Tuesday, August 11, 2015

Nazi-Cops MUM on Stats Detailing their Use of Force

Good Afternoon from Upper Darby!

Here is the article;

Data on Use of Force by Police Across U.S. Proves Almost Useless


WASHINGTON — When the Justice Department surveyed 
police departments nationwide in 2013, officials included for 
the first time a series of questions about how often officers 
used force.
In the year since protesters in Ferguson, Mo., set off a 
national discussion about policing,President Obama and 
his top law enforcement officials have bemoaned the lack 
of clear answers to such questions. Without them, the 
racially and politically charged debate quickly descends 
into the unknowable.
The Justice Department survey had the potential to reveal
 whether officers were more likely to use force in diverse
 or homogeneous cities; in depressed areas or wealthy 
suburbs; and in cities or rural towns. Did the racial makeup
 of the police department matter? Did crime rates?
But when the data was issued last month, without a public
 announcement, the figures turned out to be almost useless.
 Nearly all departments said they kept track of their 
shootings, but in accounting for all uses of force, the figures
 varied widely.
Some cities included episodes in which officers punched
 suspects or threw them to the ground. Others did not. 
Some counted the use of less lethal weapons, such as 
beanbag guns. Others did not.
And many departments, including large ones such as those 
in New York, Houston, Baltimore and Detroit, either said 
they did not know how many times their officers had used 
force or simply refused to say. That made any meaningful 
analysis of the data impossible.
The report’s flaws highlight a challenge for the Obama 
administration, which has called for better data but has no 
authority to demand that police departments keep track of it.
 Those who do keep track are under no obligation to release it.
When the Justice Department’s civil rights investigators have 
scrutinized police departments and reviewed records that 
would not otherwise have been made public, they have found 
evidence of abuse.
In Seattle, investigators reviewed the police department’s
 reports on the use of force and found that one out of every 
five episodes was excessive. In Albuquerqueinvestigators 
concluded that most police shootings from 2009 to 2012 
were unjustified. Such conclusions have been amplified by
 videos of deadly police interactions in Cincinnati and 
North Charleston, S.C., as well as on Staten Island, and 
elsewhere.
But those investigations focus only on departments 
suspected of unconstitutional behavior. And police 
officers say the videos do not reflect the tens of millions 
of interactions that officers and civilians have each year. 
Federal estimates have concluded with “substantial confidence”
 that, when considered as a percentage of that overall number, 
officers use force very rarely.
The Obama administration is trying to enhance police training
 and improve relationships between officers and minorities. 
But without better data, it will be hard to know if those efforts
 are working — or even if use of force was objectively a problem
 in the first place.
“It’s a national embarrassment,” said Geoffrey P. Alpert, a 
University of South Carolina criminology professor who often 
consults with the Justice Department on its studies. “Right now,
 all you know is what gets on YouTube.”
More than 20 years ago, Congress ordered the Justice 
Department to collect national data on excessive force by police.
 But as demonstrated by the recent survey’s inability to properly
 measure any use of force, that obligation has been virtually 
impossible to meet, in large part because of the difficulty of 
collecting reliable data from the nation’s roughly 18,000 state
 and local police departments.
Though many police departments long ago embraced 
sophisticated computer analysis for tracking and predicting
 crime patterns, they have been slower to do so when tracking
 police behavior. Of those departments that require officers to
 document their use of force, some attach the information to 
police reports, some have separate databases and some keep
 the data on paper.
Among the large police departments in the Justice 
Department’s survey, slightly more than half said they 
documented each use of force individually. About one-fifth,
 however, said they documented them by the number of police
 reports that mentioned a use of force, which means that each
 episode might be recorded several times by different officers.
 About one-fifth of departments refused to say how they kept
 their data.
That is useful information, as is the data on what tactics
 are counted in each city, said KiDeuk Kim, a researcher with
 the Urban Institute, which conducted the police survey for 
the Justice Department. He conceded, however, that “they’re
 less willing to talk about how many incidents they had.”
In private discussions, some police leaders told the Justice
 Department that they were reluctant to turn over data that 
the department could use to vilify them, officials said.
In New York last year, the police commissioner, William J.
 Bratton, displayed bar graphs showing that officers were far
 less likely to use force than they were two decades ago. Yet 
when New York responded to the Justice Department survey, 
it said it did not know how many times the officers had used
 force.
That apparent contradiction is further evidence of different
 cities counting different things. The New York Police 
Department closely tracks how and when its officers use 
firearms, batons, pepper spray, stun guns and physical force
 while making arrests. The counting is different, however, for
 stop-and-frisk encounters, which are not considered arrests.
Any physical contact in those situations is recorded, said 
Stephen P. Davis, the police department’s chief spokesman.
 Police officers who break up fights or help control a mentally
 ill person might make only a note in their log books if the
 incidents did not end in arrest.
So when the Justice Department asked for a count of all 
use-of-force incidents, Mr. Davis said, the department
 could not comply.
“We have been, for a few months, trying to work on some way
 to centrally record when force is used in any manner,” he said.
 He said no decision had been made on whether to make that 
data public. But, he added, “I would imagine if it’s a number we can
 accurately grab and document, I don’t see any reason we wouldn’t
 make it available.”
Mr. Alpert, the criminologist, said the federal government would
 need to attach an incentive, or a requirement, if it wanted to get
 reliable information. For instance, he suggested making federal
 grant money for police departments contingent on their providing
 standardized data.
At the Justice Department, researchers are trying to develop a 
reliable way to count the number of people who die nationally 
in the course of arrest or in custody. Officials hope to have some
 data on the topic in the next 18 months. Collecting and publishing
 data on use of force in individual departments, officials said, is
 not a priority.
In May, a White House task force recommended that all police 
departments publish data on use of force. Rather than try to 
compel police departments to do that, the White House started
 a voluntary program that helps police departments publish and
 use their own data. The program is not specifically focused on 
use-of-force data, but Mr. Obama couched that aspect as a suggestion.
“Departments might track things like incidents of force,” he said at
 an appearance in Camden, N.J., “so that they can identify and
 handle problems that could otherwise escalate.”
Some departments already publish that information. And some
 are willing to do it, but might not have the money or sufficient
 personnel to begin. The White House is focused, for now, on
 helping the departments that are already inclined to release
 data. The thinking is that, just as most police departments 
now voluntarily report their crime statistics, once a wide swath
 of departments make their use-of-force data available, others
 will follow suit.

No comments:

Post a Comment