Ruling: Washington state felons can vote in prison

[woolfe9999]

That's a very good point. We want to think the DA doesn't have the same 'issues', but it's also a relatively secret, secluded process.

There are various ways minorities get taken afdvantage of. I recall 'insider stories' of car salesman who really treat blacks much worse and overcharge.

Speaking of overcharging, I'd sure hope the same tyoe if taking advantage isn't as systemic for DA's. The capital punishment, sentencing, and other statistics for blacks have been terrible, though.

Well with car salesmen, the bigger problem is the way they treat women actually. Believe it or not, this still goes on. One of these guys started in on my wife one time when we were shopping for a car, telling her she doesn't know what she is talking about and can he please speak to her husband. The poor sod didn't know who he was dealing with. Suffice it to say that he was pretty much a eunuch by the time she was through with him.

Amusing personal anecdotes aside, DA's have immense discretion over criminal defendants. They decide whether to charge the defendant under the most severe statute or some lesser statute, and whether or not to add boatloads of lesser but related charges. For example, two guys are caught selling pot within 100 yards of a school - one gets charged under a special statute for selling drugs within a 100 yards of a school, and get 3 years, and the other is charged with generic trafficking, and gets 3 months. It happens every day and this discretion is, for the most part, totally unreviewable. The DA also, of course, decides whether or not to ask for the death penalty, and determines what sort of plea deals are offered to defendants. Once you have been arrested, your ass and future are largely in the hands of DA. In a sense, they have more power than judge or jury, because they decide what risks you will face in court before you even get there.

When the SCOTUS temporarily threw out the death penalty in Furman v. Georgia, if I recall correctly, it was based on data about racial discrimination in application of the death penalty, and DA charging discretion was one of the data points.

- wolf

 

[halik]

If you mean by profession, it's law. It's why I was able to access the full court opinion from Westlaw.

- wolf

Ah,
makes sense given what you wrote. Social justice ?

 

[jackschmittusa]

While I agree that DAs probably have too much discretionary power, there are many other factors that are commonly overlooked when figuring out if minorities are treated unfairly.

The rich white kid that gets busted gets a lawyer that councils him to show contrition, co-operate, and claim to have learned his lesson. This often leads to better consideration than the minority that displays a sense of bravado, loyalty (perhaps gang related), disdain for the legal system and its officers, etc..

Diverting a large portion of drug enforcement resources to low income areas is often productive because drug deals are often either made on the street, of from drug houses where the traffic patterns are an obvious clue. People in these areas that are opposed to drugs are aware of the signs of drug activity in their neighborhoods and may report the activity. This is opposed to many people in more affluent areas who fail to see it because of their belief that it just couldn't happen where they live. (I'm sure you've all seen the dazed looks on the faces of people talking to reporters when they say "But we always thought this was such a nice community.") Poor suspects are more likely to have poor legal representation who don't want to drag the case out by challenging any technical points of the arrest or evidence. In short, the cops may get more busts per buck in poorer areas, and minorities are often over represented in these areas. Good resource management for the cops, bad stats concerning minority arrests.

 

[woolfe9999]

While I agree that DAs probably have too much discretionary power, there are many other factors that are commonly overlooked when figuring out if minorities are treated unfairly.

The rich white kid that gets busted gets a lawyer that councils him to show contrition, co-operate, and claim to have learned his lesson. This often leads to better consideration than the minority that displays a sense of bravado, loyalty (perhaps gang related), disdain for the legal system and its officers, etc..

Diverting a large portion of drug enforcement resources to low income areas is often productive because drug deals are often either made on the street, of from drug houses where the traffic patterns are an obvious clue. People in these areas that are opposed to drugs are aware of the signs of drug activity in their neighborhoods and may report the activity. This is opposed to many people in more affluent areas who fail to see it because of their belief that it just couldn't happen where they live. (I'm sure you've all seen the dazed looks on the faces of people talking to reporters when they say "But we always thought this was such a nice community.") Poor suspects are more likely to have poor legal representation who don't want to drag the case out by challenging any technical points of the arrest or evidence. In short, the cops may get more busts per buck in poorer areas, and minorities are often over represented in these areas. Good resource management for the cops, bad stats concerning minority arrests.

You have some good points here. I would mention a counter-balancing point on the issue you raise about differing community attitudes toward informing the police - that people in minority neighborhoods are actually less likely to cooperate with police because they don't view them favorably, and they are also more likely to be fearful of reprisals from gangs and other criminal elements in their neighborhoods.

In any event, I haven't seen the raw data to know just how strong the statistical deviations are in this particular study. Obviously, the stronger the deviation, the less likely that counter-weighing factors like these can negate the inference of racial bias in the system. I also don't know if the study takes into account any of these factors. For example, you could look at a sampling of indigent whites and indigent blacks, where both samples are using the public defender.

- wolf

 

[jackschmittusa]

woolfe9999

I offer that you are correct in your assessment of community attitudes about police co-operation - after the fact. Prior to an arrest though, I believe that most in the more affluent neighborhoods tend to not see drugs, believe the weakest of alternate explanations from their own children, or resist calling the cops to protect their own. I've also read many times of someone in a poorer community (often grandparents or other long time residents) who get fed up with what's happening in their neighborhood and call in with complaints.