiencing homelessness.

Seattle Police Department

On March 31, 2011, we opened an investigation of the Seattle Police Department (SPD) pursuant to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Following a comprehensive investigation, on December 16, 2011, we announced our findings. We found that SPD has engaged in a pattern or practice of excessive force that violates the Constitution and federal law. Our investigation further raised serious concerns that some SPD policies and practices, particularly those related to pedestrian encounters, could result in discriminatory policing. We negotiated and filed a consent decree to address these concerns on July 27, 2012, and separately entered into a settlement agreement on related issues on that same date.

Springfield Police Department Narcotics Bureau

In April 2018, we opened an investigation of the Springfield Police Department’s Narcotics Bureau, pursuant to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 34 U.S.C. § 12601, that focused on the Narcotics Bureau’s use of force. As set forth in a July 2020 investigative report, the investigation determined that there is reasonable cause to believe that the Narcotics Bureau engages in a pattern or practice of using excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Specifically, the investigation identified evidence that officers punch individuals in the face unnecessarily and resort to unreasonable takedown maneuvers that could reasonably be expected to cause head injuries. The investigation also determined that structural deficiencies within the Department, including ineffective use-of-force reporting policies, insufficient accountability procedures, and inadequate force training, contribute to the Narcotics Bureau’s use of excessive force.

Suffolk County Police Department

On September 1, 2009, SPL and the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York opened a joint investigation of the Suffolk County Police Department (SCPD) into allegations that SCPD engaged in a pattern or practice of unlawful conduct. The investigation focused on allegations that SCPD was engaging in discriminatory policing, that it discouraged Latinos from filing complaints, and that it failed to investigate crimes and hate-crime incidents involving Latinos. On January 13, 2014, the United States and Suffolk County entered into a Settlement Agreement resolving the investigation.

Warren Police Department

In December 2004, the Civil Rights Division opened an investigation of the City of Warren and the Warren Police Department (WPD) under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, focusing on excessive force and improper strip and body cavity searches. We issued a technical assistance letter in March 2006. We continued to monitor WPD’s implementation efforts, ultimately concluding that WPD failed to make meaningful progress in implementing our technical assistance recommendations and that WPD had engaged in a pattern or practice of using excessive force. In January 2012, we filed a complaint and settlement agreement in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio.

Yonkers Police Department

In August 2007, we opened an investigation of the Yonkers Police Department (YPD) pursuant to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. On June 9, 2009, we sent the City a technical assistance letter that identified necessary reforms to YPD practices and policies in the areas of use of force, civilian complaints, investigations, supervisory oversight, and training. After receiving the department’s technical assistance letter, the City and YPD made substantial changes to its policies and procedures. On November 14, 2016, we signed an agreement with the City of Yonkers that implements and further improves those policies and procedures and addresses the department’s remaining concerns.

At some point, we have to admit the reality that this is not just a “few bad apples” here and there. This is a clear repetitive pattern of excessive force and various types of racial and gender bias at play. Over and over again, the systems that are supposed to prevent this bias fail to do so. Over and over again, the systems that are supposed to prevent use of excessive force fail to do so.

Over and over again, all the allegedly “Good cops” who are supposed to be protecting the public — Fail. To. Do. So.

And there are reasons why which we need to admit and confront. It’s not just about the individuals, it’s part of the way the system is designed to function.

Listen to this admission by former Baltimore Officer Michael A. Wood who is one of few of the “good ones” who finally came out and say the truth.

x x YouTube Video “Those are them. You don’t care what you do to them. They’re the enemy.” “You have to get stats. You have to get arrests. You can’t arrest the judge’s son. So I would go to Park Heights, into the black neighborhood. And I would get my arrests there so I would make my supervisor happy because we all know I wasn’t going to arrest anyone in Mt. Washington.”

This is the dirty truth. Women, the disabled, the handicapped, Black and Brown people are being targeted — because they’re more likely to be poor or indigent. They’re less likely to be able to afford a good lawyer who can defend them and challenge the justification for the stop, or the arrest, or the beating or their death.

If we reformed the system so that every citizen — regardless of circumstance or income — was guaranteed a strong defense. If the criminal defendant system was as robust and fulsome as prosecutors. If they were required to have an equal number of lawyers, equal pay, their own independent investigators with equal access to all the evidence, police wouldn’t go around looking for easy arrests the way that Wood admits he was doing.

The way that the system required that he acted.

If we change the system, change the incentives of police from racking up arrests to actually improving the community and keeping the residents safe. If we change the justice system from being a human prisoner mill to actually protecting and ensuring the constitutional rights of citizens from abuse by the government — we could very well make this country a step or two closer to what it has always claimed it was…

the Home of the Free.

But we can’t do any of that until we stop focusing on the “bad apple” and start looking at the entire bushel.

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/3/9/2157142/-Putting-the-Few-Bad-Cop-Apples-myth-to-bed-Systemic-Police-Bias-is-Real

Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/

You are viewing proxied material from magical.fish. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.