Bias in the judical system

Mar 2018
266
UK
#11
(3) doesn't prove a racist outcome if you explore the details.

snip
And all of that counts as other variables that you have to be careful to take into account in your statistical analysis. Location, the quality of lawyer, etc.. all falls under what I called point (2).

But you could look at the statistics about what happens to different people in the same court with the same type of lawyer. I don't remember seeing that data in particular, but I would be surprised if it hasn't been done. Sociologists are better than most people expect at doing their statistics well.
 
Jul 2016
7,353
USA
#12
The police, the district attornies, and the courts are government agencies that depend on support from voters and tax payers and are therefore susceptible to political pressures. Those segments of society that vote more often and pay higher taxes tend to get better service from government. Those segments of society that don't pay taxes (because they're poor) and who vote less often or not at all tend to get less government service. When whites have irrational fears of blacks committing crimes, there tends to be political pressure on the police to arrest lots of blacks.

Police and district attornies do not have the resources to investigate and prosecute all crimes equally. They tend to pursue the most bang for the buck. Non-violent drug offenses come with disprotionately long prison sentences which is how the police measure bang. Drug offenses therefore tend to draw more police attention than the social harm might seem to warrant. If the poor use more drugs because their miserable lives demand more escapist behavior, and if the poor won't fight back at election time nor can they withhold their tax dollars, then the police will arrest lots of poor people on drug offenses. Meanwhile, wealthy and middle class whites are also using drugs, but because there is little social harm the police don't bother to investigate drug use in white neighborhoods. If the police did work middle class and wealthy neighborhoods with the same vigor as they work poor neighborhoods, those white voters and tax payers would stop supporting the police.
Let's be real. Nobody is going to prison for many years for a dime bag of weed, or even an eight ball of coke, etc. Getting caught with amounts deemed for personal use is, at most in the last 20-30 years, usually only a misdemeanor charge and probation. Non-violent drug crimes that result in real time include street level dealers and their crew, all the way up to getting caught operating a cook house for meth, a heroin distribution center (where they cut up hundreds of kilos of product at a time, turning a kilo of raw into three kilos of street product), even moving a tractor trailer of stacked up bales of marijuana.

Most of the time police go after users its because are either blatantly using in public (smoking weed right in front of a cop then smugly blowing it in their face), or else they are caught for something else (like a DUI and crash), and the drug charge is just one of many other charges laid on them at one time. When its only small amounts of drugs its usually the result of stings by police doing of hand-to-hand sales under surveillance in order to nab a small fry user (or dealer), who will generally provide the investigators with info about local drug networks, and usually will roll on everyone they know too, to the point that after a few more quick busts they end up napping a big fish player, thereby strangling off local drug sales, causing a momentarily drop in supply and a massive rise in profit, which the politicians use as a sound byte for their ability to tackle drug related crime.

A buddy of mine was one of the top narcotics detectives in a high crime state who worked narco for nearly 10 years, and because he had a boyish looking face and was quite jolly and entertaining while drinking, he had the ability to meet random people at bars and inside a week take down major dealers. He'd get the first couple arrests doing hand to hand sales, on camera, and on the wire. They'd bring them in for questioning and my buddy would make one quick offer, to drop most charges and plea down for the remaining as long as they fully cooperated. If the person agreed, he'd exploit that individual to use the information gained in further questioning to make his next series of arrests. If the person decided to be "stand up," my buddy told them he respected their courage but that he didn't care, he had ten other people willing to sell out their mothers willing to cut a deal, and before he could make it out the door of the interrogation room, 9 out of 10 inside would beg him to return in exchange for the deal. Those few that didn't got maxed out by the prosecutors, who were working arm in arm with the detectives in the first place.

Doing this sort of policing is the only real way to tackle drug related crime, there are simply no other ways that allow for police to make any headway without a 1984 level of policing that would cost a fortune. It also is extremely effective at filling up jails and prisons will small time individuals who aren't willing to talk or whom still caught some time despite their cooperation, and overwhelming the judicial system to the point there are more pending hearings and trials then there are courts, judges, and lawyers to work them, and jails and prisons to hold them, creating a catch and release problem.

Imagine creating a method of fishing so effective you run out of space in your freezer to store them. That is essentially why the US has a massive population of incarcerations. Because they have enough policing techniques, coupled with the right laws, to rake in a ton of criminals, mostly low level and non-violent (though still real criminals). The problem is despite this efficiency, they are still not solving the problems about crime, nor drugs, nor anything else. So they are filling up prisons for essentially no reason.

Legalize drugs, its the only short term solution. But long term they'll ban them again because any culture where powerful drugs are plentiful and available is going to be a disgusting culture, which will infuriate voters and tax payers, who will demand the streets be cleaned up, with restarts the endless cycles of human criminology and stupidity.
 
Jul 2016
7,353
USA
#13
And all of that counts as other variables that you have to be careful to take into account in your statistical analysis. Location, the quality of lawyer, etc.. all falls under what I called point (2).

"But I dont know anyone who actually disputes that young black men get longer convictions than young white girls for carrying pot even when all other factors are taken into account (at least, as well as they can be taken into account). "

This is you writing something about your conclusions, having already drawn them, without remotely considering even a small number of variables. You didn't account for all other factors, there are too many to even possibly consider, you could write an entire book about a single individual, their experiences in life, their upbringing, the crime, the trial, and the outcome, and not even really touch the surface, let alone attempting to compare them to every one similar (but not identical) crime.

But you could look at the statistics about what happens to different people in the same court with the same type of lawyer. I don't remember seeing that data in particular, but I would be surprised if it hasn't been done. Sociologists are better than most people expect at doing their statistics well.
No, sociologists aren't better at gathering data, let alone analyzing it. They are considered a soft science for a reason, because personal ideology and bias are the predominate method they use to create and support their hypothesis.

Hypothesis: The US judicial system is racist (or not racist)

Study spends years collecting hundreds of thousands pieces of analytical data. They process that data by cherry picking the parts they like, discarding the parts they don't. They analyze it by looking for data that proves their point. Then they write a paper showcasing their conclusion and showing only the evidence that proves their theory, while explaining away data that doesn't work in their favor by a number of methods. They get that published in a trade journal.

After being published they notify various media organizations, lobbying groups, etc, that will support their conclusion and give them a small 1-2 page primer, with some key quotes, to use to cook up articles that make the news for a few weeks. That further disseminates their paper, gaining them popularity and making their conclusion seem like "settled science" that individuals on social media will use to try to win stupid debates. Meanwhile, some other sociologist on the other side of the debate sees that one and then decides to create their own study to refute it. And thus the cycle continues, everyone gets paid big bucks (often with govt approved grant money), and the overall problem isn't addressed in the slightest.
 
Last edited:
Jul 2016
7,353
USA
#14
Which judicial system are we talking about ?

In Europe / the US in general, it is not the system as a whole that is biased... However

1- Individuals including judges, have their biases and it will affect the particular trial where such individuals have influence

2 - In some countries government or certain organizations can influence the outcome of certain trials thus biases that they may have will be reflected in the results
Clearly they always are referring to the US, which does have a crime problem. But it doesn't refer to western or central Europe, because those are utopias. Who don't have crime. Well, they have crime, but its really low and controllable, because of social programs and methods the old fashioned reactionary Americans don't use because they aren't enlightened. Oh wait, crime rates are sky rocketing lately, but let's not talk about that. But wait, the crime rates seem to be related to fairly recent immigration decisions...HEY, stop that! I just said we're not allowed to talk about that! What are you racist! Stop being a far right nazi, we're not going to talk about rising crime rates in western and central Europe. They aren't happening, and if they do happen, its because of racism and ethnocentrism and failure to properly integrate outsiders, because racism, white nationalism, and because of lack of understanding about proper social justice concerns.

Now, away with you and don't post again until you've been properly re-educated, or else you're a nazi white nationalist!
 
Mar 2018
266
UK
#15
Aggienation, it's strange of you to accuse others of having already made up their minds, something that you are clearly entirely guilty of yourself.

It's a universal truth that people use biases in their decision. Going to court before the judge has had lunch compared to after has a huge impact on your chances of getting parole. And that's been shown with randomised control groups so it's just about as proved as anything can be when dealing with complex people. If lunch can affect someone's biases, what makes you so sure that race isn't one of them?

There is plenty of evidence (though imperfect) that the justice system has a racist bias some of the time. There's only one reasonable conclusion to draw. Where's you evidence that it has absolutely 0 racial bias all the time? I really don't see why you are so defensive about suggesting that something in the US isn't perfect...

But you're visibly not interested in listening, you seem to care more about expressing your anger. You don't need me to do that, so I'm out of here.
 
Jul 2016
7,353
USA
#16
Aggienation, it's strange of you to accuse others of having already made up their minds, something that you are clearly entirely guilty of yourself.

It's a universal truth that people use biases in their decision. Going to court before the judge has had lunch compared to after has a huge impact on your chances of getting parole. And that's been shown with randomised control groups so it's just about as proved as anything can be when dealing with complex people. If lunch can affect someone's biases, what makes you so sure that race isn't one of them?

There is plenty of evidence (though imperfect) that the justice system has a racist bias some of the time. There's only one reasonable conclusion to draw. Where's you evidence that it has absolutely 0 racial bias all the time? I really don't see why you are so defensive about suggesting that something in the US isn't perfect...
I'm defensive because I'm tired of virgins patronizingly lecturing me about how to please a women (an obvious metaphor). Naive and uneducated individuals who lecture on things they don't know. Often simply to promote a preexisting ideology or bias. I don't really care what the subject is, be it bias in the US criminal judgement system or the perfect way to make an omelette, I'm not a fan of that mentality and I'll post my opinion the same as someone else can post their own. If the shoe fits, wear it.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2010
3,961
Atlanta, Georgia USA
#17
There are clearly a lot of different levels bias can be ocuring here.

1) Do people of a certain [race/sex/age/etc...] get [stopped more/convicted more/harsher convictions] than others?
2) Is (1) be explained by people of that [race/sex/age/etc...] behaving differently than others
3) Is (1) explained by the judicial system treating someone of that [race/sex/age/etc...] differently than someone else when all other factors are equal?
4) If the answer to (3) is yes, is this done deliberately? By either the judge himself, or by the way the judicial system is designed or operated.


These are generally difficult questions. Simple statistics won't give you an answer, but you can do multivariable analysis to get close to an experiment with a control trial. The consensus by the community that has done actual research on this (ie, not SJW on the internet) is that the answer to the questions are:
(1) Yes, definitely and obviously
(2) Yes, different [race/sex/age/etc...] behave differently and this partially explains (1)
(3) Yes, this also happens, with the details varying lots from place to place. But I dont know anyone who actually disputes that young black men get longer convictions than young white girls for carrying pot even when all other factors are taken into account (at least, as well as they can be taken into account). If you have a scientific paper that disagrees with that, please share it, I'm curious.
4) Very rarely is it consciously deliberate by a judge. It's more of a cognitive bias where someone's [race/sex/age/etc...] is used to make a judgement. It's hard to see how "the system" is constructed to do this however, or even what "the system" means other than some amorphous thing to be angry at.


So it isn't simply black and white. You could arguably level the "racism" accusation at any of those 4 levels (ie, blacks commit more crime because racism pushes them into it), but that is some entirely murky and unhelpful use of the word. I would argue that (1) and (2) are not racist, more facts about how people behave. However (3) is a racist outcome based on a subconscious racist way of thinking in (4). I struggle to see why the justice system would not be better in every way if this wasn't the case, although it does seem like a very difficult and slow thing to fit. Unconscious biases are hard to not take into account, because they save so much mental effort and are not always completely false.

But fixing these biases seems important even (1) is 99% due to (2) and only 1% due to (3).
Good analysis. I agree with this.

In my view (as an older, white middle class lawyer who has lived in the urban south for decades), it is impossible not to see that the "criminal justice system"--including what are offenses and how they are detected, prosecuted and punished--does not have an anti-Black racial bias.

"A street kid gets arrested, gonna do some time
He got out three years from now just to commit more crime
A businessman is caught with 24 kilos
He's out on bail and out of jail
And that's the way it goes"

White Lines Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five

It is also impossible not to see that young African-American males commit disproportionately more crimes of whatever variety than other demographic groups. Not just drug crimes, but all crimes. The sad fact is that the victims of these crimes are disproportionately young African-American males and females.
 
Jul 2016
7,353
USA
#18
Good analysis. I agree with this.

In my view (as an older, white middle class lawyer who has lived in the urban south for decades), it is impossible not to see that the "criminal justice system"--including what are offenses and how they are detected, prosecuted and punished--does not have an anti-Black racial bias.

"A street kid gets arrested, gonna do some time
He got out three years from now just to commit more crime
A businessman is caught with 24 kilos
He's out on bail and out of jail
And that's the way it goes"

White Lines Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five
I have family who ran with the mafia in NYC, made a living as career criminal, never spent a day in jail, let alone prison. Why? Simple. They bought off the police, bought off the judicial system. Hell, the head of the FBI for decades refused to even acknowledge that there was a mafia, and that was while he was friends with mafia family bosses who fed him leads on fixed horse races, as Hoover was a degenerate gambler.

NYPD was a cess pool of crime, corruption, incompetence, biases against basically every race, but certainly against blacks. A lot has gotten cleaned up since then, but not everything unfortunately, as we're talking about people and not angels.

It is also impossible not to see that young African-American males commit disproportionately more crimes of whatever variety than other demographic groups. Not just drug crimes, but all crimes. The sad fact is that the victims of these crimes are disproportionately young African-American males and females.
This is a major, gigantic part of the crime problem that few are willing to even discuss, let alone act upon. Kudos for bringing it up, many would go after you for it, stating that even bringing up that statistical analysis is evidence of racism.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2013
790
Charlottengrad
#19
Clearly they always are referring to the US, which does have a crime problem. But it doesn't refer to western or central Europe, because those are utopias. Who don't have crime. Well, they have crime, but its really low and controllable, because of social programs and methods the old fashioned reactionary Americans don't use because they aren't enlightened. Oh wait, crime rates are sky rocketing lately, but let's not talk about that. But wait, the crime rates seem to be related to fairly recent immigration decisions...HEY, stop that! I just said we're not allowed to talk about that! What are you racist! Stop being a far right nazi, we're not going to talk about rising crime rates in western and central Europe. They aren't happening, and if they do happen, its because of racism and ethnocentrism and failure to properly integrate outsiders, because racism, white nationalism, and because of lack of understanding about proper social justice concerns.

Now, away with you and don't post again until you've been properly re-educated, or else you're a nazi white nationalist!
Here are the registered crimes in Germany since 1990 (source: https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/197/umfrage/straftaten-in-deutschland-seit-1997/). Lowest in 1990 with 4.8 million, highest in 1993 with 6.8 million (result of a) reunification and b) influx of Eastern Europeans and Germans from former Soviet areas and c) the breakup of Yugoslavia all leading to a considerable increase of population. Increase of crime rates are roughly proportional to the increase of population, so in the expected amount.), for 2017 the number is 5.8 million. We had an increase in 2015 and 2016. Due to immigration (also the majority of those offenses were illegally trespassing the border which was legalised once those migrants went through the asylum process; the rest of the increase is in the expected range for a population increase of that size), and yes that is widely and fiercely debated - in opposite to your statement.

"Funny" enough, here is a statistic to far right extremist crimes in Germany from 2007-2017: https://de.statista.com/statistik/d...smus-und-fremdenfeindlichkeit-in-deutschland/
So, it seems immigration turns the hosts into criminals.


I'm defensive because I'm tired of virgins patronizingly lecturing me about how to please a women (an obvious metaphor). Naive and uneducated individuals who lecture on things they don't know. Often simply to promote a preexisting ideology or bias. I don't really care what the subject is, be it bias in the US criminal judgement system or the perfect way to make an omelette, I'm not a fan of that mentality and I'll post my opinion the same as someone else can post their own. If the shoe fits, wear it.
You suggested to open this thread to debate the topic in the other thread despite being "tired of virgins patronizingly lecturing" you. Interesting. You accuse others of being ideologists and not open minded but behave exactly the same way - no actually worse because you insult the people who disagree with you. The conservatives in the US have a name for these kind of people I think, they call them "snowflakes".

I thought we gonna have a debate based on mutual respect where maybe I can learn something and understand a few things better (which I actually did thanks to Chlodio, Olleus and David Vagamundo - thank you). Pity you are not interested in that.
 
Apr 2015
226
Canada
#20
Good analysis. I agree with this.

In my view (as an older, white middle class lawyer who has lived in the urban south for decades), it is impossible not to see that the "criminal justice system"--including what are offenses and how they are detected, prosecuted and punished--does not have an anti-Black racial bias.

"A street kid gets arrested, gonna do some time
He got out three years from now just to commit more crime
A businessman is caught with 24 kilos
He's out on bail and out of jail
And that's the way it goes"

White Lines Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five

It is also impossible not to see that young African-American males commit disproportionately more crimes of whatever variety than other demographic groups. Not just drug crimes, but all crimes. The sad fact is that the victims of these crimes are disproportionately young African-American males and females.
Mean while black drug offenders get sentenced far more often and harshly than white drug offenders despite both being equal in users of drugs. Majority of people arrested in the Crack epidemic where black despite Latino and whites being the majority of users of crack