The Effect of the Differential Treatment of Races Within the Criminal Justice System - Essay Example

Race and Criminal Justice: The Effect of the Differential Treatment of Races Within the Criminal Justice System Race and Criminal Justice: The Effectof the Differential Treatment of Races Within the Criminal Justice System The effects of race within the criminal justice system is an issue which is absolutely critical in regards to the judicial system as a whole, and this is primarily in regards to ethnic minority groups, particularly that of Blacks and Asians. There have been various studies and tests designed and implemented that show statistics that prove there is an incredibly stark contrast in regards to the experience of White and Black and minority ethnic groups in some areas of the criminal justice system; in other words, the statistics show that there is certainly a difference in regards to how different ethnicities are treated in the criminal justice system, and this is obviously an issue that needs to be – and is – of the utmost importance. It is also clear that there is a strong will to move forward on these issues, and that with the processes that are being setup for this very issue, that we will be able to drive improvements in regards to the quality and local management both internally, in terms of employment and externally, in terms of service delivery and other key related issues. It also needs to be known that race is something which is not necessarily defined by skin colour, but rather it can be defined by many other factors, such as eye colour, hair colour, an accent, and so on. Thus the defining of racial disparity can truly be quite insignificant and vague, and by looking carefully at the statistics in this regards, we will be able to see this fact more clearly. In order to truly come to a proper understanding on this issue, and thus be able to recognize and surge through with what is necessary to be done, we must first understand exactly how certain minority groups are disadvantaged in Britain today, as well as what effect this has on their differential treatment within the criminal justice system; by thoroughly examining these and all other key related issues, we will be able to come to a much more knowledgeable and informed understanding on the matter overall, and thus be able to come to some serious and intelligent conclusions in regards to what should be done about this dilemma. There are many issues here that need to be thoroughly examined and discussed, and by doing so there can be a much broader and more understandable viewpoint that can be taken on the subject matter at hand. This is what will be dissertated in the following. One of the first and most major issues that have to be discussed in relation to this is the fact that there is far more than just a single problem that lies here; when speaking of how ethnic minority groups are treated differently within the criminal justice system, this can apply to many different forums. There are various different barriers that are put up against ethnic minority groups, and this includes everything from racial stereotyping and discrimination to disproportionality at every step of the judicial system. For instance, one big part is the fact of how on the front end of the criminal justice process itself, Blacks and Asians in particular are more likely to be racially profiled: “In 2002/03, adults from a Mixed race or Asian background were more likely than those from other ethnic groups to be victims of crime in England and Wales. Almost half (46 per cent) of adults of Mixed race had been the victim of a crime in the previous 12 months. This compared with 30 per cent of Asians. Black adults and those from the ‘Chinese or other’ group experienced similar levels of crime to White people.” (Bowling, B. & Philips, C., 2002). They are more likely to be stopped by the police, have their vehicle and persons searched, and have gang loitering and force used against them; and as well, “Even when people of colour and Whites have similar circumstances, African Americans and Latinos are more likely to be subjected to racial profiling, arrest, prosecutorial discretion, receipt of jail over bail, higher bails for similar charges, worse proposals in plea bargaining, longer sentences, and disproportionate receipt of the death penalty.” (Race, n.d.). There are many different consequences that arise from this unequal opportunity, and that includes the following issues: disproportionate imprisonment; differential post-release consequences; disparate impact on families and children; disparate impact on neighbourhoods; and more. The actual statistics in regards to each of these issues is truly staggering, as for instance “Data from 2001 show that the prevalence of imprisonment was higher for Black males (17%) than for White males (3%) and for Black females (2%) than White females (1%)…furthermore…Based on current rates of first incarceration, an estimated 32% of Black males will enter State or Federal prison during their lifetime, compared to 17% of Black males and 6% of White males.” (Race, n.d.). The issues that are problematic here in regards to how ethnic minority groups are treated differently within the criminal justice system are known by many, and this is crucial in order for a change of any sort to come about. (Atwood, C. et al., 2003). As Charles Austin, Chief of Police of Columbia, S.C. quoted: “The problem is one which builds along the criminal justice continuum of arrest through people rather than the result of the actions of any one single agency. Therefore, in order to combat unwarranted disparity, strategies are required to tackle the problem at each stage of the criminal justice system. And each component of the system requires unique strategies depending on the degree of the disparity and the specific populations affected.” (Wellford, C. F., 2004). In order to truly be able to understand the depth of the problematic issue of how differently ethnic minority groups are treated within the criminal justice system, we must also learn about the term that is used most often in this discussion: racial disparity. Racial disparity in the criminal justice system truly exists when the proportion of a racial or ethnic group within the control of the system is greater than the proportion of such groups in the general population. Racial disparity occurs when there is a noticeable and clear definition between different ethnic groups, in this case primarily between that of Whites and Blacks and Asians; Whites being those that are higher in general population and yet are discriminated against less in the criminal justice system (Atwood, C. et al., 2003), and Blacks and Asians being the two most major ethnic groups of which are seemingly affected the most negatively by this differential treatment. (Barclay, G. & Mhlanga, B., 2000). In regards to the addressing of this racial disparity issue, there are basically four key aspects that are involved, and they are: the problem of racial disparity is one which builds at each stage of the criminal justice continuum of arrest through parole, rather than the result of the actions of any single agency; in order to combat unwarranted disparity, strategies are required to tackle the problem at each stage of the criminal justice system, and to do so in a coordinated way. (Barclay, G. & Mhlanga, B., 2000). Without a systematic approach to the problem, gains in one area may be offset by reversals in another: “In 2002/03, the risk of being the victim of a racially motivated incident was higher for members of minority ethnic groups than for White people. Four per cent of Mixed race people, 3 per cent of Asians, 2 per cent of Black people.” (Fitzgerald, M & Hale, C., 1996). Each decision point and component of the system requires unique strategies depending on the degree of disparity and the specific populations affected by the actions of that component; system-wide change is impossible without informed criminal justice leaders who are willing and able to commit their personal and agency resources to measuring and addressing racial disparity at every stage of the criminal justice system, and as a result, for the system as a whole. Blacks make up a smaller part of the general population and yet a very large part of the prison population: “While Blacks make up for only 39% of the population in the UK, the percentage of Blacks in regards to the prison population is 72%.” (Bowling, B. & Philips, C., 2002). The average population in custody in 2001 was greater than in any previous year. The average prison population in 2001 was 66,300, an increase of 3% on the average for 2000 (64,600). (Home Office, 2003). As well, “Of the 265,100 state prison inmates serving time for drug offenses in 2002, 126,000 (47.53%) were black, 61,700 (23.27%) were Hispanic, and 64,500 (24.33%) were white.” (Hood, R. et al., 2003). Looking more closely at the statistics in regards to race within the criminal justice system and how the different ethnicities are treated, particular that of minority groups, we can see how staggering they really are: for one, African Americans account for about 40 percent of the arrests of violent crimes; this far surpasses their numbers in the general population, and this is the most inquisitive part of it all. As well, in many jurisdictions, in fact in most of them across the world, more Blacks than Whites are released after arrest, and this is in fact particularly true for the less serious offences, such as prostitution, gambling, and even public drunkenness, for instance, and so this obviously raises the question of why, and this is what thus comes to the staggering and absolutely critical issue of racial disparity and unjust treatment of ethnic minority groups within the criminal justice system. (Hood, R. et al., 2003). Plea bargaining is another issue that is related in this regards, and this is because more than 90 percent of all criminal cases never go to trial, however if we look at the statistics between Whites and Blacks for instance, we can see that Blacks make up for a large part of the approximated 10 percent of cases that actually do go to trial. This is suspicious if you take into account the fact that Whites then make up the most major fraction of the 90 percent of criminal cases that never go to trial. (Hood, R. et al., 2003). Police brutality is another one of the most major issues in regards to this matter, and racist violence has both structural and physical components, and as well it operates in both the public and private spheres; all of this is in relation and all of it is incredibly important to take into consideration. (Atwood, C. et al., 2003). Basically structural violence refers to that of the impersonal violence that is inflicted upon people of colour and it involves the indirect violence that is caused by institutional policies and programs that basically produce, maintain, and rationalize certain issues. On the other hand, public racist violence refers to that of the racially motivated physical and structural violence of private citizens and persons. It is known that “People of colour have been the victims of systematic public and spontaneous private violence since the slave trade and the colonial conquest of the Americas…furthermore…Privately initiated racist violence has taken the form of genocidal invasions, rapacious slaving raids, savage slave whipping, and repressive white capping, lynching, race riots, and hate crimes.” (Wellford, 2005). To add onto this, “Over the last 500 years people of colour, especially African Americans, have endured a pattern of State-sanctioned violence, and civil and human rights abuse. To enforce capitalist exploitation and racial oppression the government and its police, courts, prisons, and military have been beaten, framed, murdered and executed private persons, and brutally repressed struggles for freedom, justice, and self-determination.” (Wellford, 2005). Incarceration rates are also incredibly differential when comparing Whites to Blacks and Asians in Britain: “In 1993-4, there was sufficient evidence to support 63% of white arrests but only 56% of black arrests and 52% of Asian arrests. Also, in June 1997, the incarceration rate per 100,000 population in England and Wales was 1,249 for black people, 176 for white people and 150 for Asians.” (Raphael, S. & Sills, M., n.d.). An important gateway for a minority of offenders into the actual criminal process is the ‘stop and search’, and statistics show that “Black people and those of Mixed origin were more likely to be stopped than White people” (Raphael, S. & Sills, M., n.d.), and as well, “not only are Black people in the UK more likely to be stopped than others, but as well, by a percentage of 76% they face a higher risk of multiple stops over the course of a year” (Atwood, C. et al., 2003). Black people are certainly most at risk in the UK for this, as the number of searches of Black suspects per 1,000 population was six times that of White suspects.” (Atwood, C. et al., 2003). In conclusion, we can basically sum up the most major and most relevant statistics, such as: people from ethnic minority groups are more likely to be stopped and searched; more likely to be victims of household theft such as burglary and vehicle theft; much more likely to be victims of racially aggravated offences; much more likely to feel that the criminal justice organizations discriminate against them on racial grounds; more likely to be arrested for notifiable offences; disproportionately represented in the prison population; and furthermore, people from ethnic minority groups are more likely to say they are afraid of crime than their white counterparts; people from ethnic minority groups have a higher risk of victimization; Asian groups have a higher risk of being victims of household crime; Black groups have a higher risk of being victims of personal crime; a person’s socio-economic status influences crime risks more than their ethnicity in itself. We also now know that racial harassment is the most common form of racially motivated incident recorded, and furthermore, the increased incidence is partly due to that of increased reporting and recording methods. (Hood, R. et al., 2003). There are various other conclusions that we can draw from this review, and that includes the following: detection and clear-up rates for specific racially motivated crimes and offences will typically be lower than that of similar types of crime that are not racially motivated, and furthermore, and rather strangely in regards to some persons’ opinions, racially motivated incidents are most likely to occur inside the victim’s home. In order to conclude further, we must realize and understand the existing strategies in order not only to remove these issues from the criminal justice system but as well to avoid any further possible actions such as these; by doing this, we will be making a positive and strategic attempt against the present dilemmas in regards to the differential treatment of ethnic minority groups in the criminal justice system. In order to be able to come to proper and logical solutions for this problem, we need to thoroughly examine all of this information that has been given, as well as all of the rest of the data that is known including the statistics, and from all of this we will be able to come to understanding and intelligent answers for this overall problem. However, once all of this is done, and the proper solutions are come to, then this is really and truly only when the unfair treatment of ethnic minority groups will be able to at least be somewhat dealt with in a fair and just manner. References Atwood, C. et al. (2003). 2001 Home Office Citizenship Survey: People, Families, and Communities. HORS 270. Home Office: London. Barclay, G. & Mhlanga, B. (2000). Ethnic Differences in Decisions on Young Defendants Dealt With by the Crown Prosecution Service. Section 91 Findings, no1. Bowling, B. & Philips, C. (2002). Racism, Crime and Justice. Harlow: Longman. Ch 17: 579-612. Bowling, B. & Philips, C. (2002). Oxford Handbook of Criminology, 3rd Ed. Harlow: Longman. Clancy, A. et al. (2002). Crime, Policing and Justice: The Experience of Ethnic Minorities: Findings From the 2002 British Crime Survey. HORS 223: Home Office: London. Fitzgerald, M & Hale, C. (1996). Ethnic Minorities, Victimization and Racial Harrassment. Research Findings No. 39, Home Office Research and Statistics Dictorate. Home Office. (2003). Statistics on Race and Criminal Justice System: A Home Office Publication Under Section 95 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991. Hood, R. et al. (2003). Ethnic Minorities in the Criminal Courts: Perceptions of Fairness and Equality of Treatment. Retrieved January 16 2007, from http://www.dca.gov.uk/research/2003/2-03es.htm Race. (n.d.). Race Matters. Retrieved January 16 2007, from http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:oNi4S_NvcNAJ:www.nng.org/download/Publication/38/Race_Matters.pdf+race+differential+treatment+within+the+criminal+justice+system&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=7 Raphael, S. & Sills, M. (n.d.). Urban Crime, Race, and the Criminal Justice System in the UK. Retrieved January 16 2007, from http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:ktEXlK9081gJ:socrates.berkeley.edu/~raphael/ACTC30.pdf+race+differential+treatment+within+the+criminal+justice+system&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=11 The Sentencing Project. (2000). Reducing Racial Disparity in the Criminal Justice System. Retrieved January 16 2007, from http://www.sentencingproject.org/Admin/Documents/publications/rd_reducingrdmanual.pdf Wellford, C. F. (2004). Changing Nature of Criminal Justice System Responses and its Professions. Retrieved January 16 2007, from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/reports/98Guides/lblf/panel3c.htm Read More