A Personal Case Study of Racial Profiling in America
- By Dr. George Banks
- Published 08/11/2009
- Community
- Unrated
Dr. George Banks
Growing up in Boston, Massachusetts, Dr. Banks has been significantly influenced by the New England history of protest that has encompassed, among other things, America’s fight for freedom as well as movements for the abolition of slavery and equal rights for African Americans.
This is part two of last week’s article (Vol. 14 Issue 27) “A First-hand Look at Racial Profiling in America.”
I took my first step. I sent a letter to the head of the police authority that has jurisdiction for where I was stopped.
No place in the letter did I mention that my daughter and I were African-American. No place in the letter did I mention “racial profiling” or claim racism or unfair treatment. I simply provided a statement that included questions for which I was demanding answers.
I started the letter by reporting the details of the stoppage and continued with a statement and questions. Subsequent to my letter I received a letter from head of the police authority. The letter thanked me for my communication and advised me that my letter was being forwarded to the appropriate officials for an Internal Affairs Unit investigation.
The next set of actions from the police authority consisted of contacting me through telephone calls and letters. The purpose of these contacts was not to provide answers to the questions I raised, but rather to engage me in providing additional information to assist with an “internal” investigation.
In fact, I was asked to come to the police authority facilities for an interview regarding the incident.Having experience in resolving issues of discrimination, I was not surprised that requests were being made of me for additional information.
I realized that with my initial letter, I was placing on the police authority the burden of providing information to me regarding the actions of their police officers. This burden on the police authority was given additional weight in that I had sent copies of my initial letter to my U.S. Congressional Representative and my state government representative. Therefore, I anticipated that there would be an attempt to shift the burden of providing information away from the police authority back to me as my burden.
I did not respond. I had already provided a detailed account of the incident. Furthermore, my new question was, why was information being requested from me?
It seemed that the most significant information for the police authority internal investigation resided within the authority’s police officers who were present at the incident.
Additionally, I felt that my daughter and I were subjected to an inappropriate, time consuming, stressful interrogation while stopped on the highway on the way to my sister’s funeral. Why would I go to the police authority facility and subject myself to an unjustified, second interrogation at my own time and expense? I have yet to receive answers from the police authority.
The burden and indeed the obligation to provide information that answers my questions remain with the police.
Until they provide information that answers my questions, there is substantial justification for the conclusion that my daughter and I were the subject of “racial profiling.” I have given them an opportunity to explain the action of their officers as justifiable police practice and that my daughter and I were not subjected to “racial profiling.”
It may well be that the actions of the police officers were well within their legal authority.
At this time the case remains open. It will remain open until the point at which answers to the initial questions that I have asked are provided through the exercise of legal or other options.
My approach to dealing with “racial profiling” is based on my work with overall issues of racism and unfair treatment in our country.
In my practice and research as a social scientist, I have identified a critical relationship between levels of measurable human effectiveness on the one hand and issues or problems of race and other background factors, on the other hand. In any set of circumstances where the responsible people involved are at higher levels of effectiveness, there is less of a likelihood of problems or issues related to background differences.
Conversely, in any set of circumstances where the responsible people involved are at lower levels of effectiveness there is a greater likelihood of problems or issues related to background differences.
For me, this principle means that when there are issues or problems such as “racial profiling” or other forms of racism present in any situation, the point of attack for dealing with these issues is not really that of leveling charges of unfair treatment. What is far more important and likely to be more successful than making open charges of racism, is to directly confront the underlying human ineffectiveness of those responsible, which sets off the unfair treatment in the first place.
Therefore, where my daughter and I were subjected to “racial profiling” I have not launched a tirade claiming “racial profiling” or racism.
Instead, I am confronting the underlying ineffectiveness of law enforcement policy and practice that gives life to “racial profiling.” Each question I presented was directed at the ineffectiveness of police policy and practice.
My continued pursuit in this case will focus on ineffectiveness and its role in the “racial profiling” that my daughter and I experienced. End, pt. 2.
Organizations such as the Peoples Organization for Progress
(POP) have been active around the issue of police brutality.
One such case is that of Earl Faison who died within 45 minutes
after being wrongfully taken into custody by police in Orange, NJ. POP is currently campaigning for independent citizen-controlled
police review boards with subpoena powers for police forces at the state and local levels to move beyond our current state.
I took my first step. I sent a letter to the head of the police authority that has jurisdiction for where I was stopped.
No place in the letter did I mention that my daughter and I were African-American. No place in the letter did I mention “racial profiling” or claim racism or unfair treatment. I simply provided a statement that included questions for which I was demanding answers.
I started the letter by reporting the details of the stoppage and continued with a statement and questions. Subsequent to my letter I received a letter from head of the police authority. The letter thanked me for my communication and advised me that my letter was being forwarded to the appropriate officials for an Internal Affairs Unit investigation.
The next set of actions from the police authority consisted of contacting me through telephone calls and letters. The purpose of these contacts was not to provide answers to the questions I raised, but rather to engage me in providing additional information to assist with an “internal” investigation.
In fact, I was asked to come to the police authority facilities for an interview regarding the incident.Having experience in resolving issues of discrimination, I was not surprised that requests were being made of me for additional information.
I realized that with my initial letter, I was placing on the police authority the burden of providing information to me regarding the actions of their police officers. This burden on the police authority was given additional weight in that I had sent copies of my initial letter to my U.S. Congressional Representative and my state government representative. Therefore, I anticipated that there would be an attempt to shift the burden of providing information away from the police authority back to me as my burden.
I did not respond. I had already provided a detailed account of the incident. Furthermore, my new question was, why was information being requested from me?
It seemed that the most significant information for the police authority internal investigation resided within the authority’s police officers who were present at the incident.
Additionally, I felt that my daughter and I were subjected to an inappropriate, time consuming, stressful interrogation while stopped on the highway on the way to my sister’s funeral. Why would I go to the police authority facility and subject myself to an unjustified, second interrogation at my own time and expense? I have yet to receive answers from the police authority.
The burden and indeed the obligation to provide information that answers my questions remain with the police.
Until they provide information that answers my questions, there is substantial justification for the conclusion that my daughter and I were the subject of “racial profiling.” I have given them an opportunity to explain the action of their officers as justifiable police practice and that my daughter and I were not subjected to “racial profiling.”
It may well be that the actions of the police officers were well within their legal authority.
At this time the case remains open. It will remain open until the point at which answers to the initial questions that I have asked are provided through the exercise of legal or other options.
My approach to dealing with “racial profiling” is based on my work with overall issues of racism and unfair treatment in our country.
In my practice and research as a social scientist, I have identified a critical relationship between levels of measurable human effectiveness on the one hand and issues or problems of race and other background factors, on the other hand. In any set of circumstances where the responsible people involved are at higher levels of effectiveness, there is less of a likelihood of problems or issues related to background differences.
Conversely, in any set of circumstances where the responsible people involved are at lower levels of effectiveness there is a greater likelihood of problems or issues related to background differences.
For me, this principle means that when there are issues or problems such as “racial profiling” or other forms of racism present in any situation, the point of attack for dealing with these issues is not really that of leveling charges of unfair treatment. What is far more important and likely to be more successful than making open charges of racism, is to directly confront the underlying human ineffectiveness of those responsible, which sets off the unfair treatment in the first place.
Therefore, where my daughter and I were subjected to “racial profiling” I have not launched a tirade claiming “racial profiling” or racism.
Instead, I am confronting the underlying ineffectiveness of law enforcement policy and practice that gives life to “racial profiling.” Each question I presented was directed at the ineffectiveness of police policy and practice.
My continued pursuit in this case will focus on ineffectiveness and its role in the “racial profiling” that my daughter and I experienced. End, pt. 2.
Organizations such as the Peoples Organization for Progress
(POP) have been active around the issue of police brutality.
One such case is that of Earl Faison who died within 45 minutes
after being wrongfully taken into custody by police in Orange, NJ. POP is currently campaigning for independent citizen-controlled
police review boards with subpoena powers for police forces at the state and local levels to move beyond our current state.