4 ms·

"From 1999-2011, 2,151 whites died as a result of being shot by police compared to just 1,130 blacks." That is meaningless without adjusting for population si

by kmkemp 10y ago

"From 1999-2011, 2,151 whites died as a result of being shot by police compared to just 1,130 blacks." That is meaningless without adjusting for population sizes. "In 2013 black criminals carried out 38% of murders, compared to 31.1% for whites" I think what you mean to say is that blacks were convicted of 38% of murders compared to 31.1% for whites. I'm not saying that judicial injustice is enough to close a gap that wide, but you shouldn't present those facts without context.

kmkemp 10y ago
Thanks for the downvotes with no explanation. Did you know that blacks and hispanics make up about 59% of the prison population compared to 32% for non-hispanic whites (a ratio of 1.84), but yet the Innocence Project has exonerated (as of 2010) 172 black and hispanic persons compared to 82 whites (a ratio of 2.1)? Unless my math is wrong, that is about a 14% discrepancy.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  Why do you assume that the rate of actual innocence is constant across race/ethnicity of prisoners?
  - kmkemp 10y ago
    The entire point of my statistics is to show that there is judicial injustice based on race. I show the opposite of your assertion by comparing prison demographics to exoneration demographics. So either the Innocence Project is racially biased (DNA evidence) or our judicial system is racially biased.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > So either the Innocence Project is racially biased (DNA evidence) or our judicial system is racially biased. For some reason, I misread your post as arguing the former and implying the assumption that the latter was not true, but I can't for the life of me see why I did that looking back at it.
    - pixl97 10y ago
      >The entire point of my statistics is to show that there is judicial injustice based on race. I don't believe you have enough information to show that with just racial information. A different study is needed that shows initial judicial justice based on dollars spent on defence. Essentially we need to know the likelihood of injustice based on each $10,000 spent on lawyers. If our findings show that defendants that spend larger amounts on their defense have a lower number unjust rulings then race is a lower factor and poverty is a larger factor. Since blacks in America are more apt to live in poverty, a simple black and white racial analysis will fail in showing causation.
      - kmkemp 10y ago
        Yes, you're right on that point. I suspect we would find that they are both large factors, though. Keep in mind that the statistics I showed actually undersell the prevalence since I compared the prison population to exonerations. Exonerations typically require DNA evidence and there are any number of crimes that can land you in prison where DNA evidence is a non-factor. Even the appeals process isn't immune from racial bias.

by kmkemp 10y ago

kmkemp 10y ago

Thanks for the downvotes with no explanation. Did you know that blacks and hispanics make up about 59% of the prison population compared to 32% for non-hispanic whites (a ratio of 1.84), but yet the Innocence Project has exonerated (as of 2010) 172 black and hispanic persons compared to 82 whites (a ratio of 2.1)? Unless my math is wrong, that is about a 14% discrepancy.

dragonwriter 10y ago
Why do you assume that the rate of actual innocence is constant across race/ethnicity of prisoners?
- kmkemp 10y ago
  The entire point of my statistics is to show that there is judicial injustice based on race. I show the opposite of your assertion by comparing prison demographics to exoneration demographics. So either the Innocence Project is racially biased (DNA evidence) or our judicial system is racially biased.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > So either the Innocence Project is racially biased (DNA evidence) or our judicial system is racially biased. For some reason, I misread your post as arguing the former and implying the assumption that the latter was not true, but I can't for the life of me see why I did that looking back at it.
  - pixl97 10y ago
    >The entire point of my statistics is to show that there is judicial injustice based on race. I don't believe you have enough information to show that with just racial information. A different study is needed that shows initial judicial justice based on dollars spent on defence. Essentially we need to know the likelihood of injustice based on each $10,000 spent on lawyers. If our findings show that defendants that spend larger amounts on their defense have a lower number unjust rulings then race is a lower factor and poverty is a larger factor. Since blacks in America are more apt to live in poverty, a simple black and white racial analysis will fail in showing causation.
    - kmkemp 10y ago
      Yes, you're right on that point. I suspect we would find that they are both large factors, though. Keep in mind that the statistics I showed actually undersell the prevalence since I compared the prison population to exonerations. Exonerations typically require DNA evidence and there are any number of crimes that can land you in prison where DNA evidence is a non-factor. Even the appeals process isn't immune from racial bias.