Technology and Disparate Treatment

By: Carly Wasserman

Technology can make a police officer’s job much easier, but at what cost? According to a New York Times article, police officers in New York received special smartphones with the ability to access various arrest files, photos, motor vehicle databases, and even lists of nearby surveillance cameras as part of a pilot program begun quietly last summer. The program aims to increase law enforcement’s effectiveness by providing access to records once controlled by dispatchers or only available across various databases accessible via patrol car computers. With this information, police officers can quickly assess suspect situations and make informed decisions.

The pilot program provides officers with a wealth of information. For instance, officers involved in domestic dispute cases can see how many times police responded to complaints from the residence and the details of each visit. They can also check for any domestic violence reports, orders of protection, and gun registrations. Prior to the introduction of the program, officers often relied on dispatchers for information. When they radioed in names, they were often given minimum information, such as only being told if the individual had a warrant. Now, with smartphone technology, officers can quickly find out about all of the various offenses. Even if officers possessed access to patrol car computers, they had to search through numerous databases and often relied on unreliable internet connections. Smartphone technology bridges the gap that once existed between officers and personal records.

Advocates assert that the program aids law enforcement efforts, thus increasing public safety. However, various organizations express reservations. For instance, representatives from the New York Civil Liberties Union wonder if the smartphone technology will just become another tool to harass the people already disproportionately targeted by police. Various studies confirm a racial bias in law enforcement. A study by David Harris finds evidence that African Americans disproportionately face pretextual traffic stops by police, which can cause deep psychological and emotional scars, in addition to distorting their views of the legal system and social world. Furthermore, Gau and Brunson find citizens’ perceptions of procedural justice, hindered by racial profiling, influence their beliefs about police legitimacy, which plays a major role in determining if people will follow laws and cooperate with police. As such, we should be concerned with this new smartphone technology because it can be used to overpolice people already constantly watched and judged by the police, reinforcing racial and ethnic disparities that can harm the individuals victimized and even hinder policing efforts by eroding a sense of procedural justice and police legitimacy amongst the community necessary for police officers to effectively do their jobs. When police gain access to new technology, the benefits and concerns must be considered, because technological advances can have disparate impacts on various groups.

Racial Profiling in Schools

By: Tiffani Toy

According to a New York Times article, there is a rise in the use of school resource officers in response to the Newton shooting. However, this article states there is unclear evidence that police officers are effective at deterring crime and removing dangerous threats.Yet, school resource officers arrest or issue tickets to minors for nonviolent behavior; this pushes more children into the criminal system. One example made by the deputy director of Texas Appleseed, a legal advocacy center in Austin, is that school resource officers in Texas write more than 100,000 misdemeanor tickets each year. This article is significant because it confirms the reading by Kupchik that the use of school resource officers has a detrimental effect on the students, especially on those of minority and low-income.

This article also explains that in February, Texas Appleseed filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (the press release can be found here). According to this complaint, school resource officers from Bryan Independent School District issue criminal misdemeanor tickets at a higher rate to African American students; they receive citations at four times the rate of white students. This complaint demonstrates that the use of school resource officers brings racial profiling into the schools and leads to more oppression of minority and low income population. As mentioned in the reading by Kupchik, school resource officers are trained as police officers and not as mentors to students. Thus, school resource officers are more likely to use what Harris explains as rational discrimination to determine which students are most likely to cause trouble. This rational discrimination basically claims that “targeting blacks is the rational, sound policy choice” (294 Harris). Racial profiling of young children creates more oppression at an earlier stage of life for these students.

Placing officers in schools may seem like a reasonable response to school shootings but has the detrimental effect of racial profiling on young students. So, in a recent period of pure chaos and violence, how safe is considered “too” safe?

Spyware and Surveillance

By: Eric Walbridge   

        

There have been several advances in criminal monitoring that are put in to use by a country’s federal government. Due to the advancement of technology and the use of the internet, new developments are emerging as a way of monitoring and tracking criminals. In a recent article published by the New York Times, the use of Internet spyware by federal governments has overreached the initial purpose of the monitoring technology. A British technology company called Gamma Group was documented selling their spyware called FinSpy to at least twenty-five different federal governments around the world.  The Gamma Group was quoted in the article stating that their software is “solely for criminal investigations”. The problem with this is that governments that have a long history of human rights violations, such as Ethiopia and Serbia, are utilizing this spyware. Researchers at the University of Toronto’s school of Global Affairs and the University of California Berkeley have found that FinSpy can literally “grab images off your computer, record Skype chats, and turn on cameras and microphones”. This technology is being used by government officials to monitor political behavior rather than criminal behavior. As seen in Ethiopia, FinSpy is disguised as an email and sent to suspected anti-government citizens. Once the email is opened, the spyware is able to monitor all activity on the person’s computer.

            

The original design for this spyware was not to monitor citizen’s behavior, but rather to track criminals and potential crimes. But government officials seem to be extending this technology to gain a political advantage and also to invade the privacy of its citizens. This technology is extremely difficult to detect and nearly impossible to shut down completely. Researchers urge citizens of these counties to be mindful of the growing use of these types of spyware technologies and to speak out against the violations of privacy that are being implemented by their federal government. The use of FinSpy could definitely be used to prevent crime and investigate criminal behavior, but at the expense of the privacy of citizens. The growing use of technology in crime prevention can be a cover for a wide variety of uses that extend far beyond its original design. It is up to the citizens of these countries, included our own United States, to speak out against these egregious privacy violations. 

First Impressions

By: Kaya Vyas

Growing up in a relatively normal Orange County suburb my interaction with the police consisted of field trips to the stations, the D.A.R.E program and waving hello to Officer Wong who sat in his police car drinking coffee and eating donuts outside the elementary school. Stereotypes aside, I always perceived the police as pillars of the community who protected law-abiding citizens from criminals. Following the law and trusting law enforcement was not a conscious decision, but rather a social normative. I never thought to challenge this notion until coming to Berkeley, which is not at all surprising, and took my first Legal Studies course. I was introduced to ideas such as race wars, police brutality, raced-space, and discriminatory policing. Through this course we have discussed at length different policing styles and how they strive to effectively maintain power with legitimate authority.

In the reading, the negative perception of the police was said to have led to mistrust and a loss of credibility. The Oakland Police Department in particular has an extremely negative perception in the community due to issues of race, lack of communication and understanding and the perception of being brutal. While not from this area, in my four years I have met and heard many stories that aligned with this characterization. Working for the ACLU-NC furthered my knowledge as to why the OPD had such a negative image. In relation to our recent discussion on urban youth and juvenile rights I wondered if negative police perception proliferated to the younger generations. My parents explicitly told me that police officers were good and to call 911 if there was an emergency. Hearing in class that communities found the police to be more trouble than help was shocking. The below table and link show what 800 Oakland high school students thought of the police.

The ethnicities with the both the highest representation in the survey also had two of the highest negative perceptions of the Oakland Police. Unsurprisingly these are two of the most across the board marginalized yet most represented minority groups in the CA prison system today, African-Americans and Latinos. With further research I found this study done in 2009 in the Western Criminology Review. The article speaks at length about the importance of studying youth, race and police perception in order to create a better system of policing. Much like a child’s first introduction to learning or a new skill, this initial interaction shapes future perception. “Abusive incidents involving police officers and young people are grossly under-reported (Adams 1996). In interviews with mostly Latino and African American youths living in poor neighborhoods in Hartford, Connecticut, Borrero (2001) recorded hundreds of allegations of police misconduct against juveniles, including physical abuse, verbal harassment, threats, and violent attacks. Not surprisingly, the victims of excessive police force, who are disproportionately young minority males, have the most negative perceptions of the police (e.g., Ben-Ali 1992; Flanagan and Vaughn 1996).”

            

Perhaps a viable solution to creating better police relations and rid the perception in certain communities that law enforcement is innately racist and brutal is to start with the youth. I recognize how this may be entirely idealistic, but any great change begins with a certain amount of idealism. What was your first exposure to law enforcement and did that shape your adult perception of the police? What solutions do you propose to abetting a more positive image of the police in areas where they are thought of so negatively?

Choose Your Course of Action Wisely

By: Salena Tiet

            

In class recently, we have discussed how racial profiling is used within law enforcement agencies. Although public law enforcement officers cannot legally rely on race or ethnicity as a major factor to stop, question, or arrest an individual, statistics show that aggressive stop rates in cities such as New York are still disproportionately centered on African American and Latino young men. In theory, many agree racialized policing is unconstitutional and unfair to those being overpoliced, yet these practices still occur.

            

In large part, these practices are induced by the market forces, fear, politics, and bureaucratic forces Professor Musheno discussed in class. For example, politicians exploit fear of crime and drugs to generate support for practices, such as pretextual traffic stops and stop and frisk, which constitute institutionalized racism. In Whren v. US, the Supreme Court held that an officer can execute a stop as long as he or she has reasonable cause to stop the car because of a traffic violation. However, nothing prevents the police officer from using traffic stops as a mere pretext to obtain other evidence without probable cause. Amidst all societal preconceptions and stereotypes such as the welfare queen, foreign terrorist, and illegal immigrant, minority groups inevitably fear disproportionate policing and marginalization.

            

Consider this example. On Monday, April 15^th, two bombs, planted near the finish line of the Boston Marathon, exploded, killing three bystanders and injuring one hundred and seventy six other runners and spectators according to Fox News. USA Today reports that President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel immediately labeled this attack terrorism. Many anti-Muslim social media posts surfaced holding Muslims responsible for the bombing. A New York Post article even reported that the police detained a Saudi national, who appeared at a hospital after the bombing, and searched his apartment. Failing to find any evidence, the police released him. The article has since been pulled off the internet. Such tragic and highly publicized events unavoidably create hysteria and panic. There is immense pressure on law enforcement agencies to identify and apprehend the culprits responsible for such heinous crimes. However, public law enforcement officials cannot rely on global assumptions that a particular race is more likely to commit a crime. They must only use particularized information to narrow down a field of suspects and target investigations to uphold their legitimacy. I personally find racialized policing extremely interesting and would like to hear other opinions and thoughts regarding these practices. Does anyone particularly agree or disagree with these racialized justifications?

Apple’s Siri and Privacy

By: Michael Theofanopoulos

In the world we live in today technology has helped form our society by impacting and changing the way each individual goes about their daily life.  It is nearly impossible to walk down the street and not see someone on their cell phone or any other portable device.  What many overlook is that new technology can invade the privacy of its users.  Apple has become a major brand in the technological world by developing new and innovated features for its users.  As many know already one of Apples most hyped feature is an intelligent personal assistant and knowledge navigator, Siri.  The feature works great for those who need information quick.  However, the question many forget to ask is, what happens to the information that is shared with Siri? 

According to a CNN article, “All of those questions, messages, and stern commands that people have been whispering to Siri are stored on Apple servers for up to two years.” The question seems to be, what is considered private anymore?  Even something as the Siri feature that believed to be secure and trusted turned out not to be.  Most people are aware that the web may be monitored but most don’t realize that the personal information they are telling Siri to store into their phone is kept and saved.  As the CNN article states, “Transcripts of what you say to Siri could reveal sensitive things about you, your family, or business."  It’s quit a scary thing to think that this private information such as your family members birthdays is forwarded to the Apple data farm and kept for at least two years.  Information that no one else needs to know can virtually be accessed at any point within those years.

Nicole Ozer says she’d like to see Apple make a better effort in letting their customers know that this information is being stored before they buy an Apple product.  But is it really a surprise that Apple didn’t just come out and say they store the data?  There are so many things people do everyday that gets saved and surveilled without anyone knowing that this shouldn’t be a major shock.  However, I don’t think that it makes Apple right for withholding this info because people need to be more aware that what they think is private may not be.  Are we reaching a point in time were privacy is truly being invaded? Or then, what is considered breaking the privacy barrier?

Procedural Justice

By: Christine Sun

For the general public, allegations of police departmental corruption and racism compel us to assess the degree to which we view our law enforcement as legitimate in wielding the power assigned to law enforcement occupations. In a recent New York Times article, a long-time veteran officer of the New York Police Department was arrested for taking part in robberies of drug dealers while in uniform and for supplying his crew “with police uniforms, paraphernalia and police vehicles”. He was also charged with conspiracy to distribute drugs, commit robbery, and for the unlawful use of a firearm.

            

While the main focus in our class recently has centered on the effects of racial profiling in deconstructing police legitimacy in the eyes of the public, other violations of procedural justice and the lack of transparency within police departments lend to the kind of corruption evidenced in this article. When those who are supposed to safeguard the law ironically make transgressions of those laws, people begin viewing the police as less and less legitimate. The decrease in trust of law enforcement leads to less likely cooperation on the part of the public, and they subsequently are less likely to internalize the law as a moral obligation.  The offending officer, Jose Tejada, engaged in blatant misuse of police power to the point of using his status to demand access to the home of an innocent family of three, hold them at gunpoint, and search their home for the very drugs he planned on unlawfully distributing. What are these innocent civilians to do? Call the police when the police are the very offenders they seek to report? 

Gau and Brunson’s research into the citizens’ perceptions of procedural justice and the effects they may have on their belief of police legitimacy can thus be applied to this episode of police corruption. Episodes of racism as evidenced by tactics that implement and perpetuate racial profiling are not the only public harassment that can have negative implications for police legitimacy.

           

The steps taken in the “ongoing Internal Affairs Bureau investigation” that charged officer Tejada with the crimes discussed above demonstrate that police transgressions of the law will not be overlooked. This may go far in compensating for the legitimacy lost in officer Tejada’s actions. However, it does not change the fact that police can and do commit the very crimes they are supposed to stop, which furthers the seed of mistrust and doubt that is already growing in the heart of the public after delegitimizing affairs such as Rodney King and other incidences of police racism and corruption. When procedural justice is not carried out in a fair and transparent way, the negative implications it has on police legitimacy are consequential and arguably irreversible.