Pubdate: Fri, 24 Oct 2008
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Copyright: 2008 Los Angeles Times
Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/bc7El3Yo
Website: http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/248
Referenced: The ACLU Report http://www.aclu-sc.org/lapdracialprofiling
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/Los+Angeles+Police+Department
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/Racial+Profiling

WHICH IS THE REAL LAPD?

An ACLU Report About LAPD Racial Profiling Raises More Questions Than Answers.

Given the Los Angeles Police Department's historically troubled 
relationship with black and brown communities, it's tempting to 
brandish a recent report about the disparity between how frequently 
minorities are stopped and arrested compared with whites and use it 
as proof of ongoing discrimination. Tempting, but wrong. The data for 
the report, analyzed by a Yale economist at the request of the 
American Civil Liberties Union, certainly provoke questions about 
policing in minority neighborhoods, but they don't convict the 
department of widespread racial profiling.

The study found that LAPD officers are more likely to stop, frisk and 
arrest minorities than they are whites. It also found that officers 
were less likely to find weapons or drugs on blacks or Latinos during 
these searches, implying that the searches were unfounded. That 
sounds damning, and maybe it is. But an analysis of the same data 
conducted by a Times staff member put the information in a broader 
context. Yes, officers stop minorities more often, but the number of 
searches closely correlates with the number of crimes committed in a 
given police reporting district -- an area about the size of a census 
tract. Without more information, it's impossible to determine whether 
officers are stopping people solely because of race, or -- as blacks 
and Latinos are more likely to live in districts with higher crime 
rates -- because officers are working higher numbers of cases.

Chief William J. Bratton is adamant that the report is flawed; the 
4-year-old data used do not provide an up-to-date snapshot of the 
LAPD and its reforms, he says. That the department makes an effort to 
discourage disparate treatment is clear. Recruits are questioned 
about their racial attitudes during mandatory polygraph tests; 
officers are trained in racial sensitivity and monitored by cameras 
mounted in patrol cars. Perhaps most important, today's LAPD is far 
more diverse than it was just a decade ago. As a result, its 
relations withminority communities have undeniably improved.

That being said, the LAPD does have a history of profiling, but it is 
in statistical denial of that fact. Not one of the 320 profiling 
complaints filed last year was validated by the department, nor were 
any of those filed in the five previous years. Blacks and Latinos are 
stopped and searched more frequently than whites, and few would deny 
the probability that some of those stops are unwarranted. After all, 
this is a relationship on the mend, not one that has fully healed.

The real problem seems to be that for all its efforts, the LAPD does 
not yet know how to detect and quantify disparate treatment. Ian 
Ayres, the professor who prepared the ACLU report, says he can help, 
and the department should take him up on his offer. The truth surely 
lies somewhere between the spotless image claimed by the department 
and the sullied one implied by the report. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake