The Context of Minority Group Threat: Race, Institutions, and Complying with Hate Crime Law

A wealth of research suggests a direct association between minority group size and government social control, such as arrest or imprisonment rates. Prior work in this vein, however, gives scant attention to (1) types of law that explicitly address intergroup conflict and (2) regional variation in the salience of minority group threat. At the same time, research on organizational responses to law indicates that institutional linkages to legal environments dictate policy innovation and compliance, yet the relevance of such linkages for law enforcement agencies is less clear. The present research investigates these themes by focusing on law enforcement responses to hate crime in the United States. Data from a sample of large municipal and county policing agencies and their degree of compliance with the federal Hate Crimes Statistics Act are analyzed. Main effects models show that compliance with federal hate crime law is less likely in places with larger black populations, an intriguing finding in light of extant work suggesting that both formal social control and race-based hate crime offending are typically more prevalent where more blacks reside. This effect of black population size on compliance with hate crime law, however, is contingent on region. A positive correlation in the Northeast contrasts with an inverse association in the South. The findings also suggest that organizational facets of law enforcement agencies, notably their engagement in community policing, are associated with compliance. The results elaborate and qualify group threat explanations of government social control and contribute to a burgeoning literature on the utility of organizational theory in the realm of law enforcement.     

Criminal Law and the Routine Activity of ‘Hate Crime’

If our knowledge about so called ‘hate crime’ was confined to what we read in the national newspapers or see on the television news then the impression that we would be most likely left with is that hate crime offenders are out-and-out bigots, hate-fuelled individuals who subscribe to racist, homophobic, and other bigoted views who, in exercising their extreme hatred target their victims in premeditated violent attacks. Whilst many such attacks have occurred, the data on incidents, albeit limited, suggests instead that they are commonly committed by ‘ordinary’ people in the context of their ‘everyday’ lives. Considering the everyday circumstances in which incidents occur, this paper argues that by imposing penalty enhancement for ‘hate crime’ the criminal law assumes a significant symbolic role as a cue against transgression on the part of potential offenders.     

Affairs of the Heart: Hate Crime and the Politics of Crime Control

Various scholars have noted the priority given to law in the politics of hate violence; violence is the problem and law, more specifically the criminal law, the solution at the ‘heart’ of society. This article seeks to explore some of the gaps and silences in the existing literature and politics that mobilize these ideas and associations. It is the gap sand silences associated with demands for and expectations of criminal justice that will be the particular concern of this article. The demand for law is examined by way of David Garland's recent work on the culture of crime control. His work offers an analysis of the contemporary place of crime control in Anglo-American liberal democracies. A distinctive feature of his analysis is to be found in the way it maps an important paradox of contemporary crime control; its political centrality and an increasing recognition of its limitations. Garland's ‘criminology of the self’ and the ‘criminology of the other’ raise some important challenges for those who advocate resort to crime control. My particular concern is to consider the significance of Garland's work for a contemporary sexual politics that puts violence and criminal justice at the heart of that politics. Feminist, gay and lesbian scholarship first on criminal justice and second, on violence and law will be used to develop a critical dialogue with Garland's analysis and to reflect upon the challenges raised by his insights into contemporary crime control. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

The Hate Crime Canon and Beyond: A Critical Assessment

Although it remains an empirical question whether the U.S. is experiencing greater levels of hate-motivated-conduct than in the past, it is beyond dispute that the concept of ‘hate crime’ has been institutionalized in social, political, and legal discourse in the U.S. From the introduction and politicization of the term hate crime in the late 1970s to the continued enforcement of hate crime law at the beginning of the twenty-first century, social movements have constructed the problem of bias-motivated violence in particular ways, while politicians at both the federal and state level have made legislation that defines the parameters of hate crime. Accordingly, this article identifies and examines the parameters of a hate crime canon in the U.S., which can first and foremost be described as a body of law that 1) provides anew state policy action, by either creating anew criminal category, altering an existing law, or enhancing penalties for select extant crimes when they are committed for bias reasons; 2) contains an intent standard, which refers to the subjective intention of the perpetrator rather than relying solely on the basis of objective behavior; and 3) specifies a list of protected social statuses, such as race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, disabilities, etc. Arguing that these features constitute the core parameters of the hate crime canon and attendant discourse in the U.S., this article offers a critical assessment of the emergence, institutionalization, and arguable consequences of ‘hate crime’ as a recently developed social fact - in the Durkheimian sense of the word - that is consequential for the politics of victimization in the modern era and the social control of violence against minorities more particularly. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Aggressive Policing and the Deterrence of Crime

Recent analyses of the relationship between crime and an aggressive patrol strategy have led to no single conclusion concerning the deterrent power of aggressive policing. This research adds to that debate by exploring the effects of a variety of aggressive patrol tactics on several different crimes. The empirical analysis, based on cross-sectional data from sixty urban neighborhoods, indicates that there appears to be no stable complex of police actions that constitute an aggressive patrol strategy. However, one form of police action usually included under the rubric of aggressive patrol—suspicion stops—may indeed deter certain types of criminal activity.     

The Effects of a School Policing Program on Crime,Discipline, and Disorder: A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation

This study analyzes the impacts of school-based law enforcement officers on school crime, disciplinary actions, and disciplinary problems in 238 middle and high schools in West Virginia using a non-equivalent groups design and three years of data. Propensity score weights are utilized to reduce selection biases resulting from non-random group assignment in observational data. Binary and multinomial logistic treatment models are used when estimating treatment effects to examine whether the extent to which police officers are present in schools impacts problem outcomes. Findings indicated that while the presence of school police officers increased drug-related crimes and out-of-school suspensions for drug crimes regardless of whether they were present in schools for a single year or multiple years, there were deterrent effects observed for violent crimes and incidents of disorder when police officers were present in schools during all school years. Implications for policy and practice are discussed.

     

犯罪控制视野下的暂缓起诉裁量权

随着起诉裁量权的扩大化,在刑事起诉程序中运用高质量的犯罪控制策略,可以减少人与人之间的冲突,促使人们积极行动并且积极合作;它还可以很好地实现有限司法资源的适当配置,从而实现诉讼效率。暂缓起诉的价值就在于它在起诉阶段将一部分刑事案件进行分流,使其不必进入审判程序,这不仅有利于节约司法资源,实现诉讼的经济原则,同时国家检察机关通过暂缓起诉对刑事案件的介入处理,也可以达到弱化社会矛盾,调整社会关系,恢复社会秩序的目的,从而实现犯罪控制的社会整体效益。     

Michael Salter and Kim McGuire: The Lived Experience of Hate Crime: Towards a Phenomenological Approach

Jindal Global Law Review -     

美国仇恨犯罪理论引入之前提性研究

为了解决现阶段我国社会频繁出现的以报复社会为目的的犯罪案件以及群体性暴力事件问题,美国仇恨犯罪理论被引入刑法学和犯罪学的研究之中.但是本文通过从产生背景、犯罪原因和治理策略上对中美两国仇恨犯罪进行比较,最终认为中美两国仇恨犯罪无法被等量齐观,美国式仇恨犯罪在中国语境下并不具有相应的理论解释能力,径直将西方的研究模式移植到中国语境来分析中国特有的法律和社会问题的研究思路值得反思,因此应当对该理论的引进保持谨慎的态度.     

Predictable Policing: Measuring the Crime Control Benefits of Hotspots Policing at Bus Stops

Objectives

A fairly robust body of evidence suggests that hotspots policing is an effective crime prevention strategy. In this paper, we present contradictory evidence of a backfiring effect.

Methods

In a randomized controlled trial, aimed at reducing crime and disorder, London’s ‘hottest’ 102 bus-stops were targeted. Double patrol teams of Metropolitan Police Service uniformed officers visited the stops three times per shift (12:00–20:00), 5-times per week, for a duration of 15 min, over a 6 month period. Crucially, officers arrived and departed the bus stop on a bus, with significantly less time spent outside the bus stop setting. Outcomes were measured in terms of victim-generated crimes reported to the police and bus driver incident reports (DIRs), within targeted and catchment areas. We used adjusted Poisson-regression models to compare differences in pre- and post-treatment measures of outcomes and estimated-marginal-means to illustrate the treatment effect.

Results

DIRs went down significantly by 37 % (p = 0.07) in the near vicinity of the bus stops (50 m), by 40 % in the 100 m catchment area (p = 0.04) and marginally and non-significantly in the farthest catchment (10 %; p = 0.66), compared to control conditions. However, victim-generated crimes—the primary outcome measured in previous experiments—increased by 25 % (p = 0.10) in the near vicinity, by 23 % (p = 0.08) and 11 % (p ≤ 0.001) within the 100–150 m catchment areas, respectively.

Conclusions

These findings illustrate the role of bounded-rationality in everyday policing: reductions in crime are predicated on an elevated perceived risk-of-apprehension. Previous studies focused on clusters of addresses or public facilities, with police moving freely and unpredictably within the boundaries of the hotspot, but the patrol areas of officers in this experiment were limited to bus stops so offenders could anticipate their movements. Hotspots policing therefore backfires when offenders can systematically and accurately predict the temporal and spatial pattern of long-term targeting at a single location.

     

Mandate,Discretion, and Professionalisation in an Employment Standards Enforcement Agency: An Antipodean Experience

In recent years, there has been a resurgence of scholarly interest in the operation and effect of labour inspectorates around the world. This article aims to contribute to this mounting comparative and socio‐legal literature by considering the emergence of an active and high‐profile enforcement agency in Australia—the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO). Drawing on the experiences of inspectors and senior managers at the FWO, we examine the structure and mandate of the agency, as well as the discretion afforded to, and the professionalisation of, individual inspectors. While some have sought to draw a distinction between a rule‐bound, specialised approach characteristic of certain Anglo‐American countries and the so‐called Franco‐Iberian model, which places a greater emphasis on flexibility and pragmatism, we found that the FWO does not necessarily fit neatly within this dichotomy. Rather, we observe that as the FWO is a new institution, its mode of operation is in the process of evolution. At present it is pluralistic, in the sense that it exhibits a hierarchical, procedural approach in a drive to address concerns of consistency and accountability, while at the same time allowing, and sometimes encouraging, individuals to be experimental and adaptive.     

法律的意义模糊及其救济方法

模糊不明,即法律词汇表达的意思不明确,是一切法律都可能存在的病灶之一,这是人类思维的固有缺陷造成的。法律的统一性、明确性和规范性,不能放任法律意义的模糊,因此,寻求法律意义的明晰和确定,是法律人必须完成的使命。法律解释的基本任务即通过语言、文字或行为的方式交代,明晰因法律意义模糊而产生的困惑,其效力基础在于有权解释的强制性以及人们对法定权威的接受性。但在疑难、复杂案件中,当案件事实与规范之间的对接与沟通出现困难时,法律解释无能为力,此时需要法律推理出场。疑难案件中,对法律可能存在多重意义的理解,法律论证可使案件的读者能够有自身的选择,这是一种更深层次的理解和阐释法律的活动。     

Beyond Discretion: Prosecution, the Logic of Sovereignty, and the Limits of Law

Today it is widely recognized in both academic literature and the mainstream media that prosecutors have substantial discretion. Yet prosecutorial decisions involve, in our view, something more than a straightforward exercise of discretion. In this article we move from the language of discretion to that of sovereignty to describe prosecutorial power. In so doing we want to move from the language of administration to the language of power. Focusing on the decision not to prosecute, we argue that prosecutorial decisions participate in, and exemplify, the logic of sovereignty and its complex relationship to legality.
By drawing on Carl Schmitt and Giorgio Agamben, we seek to recast prosecutorial decision making as something that allows prosecutors to grant exemptions from the reach of valid law. The sovereign power of prosecutors is most vividly on display when they decline to bring charges where there is a legally sufficient basis for doing so. By exercising what is, in most jurisdictions, an all but unreviewable power, they can and do exempt individuals from the reach of valid law.     

Deadly Words: State Power and the Entanglement of Speech and Violence in Hate Crime

Any analysis of hate crime that attempts to separate speech from action, language from violence, faces epistemological difficulties that limit the range of conversations about laws responding to identity-based injury in the United States. Active debates have raged over the implications of bias crime sentence enhancement laws for the protection of ‘freespeech’, thus addressing the inextricability of language and meaning from hate crime. Those in favor of legal responses to identity-based injury tend toward essentialist claims which assume the stability of identity and of meanings inherent in words or actions. Those opposed assert the impossibility of codifying the meaning of words or actions in the law, and/or they worry about the reification of (victimized) identities accompanying bias crime statutes. This article argues that the focus on language and speech in these debates simultaneously enables an evasion of discussion about the law's response to bias-related violence, and misleadingly assumes too much stability in the functions of law and the nature of state power. Interviews conducted by the author with individuals involved in a 1992 racist hate crime are used to show the diverse elements of state power suffusing the incident and its aftermath. An analysis of the crime's investigation and prosecution under a Maryland hate crime statute suggests that law enforcement officers are primarily using hate crime laws as public relations tools in a fight against community perceptions that they are themselves bigots. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.