w w w . p r e s s t i t u t e s . o r g

Racial Bias in the Criminal Justice System

Update: An incredibly good overview on this topic is also available from Accuracy in Media:

Black Criminals, White Victims, and White Guilt

  The constant drumbeat among the MSM and especially among so-called 'public' radio and television informs us that blacks and hispanics (but mostly blacks) are unfairly victimized by every aspect of the criminal-justice system, from cops to judges to juries.

The actual facts of the matter, naturally, are somewhat different.
Today's example comes from a place called the 'Unamusement Park'

and in an extended essay there called

‘Too Hateful to Handle’

  we learn that most everything we're taught by the MSM presstitutes on this topic is demonstrably false.  No surprise there.  But...examples?

The racial disparity on Death Row is overexplained by racial disparities in crime.


Death penalty likelihood “rose for murders that were particularly heinous — usually involving a number of aggravating circumstances such as the killing of several victims, sexual abuse of the victim, the killing of an elderly person or a child, premeditated murders where there was extensive planning, killings in which the victim was set on fire, and murders in which the victim was mutilated or dismembered

Sadly, no prizes are awarded for guessing which 'minority group' accounts for a wildly disparate portion of such murders.  Nor will they be awarded for guessing which group is wildly over-represented among their victims. 

But...what a surprise...so long as something--anything--is stolen or even claimed to be sought before, during, or after these murders the FBI will not count them as hate crimes.

The ugly fact? 

Blacks commit just over 85% of the inter-racial violence in the USA--almost precisely the opposite of what MSM propaganda and entertainment depict.

Statistically Speaking

"Here’s how I know, for a fact, that police aren’t biased against blacks. The FBI keeps track of arrests through the Uniform Crime Reporting program, while the Census Bureau counts offenders in the National Crime Victimization Survey. NCVS is an extensive, nationally representative survey of crime victims, and it does not involve the police in any way. Putting the two together, we can compare the racial breakdown of arrests to the racial breakdown of offenders (of known race) as reported by the victims.

Let’s take 2004 to 2008, the last five years for which NCVS data are available, and look at three crimes: aggravated assault, robbery (or mugging), and rape (plus sexual assault); making sure to combine single- and multiple-offender crimes from NCVS. What percentage of offenders were black? How about arrests?
 (Bearing in mind that blacks make up about 13% of the U.S. population.)"

Black share of robbery
                                    offenders (red) and arrests

Black share of robbery offenders (red) and arrests (orange)

Black share of rape offenders
                                    (blue) and arrests (purple)

Black share of rape offenders (blue) and arrests (purple)

Black share of aggravated
                                    assault offenders (green) and
                                    arrests (yellow)

Black share of aggravated assault offenders (green) and arrests (yellow)

When Leonard Pitts Jr., or whoever, starts babbling about “documented biases against black people,” he is essentially asking us to believe that it’s easier to frame them for murder, rape and robbery, than round them up for loitering, vandalism and drunkenness:

Black share of arrests (left to
                                    right): murder, robbery, rape;
                                    loitering and curfew violations,
                                    vandalism, and drunkenness

Black share of arrests (left to right): murder, robbery, rape; loitering and curfew violations, vandalism, and drunkenness

"Black crime against whites is underreported? On what planet?"

It's a great question.  Because here on this planet, almost without exception, black crime against whites--when it is reported--is reported locally, while the (far rarer) examples of white crimes against blacks are in almost every case an international media sensation.  (Just as when an unarmed white man is shot and killed by police, it's only a local story.) And even when anti-white crime is reported, the races of victim and perpetrator are generally left out of the story.  Hence we have endless 'flash mobs' 'gang rapes' and 'knockout games' where the miscreants are 'teens' and 'youths' because We Dare Not Speak the Truth.

So the (putatively rhetorical) question above is actually a trick question.  Black crime is sometimes reported, but even the most hideous examples are always local stories only, and completely ignored by the national media, which would rather publish a rare case of a home invasion by white criminals on the front page.  Or, when that fails, simply make up a story about white fraternity boys raping young women.

But wait, there's more!

“Quantitative and qualitative evidence collected at the federal, state, and local levels confirms that racial profiling persists” (CivilRights.org). And how do we know this? Traffic stops and searches are “disproportionate” relative to the “total population.”

“Racial bias permeates the Minnesota justice system” (Hamline Law Review): it’s “extensive,” “substantial,” indeed “rampant,” and it’s “getting worse and not better.” And we know this because… “Recent studies show that African Americans in Minnesota are arrested for violent crimes at a rate twenty-five times higher” and so on and so forth.

In Washington State, census figures reveal that “black men and women were incarcerated at a disproportionately high rate” (Spokesman-Review). “Experts say drug policies explain the racial disparities… despite equal amounts of drug use across racial lines.”

If you can’t find police “bias,” you can always broaden the definition. Internal Affairs in San Jose rejected four years’ worth of “racial profiling or other bias allegations against city cops,” so now, in a move celebrated by “minority community leaders,” the department has changed its policy, “making it a violation for an officer to show any biased behavior at any time during an encounter with the public” (Mercury News). It has also stopped officers impounding the cars of unlicensed drivers, “a practice many felt was unfairly targeting undocumented Latino immigrants.” Unfair targeting — of unlicensed illegals.

  Are knee-jerk leftist racists really bothered by racial disparities?  No, the data show that racial disparities in the American criminal justice system actually favor minorities.  What these people want is a system which victimizes white people even more egregiously.  Just as the crime itself does.

What would it mean to “eliminate racially disparate treatment,” when “disparate treatment” just means that black arrest rates match black crime rates? And what sort of “change in policy” can sever the “mental connection between” two related factors?

Attorney General Reno “reduced the apparent racial bias” in capital punishment by disproportionately executing white defendants. Attorney General Ashcroft sees “no evidence of racial bias” when white defendants are demonstrably more likely “at each stage of the department’s review process to be subjected to the death penalty.”

Today, under Attorney General Eric “My People” Holder, DOJ Civil Rights is “reluctant to take cases of white victims” (Washington Times). In its report, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights cited “numerous specific examples of open hostility and opposition.”

Testimony obtained by the panel during its investigation included allegations that some Justice Department lawyers refused to work on cases involving white victims; that lawyers who worked on such cases were harassed and ostracized; and that some employees, including supervisory attorneys and political appointees, openly opposed race-neutral enforcement of voting rights laws.

Across the pond, for at least three decades now, imported Pakistanis have been raping and generally abusing untold numbers of English white girls, “but police had not gone public about the problem for fear of upsetting ethnic groups” (Daily Star). According to former Detective Superintendent Mick Gradwell, “The main pressure police have is being called institutionally racist if they highlight a crime trend like this.”

At least England’s “all-white juries” are “not guilty” of racial “bias” (Guardian).

In fact, it seems all juries are more likely to convict white defendants, and notably, some white juries […] are more likely to convict a white defendant if the victim of the assault was black or Asian. […] the jury is one element in the criminal justice system that seems to treat black and Asian defendants fairly.

Because race-neutral enforcement isn’t what they have in mind. “The colorblind thesis, the notion that ‘race’ does not or should not matter and that society and its laws are or can be colorblind, is simply unfounded” (Michigan Journal of Race and Law).

Blacks on juries refuse to convict black defendants.

As far as they're concerned "Everything is About Race" and everything is part of the race war against white people.

Curtis Lavelle Vance, serial rapist of white women, smashed Anne Pressly’s head apart with his fists and left her to die in what the Associated Press called “a suspected burglary.” Kristen Edwards considers herself lucky just to have been raped (Arkansas Times).

Given how good the DNA evidence is in the Marianna rape, how much of a slam dunk it seems […] not to mention the fact that Vance took the stand in the rape trial and testified that he had, in fact, told Little Rock detectives in a taped confession that he was in Edwards’ house on the morning of the rape, it was confusing for a lot of people when on Feb. 3, a jury in Marianna decided they couldn’t reach a verdict. The case was declared a mistrial.

The jury split seven to five along strictly racial lines — seven blacks and five whites. Even though it would be hard to find a genetics expert in the world who would tell you there was more than an unfathomably remote chance that the semen found inside the victim belonged to anyone other than Curtis Vance, the fact of the matter is this: All the white members of the jury were apparently swayed by that evidence, while all the black jurors were not.

Black jury nullification: call it a radical pedagogy for change.

[Prosecutor Fletcher] Long told the story of another Marianna rape trial he was involved in a few years back […] After the second mistrial in that case with the jury again split strictly on racial lines, the victim decided not to press it any further. Unlike Curtis Vance, that defendant — innocent until proven guilty in a court of law — is walking the streets of Marianna today.

It’s only one of the cases in the area, Long said, where a trial involving DNA wound up with “equally bizarre results” broken down on racial lines. “I’ve seen it in other types of cases,” Long said. “Although it gets particularly difficult to deal with in black/white crime” […]

Long said that the origins of that kind of thinking might lie with the media. “I think we spend so much time in the news nationwide and local to our state underlining, in the process of saying mea culpa, all the unjust things that have been done to blacks in the past, which creates a psychology of, almost, an ‘I’m going to level the score’ type thing.”

Meanwhile, the Center for Crime Prevention and Control rationalizes “ ‘stop snitching’ culture” (NPR): “What is really going on is that, after centuries of bad treatment at the hands of the outside world, … it has become mainstream thought in many minority, especially African-American communities, that law enforcement is the enemy, and good people do not treat with the enemy.” And street thugs are just looking to “finish school.”

Crime journalist Radley Balko is still “astonished to hear one hip-hop artist and activist say he would not cooperate with the police even if he had witnessed the rape and murder of an old woman in broad daylight” (Reason). Maybe you should adjust your expectations.

But once again, this is hardly a new phenomenon. As Winfield H. Collins wrote in The Truth About Lynching and the Negro in the South (1918): “Seldom is it found that the Negro will aid in the detection of the Negro criminal, rather otherwise.”

Or as Thomas Nelson Page wrote at length in The Southerner’s Problem (1904):

Conditions in the South render the commission of this crime [rape] peculiarly easy. The white population is sparse, the forests are extensive, the officers of the law distant and difficult to reach; but, above all, the Negro population have appeared inclined to condone the fact of mere assault.


The criminal, under the ministrations of his preachers, usually professed to have “got religion,” and from the shadow of the gallows called on his friends to follow him to glory. So that the punishment lost to these emotional people much of its deterrent force, especially where the real sympathy of the race was mainly with the criminal rather than with his victim. […]

For a time, a speedy execution by hanging was the only mode of retribution resorted to by the lynchers; then, when this failed of its purpose, a more savage method was essayed, born of a savage fury at the failure of the first, and a stern resolve to strike a deeper terror into those whom the other method had failed to awe.


A close following of the instances of rape and lynching, and the public discussion consequent thereon, have led the writer to the painful realization that even the leaders of the Negro race — at least, those who are prominent enough to hold conventions and write papers on the subject — have rarely, by act or word, shown a true appreciation of the enormity of the crime of ravishing and murdering women. Their discussion and denunciation have been almost invariably and exclusively devoted to the crime of lynching. Underlying most of their protests is the suggestion that the victim of the mob is innocent and a martyr.

I'd say they watched too much PBS..

More, much more, at:

‘Too Hateful to Handle’

Direct link:


Meanwhile, America's convulsions about the killing of one black criminal in suburban St. Louis turn out to be wholly unfounded.  Even the left-wing black commentator in the Washington Post admits it:

"The Justice Department released two must-read investigations connected to the killing of Brown that filled in blanks, corrected the record and brought sunlight to dark places by revealing ugly practices that institutionalized racism and hardship. They have also forced me to deal with two uncomfortable truths: Brown never surrendered with his hands up, and Wilson was justified in shooting Brown."

"Wilson knew about the theft of the cigarillos from the convenience store and had a description of the suspects. Brown fought with the officer and tried to take his gun. And the popular hands-up storyline, which isn’t corroborated by ballistic and DNA evidence and multiple witness statements, was perpetuated by Witness 101. In fact, just about everything said to the media by Witness 101, whom we all know as Dorian Johnson, the friend with Brown that day, was not supported by the evidence and other witness statements."


In this infamous case, the cause of soul-searching and hand-wringing among many Americans and especially their MSM, the vast majority of black witnesses lied through their teeth, causing riots and murders, and--of course--will never be held accountable for it. 

What do liberals think of this?
Check out the Huffington Post:

As they say, "you can't make this stuff up."

What say you?

comments powered by Disqus

Web Hosting