SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Feds' Proposal on Tracking Deaths in Custody Shows Lack of Desire to Change 'Status Quo in Policing'
DOJ proposal includes shifting reporting requirement from state to federal authorities, and rights groups say that's a mistake
Oct 03, 2016
It may seem that the simplest way to gather accurate information about deaths in police custody is for the police departments themselves to collect the data.
But that's not the how the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) proposes to implement the Deaths in Custody Reporting Act (DICRA), signed into law in 2014, and that's a real problem, according to scores of organizations.
In a letter sent Monday to the DOJ, 96 groups including the ACLU, Amnesty International USA, Government Accountability Project, and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights outline what they see as major flaws in the proposal.
Among them: it wrongly shifts the reporting requirement from state to federal authorities. That authority, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, will rely on an "inadequate method"--the Arrest-Related Deaths Program, which uses publicly available information. That means that investigative projects undertaken by the Guardian and the Washington Post are the "best national sources" for the data, but that puts the key data on lives lost at the risk of potentially dwindling national interest and media resources.
Further problematic, the groups write, is that the proposal fails to fully clarify what is meant by "custody," and the fact that data is also needed in confrontations with the police in community encounters such as traffic stops.
The proposal also fails to mention "penalties for noncompliance," but that is "critical for successful implementation of DICRA as voluntary reporting programs on police-community encounters have failed," the letter states. Citing reporting by the Guardian and Washington Post, it continues: "Reportedly, only 224 of the more than 18,000 law enforcement agencies reported approximately 444 fatal police shootings to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in 2014, though we have reason to believe that annual numbers of peopled killed by police exceed 1,000."
According to Kanya Bennett, ACLU legislative counsel, "We have reached a state of crisis with our police-community relations, and solutions can only come once we have solid data."
"When the Department of Justice disregards DICRA so that states do not have to be the primary entity collecting and reporting data, the federal government sends the message that it is not serious about changing the status quo in policing. These circumstances are likely to create future situations like we saw in Ferguson and other cities, unless the federal government provides real oversight and accountability of the state and local law enforcement that it provides millions of dollars to annually," she said.
Many of the same groups behind this letter wrote to the DOJ in August to express concern over the proposal.
Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, said at the time, "You can't fix what you can't measure. Police departments should report deaths in custody when they happen; it should be that simple. But these regulations make it clear that DOJ would rather bend over backwards to accommodate police departments' dysfunction or reluctance."
Monday is the last day for the comment period on the DOJ proposal.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
It may seem that the simplest way to gather accurate information about deaths in police custody is for the police departments themselves to collect the data.
But that's not the how the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) proposes to implement the Deaths in Custody Reporting Act (DICRA), signed into law in 2014, and that's a real problem, according to scores of organizations.
In a letter sent Monday to the DOJ, 96 groups including the ACLU, Amnesty International USA, Government Accountability Project, and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights outline what they see as major flaws in the proposal.
Among them: it wrongly shifts the reporting requirement from state to federal authorities. That authority, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, will rely on an "inadequate method"--the Arrest-Related Deaths Program, which uses publicly available information. That means that investigative projects undertaken by the Guardian and the Washington Post are the "best national sources" for the data, but that puts the key data on lives lost at the risk of potentially dwindling national interest and media resources.
Further problematic, the groups write, is that the proposal fails to fully clarify what is meant by "custody," and the fact that data is also needed in confrontations with the police in community encounters such as traffic stops.
The proposal also fails to mention "penalties for noncompliance," but that is "critical for successful implementation of DICRA as voluntary reporting programs on police-community encounters have failed," the letter states. Citing reporting by the Guardian and Washington Post, it continues: "Reportedly, only 224 of the more than 18,000 law enforcement agencies reported approximately 444 fatal police shootings to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in 2014, though we have reason to believe that annual numbers of peopled killed by police exceed 1,000."
According to Kanya Bennett, ACLU legislative counsel, "We have reached a state of crisis with our police-community relations, and solutions can only come once we have solid data."
"When the Department of Justice disregards DICRA so that states do not have to be the primary entity collecting and reporting data, the federal government sends the message that it is not serious about changing the status quo in policing. These circumstances are likely to create future situations like we saw in Ferguson and other cities, unless the federal government provides real oversight and accountability of the state and local law enforcement that it provides millions of dollars to annually," she said.
Many of the same groups behind this letter wrote to the DOJ in August to express concern over the proposal.
Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, said at the time, "You can't fix what you can't measure. Police departments should report deaths in custody when they happen; it should be that simple. But these regulations make it clear that DOJ would rather bend over backwards to accommodate police departments' dysfunction or reluctance."
Monday is the last day for the comment period on the DOJ proposal.
It may seem that the simplest way to gather accurate information about deaths in police custody is for the police departments themselves to collect the data.
But that's not the how the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) proposes to implement the Deaths in Custody Reporting Act (DICRA), signed into law in 2014, and that's a real problem, according to scores of organizations.
In a letter sent Monday to the DOJ, 96 groups including the ACLU, Amnesty International USA, Government Accountability Project, and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights outline what they see as major flaws in the proposal.
Among them: it wrongly shifts the reporting requirement from state to federal authorities. That authority, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, will rely on an "inadequate method"--the Arrest-Related Deaths Program, which uses publicly available information. That means that investigative projects undertaken by the Guardian and the Washington Post are the "best national sources" for the data, but that puts the key data on lives lost at the risk of potentially dwindling national interest and media resources.
Further problematic, the groups write, is that the proposal fails to fully clarify what is meant by "custody," and the fact that data is also needed in confrontations with the police in community encounters such as traffic stops.
The proposal also fails to mention "penalties for noncompliance," but that is "critical for successful implementation of DICRA as voluntary reporting programs on police-community encounters have failed," the letter states. Citing reporting by the Guardian and Washington Post, it continues: "Reportedly, only 224 of the more than 18,000 law enforcement agencies reported approximately 444 fatal police shootings to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in 2014, though we have reason to believe that annual numbers of peopled killed by police exceed 1,000."
According to Kanya Bennett, ACLU legislative counsel, "We have reached a state of crisis with our police-community relations, and solutions can only come once we have solid data."
"When the Department of Justice disregards DICRA so that states do not have to be the primary entity collecting and reporting data, the federal government sends the message that it is not serious about changing the status quo in policing. These circumstances are likely to create future situations like we saw in Ferguson and other cities, unless the federal government provides real oversight and accountability of the state and local law enforcement that it provides millions of dollars to annually," she said.
Many of the same groups behind this letter wrote to the DOJ in August to express concern over the proposal.
Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, said at the time, "You can't fix what you can't measure. Police departments should report deaths in custody when they happen; it should be that simple. But these regulations make it clear that DOJ would rather bend over backwards to accommodate police departments' dysfunction or reluctance."
Monday is the last day for the comment period on the DOJ proposal.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.