Race Crime Essays

Race Crime Essays Race Crime Essay Race Crime Essay There have been many studies conducted by both academics and government organisations to gain further insight into the reasons why, when compared to their representation as members of the population as a whole, people from black minority ethnic backgrounds, widely referred to as BME groups, are massively overrepresented in the criminal justice system in England and Wales (Webster, 2007;111). However, Feilzer and Hood have warned that all research has failed to conclusively prove whether different outcomes for minority ethnic people have been due to discrimination or as a result of other factors (Webster, 2007;112). This essay aims to critically account for the disproportionate presence of BME groups in the criminal justice system, in particular the police, the prison service and the courts, exploring possible reasons for the overrepresentation such as social exclusion and socio-economic disadvantage. The essay will also draw comparisons with other countries such as the United States of America and Australia. Criticism of the police and their relationship with BME groups is nothing new, and tensions within British society were exacerbated with the influx of West Indian immigrants in the 1950s. A study conducted in the 1960s compared urban and rural policing and described the negative stereotype that police officers held of members of the black community (Spalek, 2002;77). More recently, the murder of Stephen Lawrence and the subsequent Lawrence Inquiry produced a startling insight into the degree of, what Lord Macpherson termed, institutional racism within the criminal justice system (Macpherson, 1999). Recent statistics from the Ministry of Justice (MJ) illustrate the overrepresentation of BME groups in the criminal justice system. The Ministry of Justice report, Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System 2008/2009 (MJ, 2010) highlights some of the substantial differences that exist between the experiences of people from BME groups compared with those from a white background (MJ, 2010). The report illustrates that BME groups are disproportionately represented at every stage of the criminal justice system but specifically in stop and search, arrests and the prison population. However, this is not simply an issue in England and Wales, but reflects problems faced by criminal justice systems in other countries around the world (Bhui, 2009;50). It has been well established by many authors and studies that the use of stop and search powers by the police has been the most controversial issue (Bowling and Phillips, 2003;534) when dealing with the topic of policing minority ethnic communities. Stop and search powers are governed by section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) 1984, which requires the police to have reasonable suspicion. It is this concept that gives rise to concerns about discrimination and racial profiling (Davies et al, 2005;170). People from BME backgrounds are also more likely to be stopped under the stop and search powers of section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, and are less likely to be given a reason for being stopped (Davies et al, 2005;171). Black and Asian people are 26. 6 and 6. 3 times more likely to be stopped and searched respectively than white people, under Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (Townsend, 2010). This is a higher stop and search ratio than that recorded before the publication in 1999 of the Inquiry report into the murder of the black teenager, Stephen Lawrence. Section 60 powers enabled the police to use such stop and search in exceptional circumstances but has subsequently allowed the abuse of such powers through increased stereotyping, further alienating the most affected communities (Townsend, 2010). The report concluded that the overuse of stop and search had created significant mistrust in minority ethnic communities (Travis, 2010), and contributes to the idea that the system is institutionally racist. The Ministry of Justice report found that there has been a 70 per cent rise in BME being stopped and searched over the past 5 years. In England and Wales as a whole it was recorded that 18 people of a white background and 135 of a BME background per 1000 of the population were subject to the use of Stop and Search by the police under section 1 of PACE 1984 (MJ, 2010). The statistics show that under PACE, Black people were 7. 2 times more likely, and Asian people were 2. 1 times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people (MJ, 2010). It could therefore be argued that stop and searches are disproportionately carried out on people from BME backgrounds, under both PACE and the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act. However, there was a large variation in the number of stop and searches throughout England and Wales. In London the number per 1000 of the population was 47 white and 210 black. This variation is a result of several factors. Firstly, 54 percent of the black population of England and Wales live in London, and are therefore more likely to be stopped and searched than any other area. Secondly, 42 percent of all stop and searches are carried out by the Metropolitan Police Service, which only serve 14 percent of the whole population of England and Wales (MJ, 2010). In contrast, there are other areas within England and Wales such as Cumbria and Durham where the rate of stop and searches per 1000 of the population for those from black backgrounds compared to white backgrounds was 0. 7. This means that more white people are stopped and searched per 1000 of the population than black people (MJ, 2010). Findings from the report Offending, Crime and Justice Survey 2003-06 suggested that an individuals ethnic group was not significantly associated with increased or reduced likelihood of offending (MJ, 2010). It is however, believed that BME communities are considered to be suspect populations (Webster, 2010;95) with the tendency for black and Asian communities to receive greatly inferior treatment by the police, leading to their involvement with the criminal justice system. Similar to the stop and search statistics, people from BME groups experienced more arrests per 1000 of the population than people of white backgrounds, and black people were 3. 3 times more likely to get arrested than white people (MJ, 2010). However, Phillips and Browns study in 1998 found that of the cases that went to the Crown Prosecution Service, the proportions that were terminated were 27 per cent for Asians, 20 per cent for black people and 12 per cent for white people (Bhui, 2009;35). This strongly suggests that black and Asian people were more likely to be arrested and charged without sufficient evidence to prosecute. Despite the conviction rates being substantially higher for white people compared to those from BME groups (MJ, 2010) in 2008, the percentage of white adults sentenced to immediate custody for indictable offences was under 29 percent, while BME groups ranged from 42 to 52 percent (MJ, 2010). This higher percentage is not necessarily due to discrimination, but rather a number of other factors, such as the seriousness of the offence committed, mitigating or aggravating factors and whether or not the defendant pleads guilty. Research has shown that people from BME backgrounds are more likely to plead not guilty, and hence be tried in a Crown court (MJ, 2010). In fact 48 per cent of black offenders plead not guilty compared to 30 per cent of white offenders. If offenders are found guilty after pleading not guilty, they are often given heavier and longer sentences (Marsh et al, 2010;178) and this may be a reason why there are more black offenders in prison. Although people from BME backgrounds account for less than 11 per cent of the British population, they account for a much higher proportion of the prison population. On the 30th June 2009, 20 percent of prisoners identified themselves as being from BME groups (MJ, 2010). The total prison population excluding foreign nationals has experienced increased numbers from all ethnic backgrounds since 2005, but most notably from Asian and Mixed groups. Those from a white ethnic background had the smallest increase (MJ, 2010). The result of such overrepresentation of people from BME backgrounds, in particular black people, is that there are some prisons in the south east of England that are now virtually all black (Ramesh, 2010). The disproportionate presence of people from BME groups could mean one of two things. People from BME groups may be discriminated against at the point of entry into the criminal justice system and this subsequently continues to the point of imprisonment. Alternatively, the groups are actually more involved in crime than others for reasons particular to that group (Hale et al, 2009;419). It is of common belief that the true answer lies somewhere between the two theories, yet self report studies have indicated that white people commit just as much or even more crime than those from BME groups (Kalunta-Crumpton, 2010). Evidence from several studies has shown that there are three overarching causes for the overrepresentation of BME groups in the Criminal Justice System, all of which compound each other. Firstly, social exclusion is a longstanding primary cause (House of Commons; Home Affairs Committee (HC), 2007). Secondly, factors specific to the black community such as family patterns and cultures amongst black people, both fuel and compound socio-economic deprivation. Thirdly, the structure and the way the criminal justice system operates mean more young BME people come into contact, and stay in contact, with the system (HC, 2010). There is considerable racial inequality in the criminal justice system with a massive underrepresentation of people from BME backgrounds in judiciary and court positions (Marsh et al, 2010;179). A recent report by the Ministry of Justice found that, as of April 2009 in the courts based judiciary, a mere 4. 5 per cent of judges were from BME backgrounds, and represented just 3 of the 163 High Court judges (MJ, 2010). This is a point that was highlighted in the Lawrence Inquiry, and in particular the failure of the police service to recruit minority ethnic officers. Recommendation 65 of the Lawrence Report stated that the police service ought to develop more initiatives to increase the number of minority ethnic recruits (Bhui, 2009;54). Despite such attempts to recruit more people from BME groups, the police force is still a predominantly white institution with only 4. 4 percent of officers in post coming from a BME background (Hansard, 2010), and this is reflected in the feelings of people from BME groups. A study conducted by Shute et al showed that one fifth of black defendants felt that their treatment had been influenced by racial bias (Marsh et al, 2010). Of the black and Asian defendants who thought that they had been given longer custodial sentences, over half put it down to their ethnicity rather than what they had done or said in court (Marsh et al, 2010), indicating the feeling amongst people from BME groups that institutional racism still exists within the criminal justice system. Such thoughts of institutional racism within the criminal justice system were again identified with the tragic incident in March 2000 when Zahid Mubarek, a 19 year old Asian prisoner at Feltham young offender institution, was murdered by a cell mate with a history of racist and violent behaviour (Nacro, 2003). It is regarded that social exclusion is the key reason for the overrepresentation of ethnic minorities within the criminal justice system. BME groups are socially and economically disadvantaged compared with white people and are more likely to come to police attention (Bhui, 2009;34). This socio-economic disadvantage stretches back to the post-war period when the first settlers from the Caribbean were forced into ghettoes because of racial prejudice and restricted access to accommodation, resulting in them being stacked in deprived areas where schools were substandard, employment opportunities were minimal and long-term prospects to hold the family together were limited (HC, 2010). It is believed that the disproportional presence of ethnic minorities has arisen due to the idea that policing bares down more heavily on those that frequent public spaces more often (Maguire et al, 2007;437). This happens to be black and Asian people as they are still subjected to high rates of unemployment, homelessness and nocturnal shift work. It is noted that 80 per cent of black African and black Caribbean communities live in particularly deprived, high crime urban areas such as Neighbourhood Renewal Fund areas (Bhui, 2009;32). It is the combination of all of these factors that place such individuals at greater risk of being stopped and searched (Maguire et al, 2007;437). The House of Commons Home Affairs Committee found that in 2007, all the minority ethnic groups within the black category are consistently below the national average across all Key Stages, at GCSE and equivalent and Post-16. At GCSE and equivalent, 45 per cent of black Caribbean pupils, and 51 per cent of black African pupils achieved 5 or more A*-C grades compared to 57 per cent nationally (HC, 2007). The committee concluded that the failure of the education system to educate our black boys provides a breeding ground for disaffection that undoubtedly leads many to seek alternative means to obtain a good standard of living or gain respect from their peers (HC, 2007). Conversely, the recent report How Fair is Britain produced by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), shows that ethnic differences are narrowing at GCSE level, except for the top two highest performing groups; Chinese and Indian (EHRC, 2010). Educational underachievement is fed by rates of exclusion, which is higher for black young people than any other ethnic group. The 2006 Department for Education Skills (DfES) report shows that 9. 6 per cent of black Caribbean young people had had a fixed period exclusion compared with a national average for all pupils of 5 per cent (DfES, 2006). Excluded young people, regardless of ethnicity, are twice as likely to commit offences as children in mainstream school according to the Youth Justice Boards (YJB) survey completed by MORI. In a recent survey 23 per cent of young people in mainstream school said they had committed an offence in the last 12 months, while 60per cent of excluded young people say they had committed an offence over the same period (YJB, 2009). This is a clear indication that young black people are more likely to be excluded from school, and subsequently more likely to offend. Asian children on the other hand had the lowest exclusion rates, followed by children with one white and one Asian parent (EHRC, 2010). The success of Asian children in education ties in with their low offending rates. Such traits have traditionally been explained as the result of strong informal controls said to inhere in Asian culture and family life (Webster, 2010;97). In 2007, at a time of growing gun and knife crime, former Prime Minister Tony Blair, insisted that we needed to stop pretending it was a problem for the general population (Blair, 2007), but rather an issue for the black community to resolve (Hale et al, 2009). This idea has been reaffirmed in statistics such as the figures from Operation Trident, a Metropolitan Police Service operation intended to deal with shootings among black people living in London in 2006. The operations findings detailed in the Home Affairs Committee report showed that, of all the firearms homicides and shootings in 2006 in London, 75 per cent of victims and 79 per cent of suspects were black (HC, 2010). These statistics reflect the idea that the majority of offending by people from minority ethnic backgrounds is intra-racial. It was also found that the boroughs with the highest firearms offences such as Hackney and Lambeth had the highest density of black population in London, as well as being some of the most deprived (HC, 2010). Furthermore, recent research in the UK suggests that homicide rates are associated with levels of poverty and deprivation (HC, 2010). It is this level of involvement and overrepresentation that is the greatest cause for concern for some sections of black and minority ethnic communities. The Director of Equalities and Policing at the Greater London Authority, Lee Jasper said of the situation we have, quite literally, a crisis in the black community among our young black people (HC, 2010). Self report studies ask some general questions about the respondents social and economic situation and then they are asked to describe any offences that they have committed. This technique relies solely upon the honesty of interviewees to reveal their offending behaviour. Self report surveys have produced controversial findings and in particular have suggested that race differences usually observed in official records are either absent or much reduced (Bowling and Phillips, 2002;99). The 2003 Offending, Crime and Justice Study found that in actual fact, white respondents were more likely than black or Asian respondents to say that they had offended (Bhui, 2009;32). The findings of such studies have indicated that the dark figure of crime is more likely to be committed by white people than those from BME backgrounds (Kalunta-Crumpton, 2010). In Australia, they face a slightly different issue, in that the indigenous population of Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islander people are massively overrepresented in the justice system, and it is a result of historical discrimination, over-regulation and unfair treatment (Australian Law Reform Commission, 2006). Indigenous people make up 2. 5 per cent of the population in Australia, yet in 2008 they accounted for 29. 3 per cent and 24. 1 per cent of the female and male prisoners respectively (Bartels, 2010); a rate 17 times higher than that for non-indigenous people (Australian Institute of Criminology, 2010). These figures varied throughout the different territories of Australia. For example, in Victoria, Indigenous people accounted for 6 per cent of the prison population, much lower but still overrepresented compared to their presence in the general population. In the Northern Territories however, the situation is much worse, with Indigenous people representing 83 per cent of the prison population. This is a startling illustration of the massive overrepresentation of Indigenous population in the criminal justice system. One explanation considered by some authors such as Bartels, is that the Indigenous population is significantly younger than the non-indigenous population. A census in 2006 found that the median age for both Indigenous and Non-Indigenous populations was 21 and 37 respectively (Australian Government, 2008), and thus a reason for the high number of Indigenous people coming into contact with the criminal justice system. In the United States of America, they face a similar if not more extreme situation than in Britain and most Western European countries. The Washington DC based research group, The Sentencing Project reported that today there are more African American men in prison and jail than in college (Walker et al, 2007;xiii). Despite black people only representing 12 per cent of the United States population, nearly half of all prisoners in the USA are African-American (Webster, 2007), and it is predicted that nearly one third of African-American males born today will go to prison (Ramesh, 2010). The US Justice Department have released statistics that suggest approximately 40 to 45 per cent of the US prison population is black (Ramesh, 2010), and that black people represent 31 per cent of arrests and 37 per cent of all violent arrests. Walker et al concluded in The Color of Justice, that the US criminal justice system is contextually discriminatory, in that discrimination does occur within certain parts of the system but not all parts, all of the time (Walker et al, 2007;419). The recent statistics from the Ministry of Justice paint a very clear picture as to the substantial differences that exist between the experiences of BME groups compared with white people, and in particular the experiences of black people. The central problem with the disproportionate presence of ethnic minorities in the criminal justice system is their under-representation in criminal justice professions coupled with their overrepresentation as suspects, defendants and prisoners (Newburn, 2007). Longstanding tension between the police and ethnic minorities still plays a significant part in the discrimination of ethnic minorities and is demonstrated in such documentaries as The Secret Policeman (Daly, 2003), highlighting that racism within the police force still occurs. Although many positive steps have been taken to eliminate institutional racism within the police force since the Lawrence Inquiry, there is still more that needs to be done. The police are not the only institution criticised of being discriminatory, with the Prison service also displaying such traits. It could be argued that the criminal justice system as a whole is still considered institutionally racist. Minority ethnic communities around the world are suffering from the same issues faced by those in England and Wales. The Australian prison population figures illustrate the startling discrimination the indigenous population of Australia face. The United States of America have a justice system described as contextually discriminatory (Walker et al, 2007;419), with an increasing population of black prisoners, many of which have committed violent or drug related offences. Despite numerous studies by academics and government departments, it has been considered that all research has failed to conclusively prove whether the disproportionate presence of people from minority ethnic backgrounds in the criminal justice system is through discrimination or other factors (Webster, 2007). It would appear however, that BME groups are most definitely overrepresented at every stage of the criminal justice system. From the findings of self report studies it can be inferred that the overrepresentation of ethnic minorities is not a result of disproportionate offending, but rather a combination of different factors. Similarly, the issue is not one solely of institutional racism within the criminal justice system. Unfortunately people from minority ethnic backgrounds live in the most deprived urban areas, with the highest crime rates, and therefore are undoubtedly over-policed. Young people from BME backgrounds are consistently underachieving in education and are almost twice as likely to have a fixed period of exclusion compared to the national average, and subsequently twice as likely to offend. Upon being charged for an offence, people from BME backgrounds are more likely to plead not guilty, and hence tried in the Crown court, where if found guilty, will receive a heavier sentence. It is the compounded effect of these factors that are the major cause of the disproportionate presence of ethnic minorities within the criminal justice system, and without addressing these issues first and foremost, their presence will simply increase.

Italian Subject Pronouns

Italian Subject Pronouns HE went to the store, and SHE called to remind him to get wine, then THEY walked to their friend’s house together. What do the words in capital letters have in common? They’re all subject pronouns in English, and they exist to replace nouns that are the subject within clauses. In Italian, they serve that same function. Here’s what subject pronouns would look like in Italian. Subject Pronouns in Italian Singolare Singular io I tu you (familiar) lui (egli/esso) he lei (ella/essa) she Lei you (formal) Plurale Plural noi we voi you (familiar) loro (essi) they (m.) loro (esse) they (f.) Loro you (formal) In modern Italian, he, she, and they are usually expressed by lui, lei, and loro, respectively. TIP: You might have seen the words â€Å"egli, ella, essi, esse†, but note that these are used more in written Italian than in the spoken language. â€Å"Esso† and â€Å"essa† are seldom used. Remember that tu is used in addressing members of the family, peers, children, close friends, and animals. In all other cases, Lei and its plural Loro are used. Finally, note that the subject pronouns Lei and Loro always take, respectively, the third person singular and the third person plural of the verb. Does It Stay or Go? However, when you’re listening to Italian,  you’ll often notice that native speakers will drop subject pronouns because typically the verb conjugations will tell who is completing the action, so using the subject pronouns sounds too repetitive. In the examples below, the subject pronoun in parentheses can be left out of  the sentence. (Io) Vado al cinema. - I’m going to the movies.(Tu) hai fratelli maggiori? - Do you have older siblings?(Lei) vuole mangiare con noi? - Does she want to eat with us?(Lui) vuole giocare a calcio con noi? - Does he want to play soccer with us? When it comes to the third person singular, you may have to use the subject pronoun to specify whether it’s â€Å"her† or â€Å"him†. (Noi) andiamo in spiaggia oggi? - Are we going to the beach today?(Voi) Sentite le notizie? - Did you all hear the news?(Loro) Vanno in Germania. - They are going to Germany. If you remember to drop the subject pronoun, your Italian will already sound a bit more native. That being said, you can use the subject pronoun when you want to add emphasis to a sentence. For example: Offro IO la cena./La cena  la offro IO.  - I’M paying for dinner.Scegli TU il fim. - YOU choose the movie. Another area where you definitely want to use the subject pronoun is when it’s being modified by the word â€Å"anche†, which means â€Å"also† in Italian. For example: Anche io voglio andare al mare. - I also want to go to the sea.No, anche lei mi ha detto che non era la verit. - No, she also told me it wasn’t the truth.