New York Police racially driven in frisking minorities in the city

New York, May 13 (ANI): A non-profit organisation in New York has accused the city police of being racially driven while undertaking frisking drives of residents.

In 2009, it said police in New York City frisked Blacks and Latinos nine times more than whites.

According to the New York Times, police carried out more than 575,000 stops of people in the city, a record number of what are known in police parlance as “stop and frisks,” and this yielded 762 guns.

The least commonly cited reason for the stop was the claim that the person fit the description of a suspect. The most common reason listed by the police was a category known as “furtive movements.”

Under Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly, the New York Police Department’s use of such street stops has more than quintupled, fueling not only an intense debate about the effectiveness and propriety of the tactic, but also litigation intended to force the department to reveal more information about the encounters.

The Center for Constitutional Rights, which got the data on stop and frisks after it first sued the city over the issue after the 1999 killing of Amadou Diallo, said its analysis of the 2009 data showed again what it argued was the racially driven use of the tactic against minorities and its relatively modest achievements in fighting crime.

Police officials, for their part, vigorously praise the stop-and-frisk policy as a cornerstone of their efforts to suppress crime.

They claim the stops led to 34,000 arrests and seizure of more than 6,000 weapons other than guns, according to the center’s analysis.

The police officials argue that the widespread use of the tactic has forced criminals to keep their guns at home and allowed the department to bank thousands of names in a database for detectives to mine in fighting future crimes.

Besides better reporting, the surge in the number of stops, they said, is also a byproduct of flooding high-crime areas with more officers, a strategy for a force with a shrinking headcount. (ANI)

Longer sentences for future crimes deter potential criminals

Washington, May 19 (ANI): Former prisoners are less likely to return to jail if they expect longer sentences for future crimes, according to a study.

The study-conducted by researchers from the University of Naples Parthenope, France-based National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS), and University of Bergamo-used a recently passed Italian law as a natural experiment.

“This paper contributes to the literature providing evidence that potential criminals do respond to a change in prison sentences,” write the study’s authors.

They say that Italy’s Collective Clemency Bill, which was passed in 2006, presents a unique opportunity to study the deterrent effect of prison sentences.

They point out that when the clemency bill was passed, it immediately released thousands of prisoners who had three years or less left on their sentences. The remainder of each prisoner’s sentence was suspended, but not forgiven.

According to the authors, the law stipulated that a former inmate who commits a new crime within five years will have the suspended portion of his sentence reinstated and added to the sentence for the new crime.

Consequently, a repeat offender can expect extra jail time equal to the suspended portion of his sentence-anywhere from one month to three years.

The researchers used government data to look at the recidivism rates of the hese former inmates for the first seven months after their release, and found that those with longer suspended sentences-and therefore longer expected sentences for new crimes-were less likely to be re-arrested than those with shorter suspended sentences.

“These results corroborate the general theory of deterrence,” the authors write.

Their calculations suggested, “increasing the expected sentence by 50 percent should reduce recidivism rates by about 35 percent in seven months.”

However, even a small increase in the expected sentence was enough to deter recidivism at least a little, the team found.

The data suggest that a one-month increase in expected sentence resulted in a 1.3 percent lower probability of returning to prison.

The deterrent effect was consistent across age groups, and among men and women, though 95 percent of the sample was male.

“This means that a policy a commuting actual sentences in expected sentences significantly reduces recidivism. A mass release of prisoners can be effective in reducing their propensity of re-committing crimes if, when a released individual gets convicted of a new crime, his normal sentence is increased by the time that was pardoned because of the early release,” Dr. Vertova says.

The researchers, however, write that one important exception to the deterrent effect was that recidivism rates among those whose original crime was more serious were essentially unaffected by the length of their suspended sentence, which suggests that “more dangerous inmates are not deterred.”

They also caution that their results only measure deterrence on those who have already served time in jail.

“Indeed, it is not clear whether these results can be to individuals who have never received prison treatment,” they noted.

However, despite the limitations, the study does provide real-world evidence that “individuals vary their criminal activity in response to a change in prison sentences,” the authors write.

The study has been reported in the Journal of Political Economy. (ANI)