Ferguson Effect?

[LP_85]

There is no Ferguson Effect:

http://sentencingproject.org/doc/pub...son_Effect.pdf

https://storify.com/davidminbklyn/as...in-perspective

[Wesley Mouch]

Most likely Detroit didn't provide mid-year crime statistics and that's why it isn't mentioned. It's hard to draw any conclusions about about what is causing an increase in murders in some cities beyond wild speculation. We're not even looking at a complete set of data to draw any inferences since 1) all cities haven't provided data, and 2) we've still got 1/3rd of the year left to finish out.

It is too early to say for sure -- you're right on that.

Nonetheless, I really enjoy reading posts like yours where you'll make whatever leap is necessary to avoid saying that this is alarming. Am I that way on my issues? I hope not.

IHTD, if the trend were to continue for years -- and every city reports -- would you then believe? Or would you find new reasons why it just can't be?

[iheartthed]

It is too early to say for sure -- you're right on that.

Nonetheless, I really enjoy reading posts like yours where you'll make whatever leap is necessary to avoid saying that this is alarming. Am I that way on my issues? I hope not.

IHTD, if the trend were to continue for years -- and every city reports -- would you then believe? Or would you find new reasons why it just can't be?

I assume you started this thread in the Detroit Issues section because you thought this was relevant to Detroit. But Detroit's murder rate is flat since last summer so is this even still relevant?

[Wesley Mouch]

I assume you started this thread in the Detroit Issues section because you thought this was relevant to Detroit. But Detroit's murder rate is flat since last summer so is this even still relevant?

It is more of a national issue than local -- but it has tremendous local implications.

BLM and its adherents have a strong message for African-Americans. How that message is accepted in Detroit is relevant. That Detroit is doing better than other cities is also relevant. Why is our murder rate flat? Relevant.

I might suggest that our murder rate is flat because Chief Craig is having success with the culture of DPD. I also think its possible that Detroiters are tired of the same old solutions of the progressive past and are starting to realize that the right is not their enemy. At least let me dream, won't ya.

[aj3647]

The issue is whether or not a police killing is justified. In the vast majority of cases, the answer is yes.

In the vast majority of cases, in the absence of clear video or independent eyewitness testimony, they simply take the cop's word for what happened. There have already been two high profile cases of police officers murdering unarmed black men where the officer's "version" of events was directly contradicted by video evidence [[Michael Slager in South Carolina and the University of Cincinnati officer who shot the black motorist), i.e. the officers were LYING. In short, police officers have a vested interest in lying to keep themselves out of prison.

If you're in a situation where you are potentially facing decades in prison, wouldn't you lie to keep yourself out? I think 95% of people, cop or not, would absolutely lie if it meant avoiding a prison sentence. I think cops would actually be MORE prone to lying to cover their own asses, because they know how they will be received in prison as former police officers.

[ejames01]

It's almost certainly true. Police are less willing to be proactive, and crime rises. Same thing happened in the late 60's and early 70's following the era of riots. Baltimore has had stunning increases in crime this year directly dated to the urban unrest.

"Black Lives Matters" is a borderline domestic terrorist group. They explicitly, repeatedly, called for the execution of police officers, and have now gotten their wish multiple times. Anyone who supports BLM and their aims should be ashamed. They should rename themselves "Black Lives don't Matter unless said Black Life is a Criminal trying to Kill a Non-Black Cop".

The only time the city of Detroit really had huge protests over the last year was over Ferguson. Yet our Justice Department, headed by a black civil rights leader, and who answers to a black President, determined that "Hands Up Don't Shoot" was a lie, and that the officer acted properly, within guidelines, in Ferguson. That was apparently cause for protest, but the 300 blacks killed in Detroit during the same period, many of them innocents, weren't worth a damn.

Totally not true.

[Dan Wesson]

In the vast majority of cases, in the absence of clear video or independent eyewitness testimony, they simply take the cop's word for what happened. There have already been two high profile cases of police officers murdering unarmed black men where the officer's "version" of events was directly contradicted by video evidence [[Michael Slager in South Carolina and the University of Cincinnati officer who shot the black motorist), i.e. the officers were LYING. In short, police officers have a vested interest in lying to keep themselves out of prison.

If you're in a situation where you are potentially facing decades in prison, wouldn't you lie to keep yourself out? I think 95% of people, cop or not, would absolutely lie if it meant avoiding a prison sentence. I think cops would actually be MORE prone to lying to cover their own asses, because they know how they will be received in prison as former police officers.

Ha, you have no idea about how fast a LEO will lie to ya to get you to say something incriminating. SCOTUS has decided that when a LEO lies it is not illegal and cannot be used in court as a defense. [[e.g., Frazier v. Cupp, 1969) [[State v. Cobb, 1977 and State v. Jackson, 1983)

It's called the false evidence ploy.

Lying is part of their tool kit, sad to say.

[Bham1982]

In the vast majority of cases, in the absence of clear video or independent eyewitness testimony, they simply take the cop's word for what happened.

No, actually what they do is present the shooting to a Grand Jury [[a jury of your peers) and the people decide whether or not to indict.

You're just angry that we don't have mob rule, and we don't hang cops for defending themselves or otherwise following the law. The fact that Grand Juries don't indict cops in the vast majority of instances means that the incidents are due to the fault of the other party.

If you have a specific problem with the Grand Juries, then the problem is with your fellow citizens, not with police. But I suspect you just don't like the Grand Jury decisions because it doesn't fit your totally discredited killer cop/innocent criminal, "hands up don't shoot" worldview.

[Honky Tonk]

Ha, you have no idea about how fast a LEO will lie to ya to get you to say something incriminating. SCOTUS has decided that when a LEO lies it is not illegal and cannot be used in court as a defense. [[e.g., Frazier v. Cupp, 1969)

It's called the false evidence ploy.

Lying is part of their tool kit, sad to say.

Yep, Been there, and had it happen to me.

[Bham1982]

It is more of a national issue than local -- but it has tremendous local implications.

BLM and its adherents have a strong message for African-Americans. How that message is accepted in Detroit is relevant. That Detroit is doing better than other cities is also relevant. Why is our murder rate flat? Relevant.

I might suggest that our murder rate is flat because Chief Craig is having success with the culture of DPD. I also think its possible that Detroiters are tired of the same old solutions of the progressive past and are starting to realize that the right is not their enemy. At least let me dream, won't ya.

Or, more plausibly, the increased violence brought about by BLM and the like has less of an impact on a police force that is already generally hands off. It isn't like Detroit cops are now less aggressive in fighting crime; there hasn't been truly proactive crime enforcement in Detroit since the early 1970's, and they probably don't have the manpower to be aggressive in the first place.

[DetroitBoy]

Or, more plausibly, the increased violence brought about by BLM and the like has less of an impact on a police force that is already generally hands off. It isn't like Detroit cops are now less aggressive in fighting crime; there hasn't been truly proactive crime enforcement in Detroit since the early 1970's, and they probably don't have the manpower to be aggressive in the first place.

These BLM people think they have free rein to tear up and destroy neighborhoods with no consequences. It is essentially mob rule and it has to stop. If law enforcement bows to this kind of behavior, crime will only increase which is what is happening now across the country. What punishment came to Michael Brown's stepfather for inciting the riot in Ferguson and the destruction that followed? I never heard of him being convicted of anything even though there is clear video he was responsible:

http://youtu.be/MLlDzWt7TPc


It is great to see people coming back to Detroit and growth and gentrification happening. What ISN'T great is watching crime shift and spillover to first ring suburbs from the adjacent northern Detroit neighborhoods. Places like Harper Woods, Eastpointe, Grosse Pointe Woods and Ferndale do not have the manpower to contain this crime. The city of Detroit needs to be more aggressive with whatever state or federal resources they can get to come in and sweep these neighborhoods and shut the illegal activity down. They know who these gangs are and where they have drug houses. Take them out with a zero tolerance for breaking the law. There are still too many dangerous people and illegal activity going on that needs to be shut down by aggressive enforcement.

[LP_85]

If you have a specific problem with the Grand Juries, then the problem is with your fellow citizens, not with police. But I suspect you just don't like the Grand Jury decisions because it doesn't fit your totally discredited killer cop/innocent criminal, "hands up don't shoot" worldview.

No, the specific problem is in how cases involving police officers are treated completely different from every other case.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/08/ny...l-actions.html

For most felonies, grand jury hearings are swift, bare-bones proceedings. Prosecutors present enough evidence to show it is probable that the defendant, who rarely testifies, committed a crime, and ask the jury to vote for an indictment. Several cases are usually processed in a single day.

But because most prosecutors impanel a special grand jury to investigate police-related deaths, they insulate themselves from the final decision, while appearing to fulfill the public desire for an independent review, legal experts said. The inquiries often go on for weeks or months, with testimony from several witnesses.

The proceeding is transformed into a trial of sorts, behind closed doors but without cross-examination. Prosecutors control what witnesses appear and in what order, legal scholars said.

In most cases, the officer provides his or her account; prosecutors can decide to let an officer’s version of events go unchallenged or to discredit it with cross-examination. They can do the same with other witnesses.

“If the prosecutor wants an indictment she or he is probably going to get one because they do have so much control over the grand jury,” said Andrew D. Leipold, a law professor at the University of Illinois who is an expert on grand juries. “The accountability for the decision to charge or not to charge rests with the prosecutor, not with the grand jury.”

[Gpwrangler]

Places like Harper Woods, Eastpointe, Grosse Pointe Woods and Ferndale do not have the manpower to contain this crime.

They do a very good job of controlling it. No doubt the Military and Guard would be called out if necessary.

[Bham1982]

No, the specific problem is in how cases involving police officers are treated completely different from every other case.

Then change the laws if you don't think that cops have a right to defend themselves.

The problem, generally speaking, isn't the cops. It's black-on-black crime, and its many, many enablers.

[Wesley Mouch]

There is no Ferguson Effect:

http://sentencingproject.org/doc/pub...son_Effect.pdf

https://storify.com/davidminbklyn/as...in-perspective

The first article was an interesting read. Their conclusion was not that there 'is not Ferguson Effect'. Here's their CONCLUSION:

Whatever their cause, double-digit homicide increases in St. Louis and other cities during the past several months should not be discounted as unimportant or as mere “random fluctuations” in crime statistics – not when so many lives are at stake.

They say the issue needs attention.

But neither should the recent increases be read as a new crime wave, at least not yet. Even with a 33% increase over the previous year, the St. Louis homicide rate in 2014 remained well below the peak levels reached in the early 1990s [[see Figure 5). We should watch the new increases carefully and encourage local police departments to apply evidence-based best practices in response.

They're saying to keep looking to see if new evidence continues to suggest a Ferguson Effect.

In the absence of credible and comprehensive evidence, sounding alarm bells over a “Ferguson effect” or any other putative cause will not help.

They're NOT saying there's no Ferguson Effect -- but just that we shouldn't right the 'alarm bells'.

This article actually expressed great concern that there IS an effect. That increase in crime look like they might be caused by FE -- but let's not jump to conclusions.

These days, its easy to find a study that agrees with our point of view. This first study sounds like it supports you POV, but it really doesn't.

On the Ferguson level, it does point out that the increase in crime in Ferguson does't look like its the Effect. And that makes sense. Ferguson has to be the most distorted law enforment vortex on the planet. But they don't dispel the apparent increase in crime in other cities, nor that it MIGHT be Ferguson Effect.

Those who are concerned about urban crime predicted exactly this increase in crime -- and we're starting to see it. I don't see any other causes being brought forward, except for a comment that there's been a change in the types of drugs used. So I'm seeing facts suggesting a potential link -- and only supposition so far against.

Bring on the evidence.

And in the meantime, follow your articles advice. Watch this closely. Too many urban lives are at stake to ignore the Ferguson Effect. And remember that the disproportionately effects blacks.

[Pam]

http://www.commondreams.org/news/201...olice-violence

Launched as an online manifesto with an interactive website, Campaign Zero proposes new federal, state, and local laws that would address police violence and reform the criminal justice system—including demilitarizing law enforcement, increasing community oversight, limiting use-of-force, and requiring independent investigation and prosecution of police violence cases.
"More than one thousand people are killed by police every year in America," the group states on its website. "Nearly sixty percent of victims did not have a gun or were involved in activities that should not require police intervention such as harmless 'quality of life' behaviors or mental health crises."

I don't see anything listed advocating violence as a response to police violence.

[bust]

Thanks, Bust, for the comments. I think the connection -- the Ferguson Effect -- is an obvious result. So I'm interested in opposing thoughts.

The idea you suggest -- bolded above -- is that there is a simple 'correct' in a policeman's job. Its a common theme I hear from those who advocate for more police oversight. And I think its a simplification. For example, teachers in Ontario threaten to 'teach to the rule'. Its a threat to not be great teachers -- but to do everything required by the 'rules'. What I think is happening is the that cops are beginning to 'work to the rule'. That should have some positive effects, I hope. Fewer criminal actions by bad cops. But it also means that fewer cops are likely to put themselves in a situation where they can be called racist. So more cops do what they have to do -- and the criminals know it. Maybe its a small figure, but perhaps 5% more 'bad guys' now carry guns in NYC. The calculus has changed.

Thanks for the comment.

Thanks for your comment too. I'm happy to engage in a rational discussion.

I'm aware it's highly complex work for police to manage unpredictable and often very dangerous situations. Expecting them to do their job correctly does not change that.

It sounds like you believe recent criticism and scrutiny of the police is causing the "Ferguson effect" for three reasons: 1) some police have stopped using illegal aggressive behavior; 2) some police are hesitating engaging in borderline racist behavior; 3) some police have engaged in what amounts to a retaliatory work slow down. Please correct me if I misunderstood your words.

Your example of the Ontario teacher action reminds me of the police slow down that happened recently in New York. After the city saw large and overwhelmingly peaceful protests against the shocking grand jury decision not to indict the police officer who killed Eric Garner in a choke hold the police attempted to strong arm the city into "respecting" them. It was shameful. Rather than earning our respect it pushed many of us in the opposite direction.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/07/ny...-rarities.html

I hope that irresponsible behavior has not spread to other cities

The jury is still out whether there is a "Ferguson effect", but if it exists and these are the reasons for it, the fault lies squarely with the police. 1) It goes without saying police should not engage in illegal behavior. 2) Regarding hesitating engaging in borderline racist behavior, racism and racial profiling are prohibited, and for very good reason. I understand it's tricky for police to include every consideration in their calculus when snap life and death decisions must be made, but this one's important. The consideration should have been there in the first place. If they struggle with that more training is needed. No one said it's an easy job. 3) If police are petulantly refusing to perform to the best of their abilities because they're upset with recent scrutiny they don't deserve the honor of wearing the badge.

Police play a vital role enforcing law and order. It's correct to hold them to a high standard. And they should uphold law and order by their own example. They signed up for that when they chose the career. It's an incredibly noble profession when performed with moral integrity. But how incredibly ignoble when performed without it.

I strongly want to support the police. I strongly want police I can support.

Thankfully, most of them still are. But not all of them, not everywhere.

As citizens we need to be part of the discussion, to promote the good ones, and to oppose the bad.

[LP_85]

Then change the laws if you don't think that cops have a right to defend themselves.

First, it's not about "defending themselves." It's about accountability. You really don't think it's a problem that the entire justice system gives certain people special treatment just for wearing a badge? A huge part of the BLM movement is calling for changes to these laws and policies.

It's not a hate group. To reduce the entire thing to such is to effectively dismiss and ignore the millions of people who are saying "I don't feel safe. I don't feel protected by those who've sworn to do so. My life matters too. Why aren't you acknowledging that?"

The problem, generally speaking, isn't the cops. It's black-on-black crime, and its many, many enablers.

Or it could be that both things are problems. If you think the latter is being ignored, then you haven't been paying enough attention to the community that has to live with it every day. Instead of bringing that up to derail the conversation at hand, you might want to take a minute [[just a minute) and listen to what people are actually saying.

http://www.salon.com/2015/09/02/blac...ampaign=Tumblr

[Shai_Hulud]

Good article...

How is it that two mentally ill Black men targeting police officers constitutes a pattern, but the killing of Walter Scott, the killing of Samuel Dubose, and the killing of Jonathan Ferrell, all by police while they were clearly unarmed and committing no crimes, add up to a collection of unrelated, isolated incidents? How is it that the random acts of two mentally unstable Black men who had no formal or informal relationship with the Black Lives Matter movement constitute a trend, but the two dozen police killings of unarmed Black citizens again remain a collection of unfortunate but isolated incidents?

That was the underlying sentiment of my old friend’s post on my page. “The cops get killed, too. And you and your friends and your anti-cop rhetoric are the cause of it.” Such accusations, whether stated or implied, are designed to put Black people on the defensive. We are then supposed to prove that we are both human and humane, non-violent, empathetic, and non-dangerous. We are supposed to prove to white people that we are good people, that we are not a threat, that we mean them no harm. Never mind the harm that many of them have caused us. More than all that, we are not “reverse racists.”

[bust]

First, it's not about "defending themselves." It's about accountability. You really don't think it's a problem that the entire justice system gives certain people special treatment just for wearing a badge? A huge part of the BLM movement is calling for changes to these laws and policies.

It's not a hate group. To reduce the entire thing to such is to effectively dismiss and ignore the millions of people who are saying "I don't feel safe. I don't feel protected by those who've sworn to do so. My life matters too. Why aren't you acknowledging that?"



Or it could be that both things are problems. If you think the latter is being ignored, then you haven't been paying enough attention to the community that has to live with it every day. Instead of bringing that up to derail the conversation at hand, you might want to take a minute [[just a minute) and listen to what people are actually saying.

http://www.salon.com/2015/09/02/blac...ampaign=Tumblr

Well said and great article. Thanks for sharing.

[G-DDT]

The rise in Opiate addiction has something to do with it as well.

Yup!

Submitted for your approval:
1.) My brief interaction with Baltimore started with a twelve hour lay-over at a Greyhound waiting for misdirected luggage. I got to talk with some locals who said Baltimore has a serious heroin problem. Walking about the city gave me enough evidence to support those claims. It definitely screamed heroin.

2.) John Hopkins seems to be a great place to get supplies. According to a Mike Wallace episode of 20th Century on the History Channel [[a surprisingly competent report for the likes of the History Channel, but this was prior to 2000. The episode was called "Insidious Killers" and covered the history of Bio/chemical-warfare, even mentioning the Aum Shinrikyo subway gas attack of 1995.) Saddam Hussein got a lot of his bio/chemical-supplies from oversees, including the U.S. and John Hopkins [[oddly not mentioned on the internet or any Wikipedia entries).

3.)Of the many riddles I had to unravel during that horrible previous decade [[one where I chose to avoid any computer usage for over seven years), one regarded the Fentanyl [[remember? one of the drugs found in the system of a long-standing Dearborn Heights officer found dead in his garage this summer. http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...ewen/71080518/After all, the matter is affecting many othershttp://www.pressandguide.com/article...8767434421.txt) epidemic as reported in 2006. Most mainstream reportings [[broadcast and print) would mention how the problem was affecting the heroin addicted populace residing in Washington D.C., New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and many other cities surrounding Baltimore with the complete lack of mention of Baltimore.

What was the riddle in the Star Wars film Attack of the Clones:OBI-WAN
This is where it ought to be...
but it isn't. Gravity is pulling
all the stars in this area inward
to this spot. There should be a
star here... but there isn't.

YODA
Most interesting. Gravity's
silhouette remains, but the star
and all its planets have
disappeared. How can this be?

There is a brief pause. Then a CHILD puts its hand up. YODA nods.

JEDI CHILD JACK
Because someone erased it from the
archive memory.
YODA
Truly wonderful, the mind of a
child is. Uncluttered. To the
center of the pull of gravity go,
and find your planet you will.

....So, I ask, what would one be left to assume regarding where a lot of the supplying of Fentanyl was/is coming from?

[LP_85]

The first article was an interesting read. Their conclusion was not that there 'is not Ferguson Effect'. Here's their CONCLUSION:They say the issue needs attention.
They're saying to keep looking to see if new evidence continues to suggest a Ferguson Effect.

They're NOT saying there's no Ferguson Effect -- but just that we shouldn't right the 'alarm bells'.

They are absoluteley saying there is no Fergusen Effect:
https://twitter.com/SentencingProj/s...84617706835968

This article actually expressed great concern that there IS an effect. That increase in crime look like they might be caused by FE -- but let's not jump to conclusions.

These days, its easy to find a study that agrees with our point of view. This first study sounds like it supports you POV, but it really doesn't.

The concern is that the violence is real and affects people. That shouldn't be ignored. There is zero speculation on any cause in any way.

I'm not sure how it could be clearer. In order for the "Ferguson Effect" to exist, two things must be true: that there's an overall reversal in the trend in murder rates compared to the last 20-30 years [[of which there is no evidence), and any such increase must be a direct result of what happened in Ferguson [[which is directly contradicted by the fact that murder rates in St. Louis went up well before anything happened to Michael Brown).

To even speculate that there might be a Ferguson Effect is alarmist and irresponsible. It's about as useful to suggest any increase might have been caused by underground mole people.

On the Ferguson level, it does point out that the increase in crime in Ferguson does't look like its the Effect. And that makes sense. Ferguson has to be the most distorted law enforment vortex on the planet. But they don't dispel the apparent increase in crime in other cities, nor that it MIGHT be Ferguson Effect.

The numbers in the study are from St. Louis [[because it's the nearest city with enough data available). That they did not run the same numbers in every city in America does not in anyway suggest that there is any trend or unified cause. Any speculation is, again, irresponsible.

Those who are concerned about urban crime predicted exactly this increase in crime -- and we're starting to see it. I don't see any other causes being brought forward, except for a comment that there's been a change in the types of drugs used. So I'm seeing facts suggesting a potential link -- and only supposition so far against.

Bring on the evidence.

Who, specifically, are you referring to when you mention "those who are concerned about urban crime"? And what "evidence" is there for the type of drugs being the cause? You ask me to bring on the evidence, yet you make these claims with no supporting evidence whatsoever.

Again, there is absolutely nothing factual that suggests any link between unrest in Ferguson and murder rates either locally or overall. Nothing.

And in the meantime, follow your articles advice. Watch this closely. Too many urban lives are at stake to ignore the Ferguson Effect. And remember that the disproportionately effects blacks.

And it also does the community a huge disservice to speculate about causes which are not supported by evidence.

[Bham1982]

They are absoluteley saying there is no Fergusen Effect:
https://twitter.com/SentencingProj/s...84617706835968

Wait, a radical organization that supports/funds Black Lives Matters, and which wants to empty the jails in America, thinks there is no relationship between the urban unrest in Ferguson and Baltimore, and the skyrocketing crime immediately following the urban unrest. I'm completely shocked!

Next, let's consult the KKK, Nation of Islam, Westboro Baptist and ISIS for their unbiased, nuanced take on the situation...

Back in the real world, it's clear that there has been an uptick in violent crime following Ferguson/Baltimore, and it's clear that police have been "standing down" in response to the lies brought about by Black Lives Matter. We know this because we already have the data.

One can argue correlation-causation [[ I suppose one could argue it's all a wacky coincidence or something) but one can't argue the surge in crime or the timing of the surge.

[Gpwrangler]

Back in the real world, it's clear that there has been an uptick in violent crime following Ferguson/Baltimore, and it's clear that police have been "standing down" in response to the lies brought about by Black Lives Matter. We know this because we already have the data.

There is no data to support your "standing down" theory. You know that it would be foolish to walk in to Birmingham, Royal Oak or Huntington Woods and start shit expecting the cops to "stand down", and I can think of quite a few more examples.

[Wesley Mouch]

There is no data to support your "standing down" theory. You know that it would be foolish to walk in to Birmingham, Royal Oak or Huntington Woods and start shit expecting the cops to "stand down", and I can think of quite a few more examples.

The argument behind the Ferguson Effect is not that officers are 'standing down', whatever that means.

Standing down might be an appropriate word for that idiot clerk in Kentucky who put her religious beliefs above the law she vowed to enforce. The Ferguson Effect does not suggest officers aren't doing their job. It suggests that they are being just a little bit less aggressive -- especially in high-risk situations.

Isn't this what BLM wants? Less aggressive policing? Don't hassle people. Don't get worked up about 'victimless' crimes or 'quality of life' crimes.

I don't think police are 'standing down'. They just are thinking twice. Being just a little less aggressive. Trying to make sure they don't get into a situation that will look bad.

Bad guys figure this out. Like bad kids, they push the limits. They notice that they aren't getting hassled quite as much. They take slightly greater risks than before. The crime rate ticks up just a little bit.

That's the Ferguson Effect -- and we don't know that its the cause of the currently trends... but we should watch and listen. Sticking our heads in the sand and screaming that its not true doesn't get us to the right solution.