Pubdate: Sun, 23 Jan 2005
Source: Arizona Daily Sun (AZ)
Copyright: 2005 Arizona Daily Sun
Contact:  http://www.azdailysun.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1906
Author: Larry Hendricks
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/racial.htm (Racial Issues)

IS RACIAL DISPARITY IN STOPS PROFILING?

All sides finally agree: Black motorists are stopped and searched for drugs 
by police at a disproportionately higher rate than white motorists.

But that's where the agreement ends in a dispute that is nearing key 
turning points on both the civil and criminal fronts.

Attorneys for the minority motorists on Interstate 40 in Coconino County 
contend the disparity is due to racial profiling, which the courts have 
said is illegal.

Attorneys for the Arizona Department of Public Safety say many other 
factors besides racial profiling, such as driver behavior, could account 
for the disparity.

The dispute, although it involves battling professors, is more than an 
academic one. If the Arizona Supreme Court decides that racial profiling 
can be raised in criminal drug cases as a way to get charges dropped or 
evidence thrown out, then the fact that a racial disparity in stops and 
searches has been shown will loom large.

If, on the other hand, the supreme court says criminal defendants must 
raise racial profiling in separate civil lawsuits, then the issue likely is 
dead in Arizona. That's because DPS, which denies its officers engage in 
racial profiling, is close to settling a class-action lawsuit that has it 
improving the collection of traffic stop information so that it can 
identify and respond quickly if statistics point to racial profiling.

First Accusation In 1999

The accusation that DPS officers might be making traffic stops in search of 
drugs on Interstate 40 was brought to Coconino County Superior Court in 
1999. The effort was led by Flagstaff defense attorney Lee Phillips.

DPS officials have staunchly maintained that the agency does not make 
traffic stops in search of drugs based on race, and it even has a policy in 
place to prohibit the practice. Therefore, it was the burden of defense 
attorneys who represented black or Hispanic clients, all accused of 
transporting drugs, to prove that race-based policing was taking place.

To date, with dozens of cases pending or on appeal in Coconino and Yavapai 
Counties and in federal courts, Phillips has failed to do so for a variety 
of reasons (see related story).

Meanwhile, criminal cases continue to be filed in county and federal 
courts, with attorneys persisting in getting the central question about 
racial profiling answered once and for all.

Defense Findings

Phillips has asked for and received an entire year's worth of traffic stop 
documents from DPS -- tickets, warnings and equipment repair orders. With 
that information available, he commissioned Fred Solop, professor of 
political science and director of the Social Research Laboratory at NAU, to 
make a statistical analysis of the traffic stop documents.

To analyze the DPS traffic stop information, Solop needed a study with 
which to compare the DPS traffic stop information. With input from a 
statisticians who worked on similar cases, Solop created a way to make a 
study that would attempt to quantify the racial makeup of motorists on 
Interstate 40 who violate traffic law and who would be qualified to be 
stopped by DPS officers.

The percentage of black and Hispanic motorists reflected in the DPS traffic 
stop information and the percentage of black and Hispanic motorists who 
violate the law should be roughly the same. It was not.

"When examined from a variety of research approaches, this data clearly and 
consistently indicates a pattern of discrimination and selection bias 
against African Americans and Hispanics traveling on I-40 in Coconino 
County," Solop stated in his report.

"The data also supports the conclusion that racial profiling is a regular 
component of drug-interdiction activity along Interstate 40 .."

Using the same methods, Solop arrived at the same conclusion regarding 
motorists traveling on Interstate 17 in Yavapai County.

State Findings

Robin Shepard Engel, associate professor of criminal justice at the 
University of Cincinnati, was commissioned by county and federal 
prosecutors, in essence, to defend DPS policies and practices, found fault 
with Solop's work in multiple areas.

According to her report, among them were: The DPS traffic stop information 
is unreliable. Solop's violator study is flawed because, among other 
things, the sample size of violators is too small and the amount of time 
the study was conducted was not long enough. Even if his methods weren't 
flawed, his conclusion is flawed.

So instead of Solop's approach, Engel used census data from Coconino County 
- -- and arrived at conclusions similar to Solop's in her analysis. Black, 
but not Hispanic, motorists were stopped at a disproportionately higher 
rate. Her analysis included several caveats.

Research compiled about travel, transportation and accidents clearly show 
"considerable racial and ethnic differences in a variety of driving-related 
behaviors ."

For instance, differences exist in seatbelt use, vehicle ownership, driving 
without a license, driving under the influence, fatal accident involvement 
and more.

"Together, these research findings suggest that drivers' behavior may at 
least partially explain some racial disparity reported in police stops and 
post-stop outcomes," Engel stated.

Engel also concluded that black and Hispanic motorists were searched at a 
higher rate. Once again, her analysis included several caveats. The 
analysis did not include behavioral factors of motorists that could have 
influenced an officer's decision to search -- such as the motorists level 
of resistance.

Conclusions Differ

In a critique of Solop's report, Engel stated, "... differences reported in 
aggregate rates only tell us that differences exist; researchers have not 
measured why they exist. While it is possible that some racial/ethnic 
disparities observed in traffic stops may be the result of individual 
officers targeting racial/ethnic minorities, it is important to note that 
this is a hypothesis that has not been adequately tested in any traffic 
stop study because the data necessary to test such a hypothesis are 
unavailable."

Too many other variables exist, which have not been accounted for in any 
study to date.

Solop, however, isn't buying the caveats about the real world trumping 
statistics.

"While Dr. Engel's statement that some conditions in the world cannot be 
adequately quantified is obviously true, it doesn't negate the conclusions 
of her statistical work," Solop stated in an e-mail correspondence from 
Spain. "... Court precedent says that statistical evidence can be used in 
racial profiling cases to determine if profiling is taking place."

But that court precedent is slowly changing, Engel stated in her report.

"Most of the current traffic stop studies now appropriately acknowledge 
that it cannot be determined with traffic stop data if disparities are due 
to discrimination because of the inability to measure alternative factors 
that might account for these disparities," Engel stated.

But previous studies have been accepted as scientific fact by courts -- 
particularly noteworthy is the 1996 case from New Jersey, on which Solop 
bases much of his work. In that case, the court found that racially based 
policing was occurring.

Since that time, a variety of state and federal courts have rejected 
findings similar to Solop's, Engel stated, listing several in her report.

"At this time, social science research studies based on traffic stop data 
collections simply cannot determine whether or not racial profiling 
exists," she stated.

Because traffic stop data and comparisons of other "benchmarks" to that 
data are so flawed, analysis of the data can never prove or disprove 
racially based policing, Engel stated. The best the analyses can hope for 
is to work as a tool to help residents encourage a policing agency to 
address "the problem or perception of racial profiling."

In his critique of Engel's report, Solop stated: "Dr. Engel apparently 
seeks to downplay the significance of the results of her analysis by 
concluding that statistical analyses are not useful for informing and 
understanding of whether racially biased policing takes place."

Later, he stated: "Social scientists regularly perform statistical analyses 
to determine if discrimination takes place, and courts regularly weigh the 
merits of their work."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth