- by Jorge Toledo
The Borrowed Pants case in Cops, Teachers, Counselors reveals a startling bias within the punishment paradigm of the United States. Specifically, the relevant judgment for this assessment was made by the police officer when he reassured himself of his decisions on the girls upon discovering how their lives turned out. He was easier on the adolescent that turned out to have her life together and tougher on the delinquent that continued to have problems. Unfortunately, this sign of perceived validation is a façade that disguises the negative self-fulfilling implications of ascribing an identity in the first place.
In order to engage this discussion, it is important to distinguish the institutionalization of self-actualizing identities by law enforcement from their inevitable occurrence in the interaction between people. When two people engage each other for the first time, at times, a situation will occur in which one person perceives the other to be disinterested in developing a friendship and will thus attempt to embody some sort of reciprocation that concludes their chances of affiliation. In this situation though, the initial perception drives decision-making on both parts but does not actively work to secure its own accuracy.
In the case of law and punishment in the American justice system, the original “fix” induces several procedural mechanisms that necessarily operate to solidify the mold. A clear example of this phenomenon from front line workers was shown in class during the segment from Michael Moore's TV Nation. Even after the police officers noticed Brian Anthony was not guilty after his first-ever arrest, they told him they were now watching him. This reveals the inability to depart from the perception first ascribed to him. Unfortunately, the system works to further entrench individuals the deeper into the operations they go.
The lasting effects of engaging with the legal system seem more devastating given the methodology guiding recent convictions. At 716 per 100,000 people, the United States incarcerates a higher percentage of its population than any other country in the world. These imprisonments come with collateral consequences that make it difficult, if not impossible, to get a job, get a loan, sustain relationships, engage politics etc after getting out. The few alternatives left for convicts helps explain much of the elevated reincarcertaion rates that would, at a glance, seem to further justify their initial conviction. But, the effects of confinement and probation are far from therapeutic.
The “fixes” put on others by front line workers not only attempt to determine future behaviors, but inherently shape them. The debilitating consequences of a lawbreaker identity are counterproductive to the aims of policing. This is particularly alarming given that the umbrella of criminals often includes victims of terrible conditions (like destructive households or sex workers) or offenders of victimless crimes. Therefore, the law is in many ways creating a new threat by housing all offenders in deplorable conditions then throwing them out to the world with incredible restrictions on every aspect of their life. There is a complete disregard for the lack of rehabilitative capacity of imprisonment given the fact that most convicts will be reintroduced to society, at some point. And, granted that there is an inevitability to putting a fix that we have discussed in class, there needs to be a discussion on readjusting the permanence of that fix given the dynamic nature of identity itself.
Sources:
Cops, Teachers, Counselors: Stories from the Front Lines of Public Service
By Steven Williams Maynard-Moody, Michael Craig Musheno
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/13/incarceration-rate-per-capita_n_3745291.html
http://www.pennlawreview.com/print/?id=361
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2072736
Jorge, this is a very thoughtful exploration of the power and implications associated with the simple a to of authoritatively ascribing to someone a stigmatizing identity. Clearly, you are right to claim that subsequent incarceration, after an initial label of felon, is driven by the consequences of carrying that label back out into society. Of course, there are examples of people surmounting those first ascribed identities, but it requires the help and engagement of others in conjunction with institutional support. Universities, through their admissions policies, can and do make a difference in this regard.
ReplyDeleteI relate your discussion of putting a fix on criminals as similar to a first impression. Once implanted, these identities are extremely tricky to get rid of, and the consequences for convicted felons, as you thoroughly discuss in your blog post, are severe. Our nation's high incarceration and recidivism rates make more sense in this light.
ReplyDelete-Jonathan Berry-Smith
I enjoyed your post quite a bit. I liked the way that you tied in the Michael Moore video and described the paradox of the policing system in that by labeling someone as a criminal that person will have stigmas placed upon them which makes them more likely to commit more crimes. I do however, want to know what your thoughts were when you mentioned how this paradox is especially damaging to those who committed "victimless" crimes. What do you consider to be a victimless crime? Most crimes have a victim, even if one does not realize there to be. Anyone who recreationally uses drugs, even if not harming anyone in the process of using them, is perpetuating the illegal drug trade and the violence associated with creating and distributing the drugs. If the low level users are always let off, the trade will never diminish.
ReplyDelete-Colleen Johnson, Discussion 102
I think this post clearly illustrates the link between discretion in policing and the continued growth of the Prison Industrial Complex. If officers go about their jobs with a certain "type" in mind, then not only will those that accurately or inaccurately fit that profile be policed more harshly, but those who do not fit the profile will be able to move under the radar. For this reason, it is necessary to reorient policing tactics to focus on behavior as an indicator, instead of appearance and/or location.
ReplyDeleteAyesha Ali
A thought that I found relevant is also what Victor Rios's Control Complex. How instead of actually supporting these marginalized people, they are being stripped away from less and less resources, their freedom and dignity. Being caught up in the system perpetuates them even further and it makes it more difficult for them to climb out of the hole that has been buried so deep that traps them and pushes them down further. Punishing an already disempowered group of people, creates a more relentless population. And morality, and who is considered to be right or wrong in these "fixes" reiterates the unequal power relations that exist.
ReplyDeleteSureyma Gonzalez
"Therefore, the law is in many ways creating a new threat by housing all offenders in deplorable conditions then throwing them out to the world with incredible restrictions on every aspect of their life. There is a complete disregard for the lack of rehabilitative capacity of imprisonment given the fact that most convicts will be reintroduced to society, at some point." I totally agree with you on this point; there is indeed a dearth of rehabilitation for released convicts, but I think that the problem goes far beyond rehabilitation. I don't think that there is a total lack of rehabilitation, though it could very much so be improved, but society itself with the way that we view these people needs to be changed as well. We cannot put all of the effort of change on people who have been in the system. For example, the "ban the box" campaign, which advocates to remove questions about prior convictions and felonies from job applications to prevent premature bias, works to affirm the identity of convicts as people rather than criminals in the eyes of society.
ReplyDelete-Chey Iwamoto
Your post reminded me of the reading by David Harris, " Driving While Black." In this reading the officers that are stopping these African Americans for traffic violations are doing so by "putting a fix" on them. Harris's research shows that while whites and blacks commit traffic violations at equal rates, perceptions that African Americans are more likely to commit crimes causes police to be more likely to stop them. These fix's the police officers put on African Americans allows for innocent African Americans to be further searched at pretext stops, for drugs in their cars. Putting a Fix on people, such as African Americans leads to less overall trust in our criminal justice system, as those who are stopped and searched for being "black" will no longer believe the justice system serves to protect them but is against them.
ReplyDelete-Michaela Acebedo
Hi Jorge! I thought your post was very well written and insightful. You articulate a clear understanding of how police officers impose identities onto individuals, which then morphs into an unfortunate cycle of: detaining perps based on appearance. I agree that this sort of objective policing strips away individuality and leads to an environment in which certain demographics are targeted regardless of their actual behavior. - Chelsea Goddard
ReplyDeleteThe topic you are addressing is an important one, the time of extralegal measures such as the classification of individuals into these imposed identities should be over. Your insight into the way the legal system strips away the self and at times treats people differently due to their socioeconomic status is well expanded upon. As law enforcement moves forward, it should take a serious look at the categories they place people in due to predisposed notions and oftentimes over-generalizations.
ReplyDelete-Alejandro Castellano
While the amount of discretion enjoyed by frontline workers such as law enforcement officers is problematic in its extreme subjectivity, it's also valuable to keep in mind that these frontline workers are functioning within a context in which this discretion is key to the overall functioning of each system. For example, if police officers were to apply the law more uniformly and arrest individuals based on every infraction of the law (jaywalking, smoking marijuana, speeding), it would result in an extreme amount of overcrowding within our prisons and jails. Our criminal justice system, not to mention other public service spheres that frontline workers work within, is simply not equipped to handle the amount of people it would be expected to if frontline workers were to strictly adhere to the law. Though the original intent of the rules was probably not to allow discretion or at least not to the extent it has been experienced, the practice of discretion has become a necessity.
ReplyDeleteAnnie Choi
The Borrowed Pants case definitely seems to be popular when it comes to putting a fix on someone by frontline workers. These workers deem whether or not the citizen-client is worthy of getting a second chance or receiving a break. In this case, he did not think one of the girls could straighten out her path because she was not taking accountability for her actions. He did not see potential in her, thus decided not to send her to the juvenile court (but sent the other girl to the juvenile court since she showed some remorse for her actions). It was interesting to see how their lives played out and that he was able guess whether or not one person was worthy. However, what would have happened if the front line worker guessed incorrectly? This could severely hinder a person's experience with frontline workers and perhaps can make the citizen-client have future problems with the frontline worker
ReplyDelete-Dash Oliver
This was one of my favorite presentations and blog posts this semester. Your challenge to the notion of a "fix" as almost inherently being a static identity assignment. And that people are inherently more dynamic. It's a very interesting check on the notion of identity assignments.
ReplyDelete-Mark Sheppard