RACE AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF DRUG DELIVERY LAWS IN ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TARGET data also provide information about the race/ethnicity of a subset of serious drug users: those admitted to publicly funded drug treatment programs. These data include all Seattle residents admitted to fully or partially publiclyfunded drug treatment programs in 2006. Insofar as these data omit persons admitted to private drug treatment programs, they under-represent higher income persons and, as a result, likely over-represent blacks, Asians, Latinos and Native Americans among those entering drug treatment programs. 69 Moreover, a substantial share of those entering public drug treatment programs are referred by criminal justice agencies, a pattern that inflates the representation of blacks among those entering publicly funded drug treatment programs. Persons admitted to public treatment programs may be referred to treatment programs by a variety of agencies, including the courts, probation office, and Department of Corrections. Referrals stemming from any of these three agencies are grouped together as “criminal justice referrals.” Overall, whites comprise a smaller share of those referred to treatment programs by criminal justice agencies than by other agencies. By contrast, blacks comprise a larger share of those entering public treatment programs via criminal justice institutions than those entering treatment programs via an alternative path. This pattern suggests that racial disproportionality in drug arrests, and the resulting disproportionality in contact with other criminal justice institutions, is inflating the representation of blacks in the TARGET data. 70 Despite these biases, these data suggest that the majority of Seattle’s heroin, methamphetamine and other serious drug users are white (see Table 4). 69 According to 2000 U.S. census data, 8.5 percent of white Seattle residents, but 16.2 percent of Asian residents, 21.6 percent of Hispanic/Latino residents, 23 percent of black/African American residents and 29.1 percent of American Indian/Alaska Native residents, live in poverty (Cornelius n.d.). 70 In Washington State there is evidence that the differential impact of drug law enforcement on black and Latino communities is not a consequence of differential treatment after arrest (Minority and Justice Commission Report 1999). This report examined the role of race and ethnicity in the processing and sentencing of felony drug offenders in King, Yakima, and Pierce counties. The authors found “no evidence that race and ethnicity are important factors affecting charging decisions for drug offenders (p. 2), but also suggested “further study should be done of law enforcement practices” (p. 70). This conclusion was primarily based on the finding that arrest rates roughly correspond to conviction rates among various racial/ethnic groups. The implication of this study, which involved interviews with law enforcement and justice system professionals in the three counties, is that the disparity in drug-related incarceration stems from arrest patterns and/or racial differences in offending behavior, rather than post-arrest practices. 33
Primary Drug of Abuse Cocaine (all types) (n=2,184) Heroin (n=1,949) Meth (n=929) Other Serious Drugs (n=535) All Serious Drugs (n=5,597) Table 4. Race and Ethnicity of Seattle Residents Admitted to Public Drug Treatment Programs by Primary Drug of Abuse and Referral Source, 2006 Referral Source White Black/ African American American Indian/ Alaska Native Hispanic/ Latino Asian/ Pacific Islander Criminal Justice 27% 58.9% 1.2% 3.9% 2.9% Other 32.8% 53.4% 3% 3.5% 1.5% All Referrals 30.6% 55.4% 2.4% 2.6% 2% Criminal Justice 58% 23.1% 5.1% 7.9% .6% Other 62.9% 19.7% 3.8% 7.4% .9% All Referrals 62% 20.3% 4% 7.5% .8% Criminal Justice 81.3% 3.1% 2.2% 2.9% 4% Other 73.3% 7.9% 2.7% 7.4% 3.3% All Referrals 77.2% 5.6% 2.5% 5.3% 3.7% Criminal Justice 56% 24.8% 4.6% 8.3% 2.8% Other Referrals 70.2% 12.4% 2.6% 3.8% 4.2% All Referrals 67.3% 15% 3% 4.7% 3.9% Criminal Justice 49.4% 34.8% 2.5% 4.7% 2.7% Other Referrals 54.8% 29.4% 3.2% 5.6% 1.8% All Referrals 52.8% 31.1% 3% 5.3% 2.1% Source: Caleb Banta-Green, Research Scientist, Alcohol and Drug Abuse Institute, University of Washington. Notes: These figures include Seattle residents living in one of the 37 zip code areas that fall entirely within Seattle city boundaries. Persons living in one of the four zip codes that fall partly within Seattle are not included. If persons living in one of the four zip codes that spans the city boundary are included, the results change very slightly (see Table 1A in Appendix A). Although these data do indicate that a majority of Seattle residents admitted to publicly-funded drug treatment programs are white, they also suggest that the 34
Page 1 and 2: RACE AND DRUG LAW ENFORCEMENT IN SE
Page 3 and 4: This report was commissioned as par
Page 5 and 6: LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES PAGE TAB
Page 7 and 8: Figure 9. Purposeful Seattle Drug D
Page 10 and 11: SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS FINDING 1 T
Page 12 and 13: FINDING 4 The focus on crack cocain
Page 14 and 15: INTRODUCTION Less than 5 percent of
Page 16 and 17: RACIAL DISPARITIES IN SEATTLE DRUG
Page 18 and 19: Table 1. Black and White Drug Arres
Page 20 and 21: esearchers found that rates of drug
Page 22 and 23: RESEARCH DESIGN AND ORGANIZATION OF
Page 24: serious drugs in Seattle are white.
Page 27 and 28: users: “Persons at almost all lev
Page 29 and 30: as the goal is to provide samples o
Page 31 and 32: percent of white Seattle residents,
Page 33 and 34: acial/ethnic groups. These data ind
Page 35 and 36: When approaching clients, surveyors
Page 37 and 38: youth. However, these surveys likel
Page 39 and 40: 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Page 41: or partially publicly-funded treatm
Page 45 and 46: system at the time of their death w
Page 47 and 48: did not transfer drugs to the buyer
Page 49 and 50: Insofar as many drug users knowingl
Page 51 and 52: the person who provided these subst
Page 53 and 54: Table 7. Racial and Ethnic Composit
Page 55 and 56: Table 8. Summary of Data Pertaining
Page 57 and 58: ut only 89 for methamphetamine, ecs
Page 59 and 60: time. 87 As noted previously, this
Page 61 and 62: Drug delivery arrests continue to b
Page 63 and 64: In sum, many of the arrest patterns
Page 65 and 66: Table 10. Racial Disparity in Drug
Page 68 and 69: PART III: EXPLAINING RACIAL DISPARI
Page 70 and 71: that a higher percentage of whites
Page 72 and 73: After clients had completed their s
Page 74 and 75: Table 13. Racial and Ethnic Composi
Page 76 and 77: whites engaging in the same behavio
Page 78 and 79: Analysis of the patterns found in t
Page 80 and 81: Table 16. Statistical Significance
Page 82 and 83: In sum, the evidence shows that rac
Page 84 and 85: those delivering drugs downtown wer
Page 86 and 87: for delivering a serious drug in Se
Page 88 and 89: to danger, instantaneous addiction
Page 90 and 91: 9.6 percent primarily abused other
Page 92 and 93:
percent of those delivering drugs d
Page 94 and 95:
officers made a drug arrest, issued
Page 96 and 97:
Figure 18. Geographic Distribution
Page 98 and 99:
Figure 20. Geographic Distribution
Page 100 and 101:
As these maps illustrate, civilian
Page 102 and 103:
and infant health by crack cocaine
Page 104 and 105:
Although the crack trade has been a
Page 106:
Weapons were more likely to be seiz
Page 109 and 110:
supports an alternative explanation
Page 111 and 112:
Buckman, Charles, and John Lamberth
Page 113 and 114:
Hagedorn, John M. 1994. “Homeboys
Page 115 and 116:
Murphy, Sheigla and Dan Waldorf. 19
Page 117 and 118:
Ritter, Alison. 2005. A Review of A
Page 119 and 120:
United Nations International Drug C
Page 121 and 122:
APPENDIX B: UNRELIABLE 9-1-1 CALL E
Page 123 and 124:
Complaint: Arrival: Officer Update:
Page 126:
ABOUT THE AUTHOR Katherine Beckett
Page 130:
THE DEFENDER ASSOCIATION
show all

RACE AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF DRUG DELIVERY LAWS IN ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?