Tuesday, November 18, 2014

Guilty by Definition




Guilty by Definition:  The FBI’s Enabling of Genocide

Martha K. Huggins (mhuggins@tulane.edu)

@mdkhuggins (Twitter) 
Bureaucratic Death.  While we wait for the St Louis County’s grand jury decision on indicting Ferguson policeman Darren Wilson for killing Michael Brown, we might consider how the FBI is likely to designate Michael Brown’s death for its annual statistics.  Will Officer Wilson beat the rap for killing Michael Brown and see this killing logged by the FBI as “justifiable”?  Such justifiable law enforcement killings occur, according to the FBI--the US’ premier law enforcement agency whose own killings of civilians are almost never questioned—when a “peace officer [kills] a felon…in the line of duty [and the killing is subsequently] determined through [a] law enforcement investigation to be justifiable….”  Reading this definition I would say to my Tulane University students in 2012 just after Michael Brown’s death, “think, does the Bureau’s definition promote justice or enable injustice?” 

          If national  and international media attention and relentless protests in Ferguson had not derailed police business as usual, Michael Brown’s slaying would have automatically been designated “justifiable” and sent, or not, to the FBI.  Michael Brown, a high school graduate about to enter community college, was killed for walking in the street rather than on the sidewalk--how many of  the rest of us regularly do that, I asked?  Given the proliferation of cracked sidewalks, I do and yes I am angry when I have to do this.  I can still hear one of my students say, ‘But you are not a big angry black kid with pants hanging below his butt. When he walks in the street he does it to be threatening.’  So the Ferguson police would apparently be justified in responding forcefully to such a Black youth’s sartorial faux pas?  


Matter out of place.  Michael Brown was killed in 2014 along with countless other Black youth, before and since, not because he had committed a felony but because young Black men are seen as ‘matter out of place,’ as British anthropologist Mary Douglas might put it. Whether outside their usually segregated neighborhoods or when they are on public sidewalks, even those inside their own neighborhoods—as when stopped-and-frisked in Harlem or Bed-Stuy—Black youth are managed by law enforcement and rent-a-cops to keep them from ‘polluting’ others.  Being ‘matter out of place’ US blacks join such other negatively-branded social categories as India’s ‘undesirables,’ Japan’s burakumin, medieval European ‘lepers,’ people in the US with HIV/AIDS, in being defined and treated as dangerous to the ‘unpolluted’ more powerful groups whose domination is fortified by keeping such groups in their “place.”   Through a combination of cultural rituals, administrative  regulation, and the law itself,  those considered ‘matter out of place’ are managed inside and out of te spaces reserved for ‘good’ people.

          For youthful Blackssince Black is associated with criminality and criminality with being Black[1]--“control” includes circumscribing their movements—from residential segregation to being followed by a department store’s security;  limiting choices—from informally segregating school districts to ‘tracking’ them into non-college preparatory classes; social and physical ‘branding’--from ‘stop-and-frisk’ operations to police militarized assaults on their neighborhoods;  Elimination—from arrest and mass incarceration, to lethal-force killings.  

          US Blacks are victimized by unstated and unrecognized, yet vigorously defended, geographies of exclusion.  Reinforced by corporate real estate ‘redlining’ and other forms of de facto segregation,[2] these geographies provide employment for those who ‘protect’ the rest of us from those who are said to be violating the social and physical boundaries that keep especially poor young Blacks from threatening just about everyone else.  The ready-made label—“dangerous felon”—with its foundation in law and police practice disguises the disproportionate racial exclusion of young Blacks.  Why then does the FBI publish only US law enforcement’s “justifiable” killings of civilians, not the “unjustifiable” ones?  Is it to send the message that our law enforcers only kill when absolutely necessary and justified?  Has the Bureau has chosen not to know whether US law enforcement violates some civilians’ civil rights more than other ones? 


FBI definition enables lethal outcomes.  The most fundamental problem with the Bureau’s research methods is that for over sixty years it has employed a circular definition of a “justifiable” law enforcement killing.  Its self-serving nomenclature helps protect killer cops from serious investigation for murder, in part, because a law enforcer is presumed to have targeted someone who is by definition a “felon.” This outcome is assured by the Bureau’s failing to place the qualifier alleged before the word felon in its description of the victim ‘justifiably’ killed and by not identifying which felony can excusably trigger a “peace officer’s” use of lethal force. In most cases the killer cop claims that a Black youth with a gun, knife, or razor threatened his[3] life.  Worse yet, the Bureau assigns to the blue brotherhood the power to come up with whatever ‘felony’ most excusably prompted the law enforcement-involved killing.[4] Whether the person killed was already a felon or defined post-facto as one, the deceased civilian’s fate is sealed when a cop’s shooting is investigated by a state or local law enforcement organization. 

               Scholarly investigations going back at least 67 years[5] have found that “merely thinking about Blacks can lead people to evaluate their…behavior as aggressive, [and] to miscategorize harmless objects as weapons, or to shoot quickly, and, at times, inappropriately.”  Recent research finds that “thinking of crime can trigger thoughts of Black people.” [6] Putting these findings together suggests the unsettling conclusion that if you are Black you’re criminal and dangerous and if you are criminal you’re Black and threatening. Such an imagined ante-facto social danger easily renders Blacks hazardous ‘matter out of place’ with lethal consequences for many, even though this information cannot be derived from FBI statistics on “justifiable” killings by law enforcement—except by the extraordinarily high proportion of Blacks “justifiably” killed by law enforcement.


FBI protocol shapes research conclusions.  How the most elite US law enforcement organization defines a “justifiable” killing shapes what state, county, and municipal law enforcement agencies send to it quarterly-- or not--for the Bureau’s Uniform Crime Reports (UCR).  In fact, most US law enforcement organizations do not  send any data at all to the Bureau on   “justifiable” law enforcement killings in their jurisdiction-- “fewer than five percent of the nation’s 17,000 law enforcement agencies currently send [the Bureau this] information.”[7]  Just the same, what ends up in the Bureau’s Uniform Crime Report statistics on “justifiable” killings by cops has to shape the conclusions available analyzing this information. (FYI US Government:  police and sheriff organizations receiving federal aid of any kind—and most  do--could be required to submit all crime data in their jurisdictions to the DOJ/FBI or lose federal assistance)

          The respected investigative journalism organization ProPublica—full disclosure, I have donated to them--recently interpreted the FBI’s data on “justifiable”  killings by law enforcement to say that between 2010 and 2012,  “young black males…were at a far greater risk of being shot dead by police than their white counterparts—[in fact] 21 times greater….”  But the FBI’s data only allow a researcher to generalize about what happens to black and white victims respectively when cops investigate another cop’s killing of a civilian.  I propose the alternative more narrow  conclusion that when US cops investigate another cops’ use of lethal force, it is 21 times more likely that a Black youth’s slaying will be deemed “justifiable” than when cops investigate the killing of a White youth.  This is  old-style kangaroo court ‘justice’ for US Blacks.

Black genocide.   Of course, there is in fact every reason to believe that in the United States Black male youth--especially poor ones between their teens and late 20s--are killed at higher rates than comparable White youth.  Yet FBI statistics make it impossible to explore this.  Suffice it to say that Black youth are in serious peril of being killed by law enforcement in their own homes and every time they step outside them.  That their slayings by cops are  disproportionately likely to be deemed “justifiable” by a law enforcement organization merely underlines the danger to their lives from police agencies.

           Public policy researchers Guy Adams and Danny Balfour--drawing on the work of Holocaust scholar Zygmunt Bauman[8]--remind  us that “legal procedures and accounting routines were essential to…removing Jews from German society.”  Once Jews had “ceased to exist as members of a political community,” they could then be killed without repercussion.  These facts are as troublingly true for Blacks in the US today as for Jews in Nazi Germany







[1] See discussion p. 4 and footnotes 5 and 6.
[2] For Florida’s Key West (Monroe County) see The Blue Paper, 9/26/2014, “MONROE COUNTY’S SECRET ROADMAP TO RESEGREGATION,”Arnaud and Naja Girard
[3] An impressive study by Lonsway (n.d, c. 2003) showed not only that male LAPD cops carried out more violence on-duty than female cops, but also that “the average male officer cost over five and a half times more than the average female officer in terms of excessive force payouts. When payouts for just assault and battery are examined, the ratio increases to 32:1. If only killings are considered, it skyrockets to 43:1.” (“Men, Women, and Excessive Force: A Tale of Two Genders.” Kimberly A. Lonsway, http://www.pennyharrington.com/excessiveforce.htm)   
[4] Examples of this can be seen in Ferguson, Mo. today (DailyKos. 2014.  Earliest police report from Ferguson is released and conflicts with Darren Wilson's testimony leaks,” October, 29. (http://m.dailykos.com/story/2014/10/29/1340042/-Earliest-police-report-from-Ferguson-is-released-and-conflicts-with-Darren-Wilson-s-testimony-leaks?detail=facebook), and for New Orleans’ Danziger Bridge killings. “Danziger Bridge shootings cover-up was brazen, former NOPD detective testifies.” Times-Picayune, 7/20/2012 (http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2011/07/danziger_bridge_shootings_cove.html)
[5] Allport, G. W. and Postman, L. J. (1947). The psychology of rumor. New York: Russell & Russell.
[6]  Eberhardt, Jenifer et al. (2004).  Seeing  Black: Race, Crime, and Visual Processing.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.  Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, Vol. 87, No. 6, 876–893.
[7] Phillips, Victoria L.  2014. “What surgery and police have in common: Both kill a disproportionate number of black men.” The Washington Post, October 21. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/10/21/black-men-die-disproportionately-at-the-hands-of-surgeons-and-police-officers-heres-how-to-fix-both-professions/)
[8] Zygmunt Bauman, 1989. Modernity and the Holocaust.  Ithaca: NY: Cornell University Press.
Guy B. Adams and  Danny L. Balfour. 2004.  Unmasking Administrative Evil. Armonk, NY:  M.E. Sharpe, p. 52

No comments:

Post a Comment