General US Politics Discussion

[Raavi]

1 minute ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

(If you think academia in social sciences does not have bias, check out that conclusion from the article ...if all this data has been assembled, why not just target each individual judge/prosecutor for removal..because they are racist

Again, point out study by study where exactly this bias is exhibited? Unless you want to admit that you cannot, because it is in fact not there?

 

1 minute ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

same could be said about 90% of the studies you are claiming, trying to say if I scrutinized these people there would not be some wackos in their midst

Nice whataboutism. So I take it you continue to subscribe to the article that explains away gross racial disparities in criminal justice by saying on average black people are dumber than whites?

 

1 minute ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

so have I and you not ready to buy them hook line and sinker?

Except for the fact that you haven't. Of the few 'studies' you pointed to one said something completely different than you posited, one was based on racist garbage, and the other going off what you think it said was easily refutable by a number of specialised studies.

 

1 minute ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Every case in the legal system turns on its facts, and its going to be hard to determine whether or not there is institutional racism based off raw data.

Please point out to me how minorities disproportionately getting pulled over, or black people who were convicted of murder being about 50 percent more likely to be innocent than other convicted murderers and spending longer in prison before exoneration has nothing to do with systemic racism and can be explained away by the facts?

 

1 minute ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

there are far more likely causes for these outcomes such a financial means, education levels, and many other social issues,

All areas where systemic racism also plays a role. The school to prison pipeline springs to mind.

 

1 minute ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

you are wasting your time 

 

Assuming you actually work in the field of criminal justice: if next time you deal with an issue concerning a minority, and you at least think about the issue of systemic racism or how the system is statistically harsher on them - I consider it a job well done. You're too proud and convinced of the superiority of your system to see things for what they are. But if I even plant a tiny seed, I consider that a win.

[CosmicBuffalo]

9 minutes ago, Raavi said:

Again, point out study by study where exactly this bias is exhibited? Unless you want to admit that you cannot, because it is in fact not there?  (The article about Judges not granting or granting higher bonds to minorities should be titled, Minority Judges Racially Biased Toward Their Own...I am glad that you can bury your head in the sand...but seriously, I thought if any stage involving a Judge being racist...it would be at the bond setting stage, but then you read...black judges are racist as well..completely debunking their theory, yet they gloss over it...and Mr. Wa Po does not even mention it in his description.  Do you honestly expect me to read each one of these articles?)

 

Nice whataboutism. So I take it you continue to subscribe to the article that explains away gross racial disparities in criminal justice by saying on average black people are dumber than whites? (It was "peer reviewed"...it must be solid gold.)

 

Except for the fact that you haven't. Of the few 'studies' you pointed to one said something completely different than you posited, one was based on racist garbage, and the other going off what you think it said was easily refutable by a number of specialised studies. (I am not reading any more these dog crap studies, the one that I read because I thought this might actually be true...confirmed, as I said, when the system is full of minority, police, judges, prosecutors, these arguments are just garbage.

 

Please point out to me how minorities disproportionately getting pulled over, or black people who were convicted of murder being about 50 percent more likely to be innocent than other convicted murderers and spending longer in prison before exoneration has nothing to do with systemic racism and can be explained away by the facts? (I agree that police can be racist, most if these outcomes can attributed to prejudice as opposed to genuine racism.)

 

All areas where systemic racism also plays a role. The school to prison pipeline springs to mind.  (Yeah, society is racist, we remake it in the exact way you think it should be.)

 

 

Assuming you actually work in the field of criminal justice: if next time you deal with an issue concerning a minority, and you at least think about the issue of systemic racism or how the system is statistically harsher on them - I consider it a job well done. You're too proud and convinced of the superiority of your system to see things for what they are. But if I even plant a tiny seed, I consider that a win. (If you work in law, your clients are receiving the most irrational subjective garbage advice, they might as well represent themselves...if you work in academia or government, you are example of the bias you claim does not exist.)

 

[Raavi]

59 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

.it would be at the bond setting stage, but then you read...black judges are racist as well..completely debunking their theory, yet they gloss over it.

 

This shows me three things. 1. you didn't even read the introduction in whole, let alone the conclusion. 2. you do not understand what you're even trying to argue. 3. you have a sophomoric understanding of racial biases in criminal justice. The study says that they found "several pieces of evidence consistent with our results being driven by racially biased prediction errors in risk, as opposed to racial animus among bail judges." In other words, the racial bias stems not from individually racist judges but rather as they posit in the conclusion "bail judges relying on inaccurate stereotypes that exaggerate the relative danger of releasing black defendants versus white defendants at the margin. According to this study these minority bail judges (of which there are few in the districts where they collected their data as they point out) are just as prone to base their bail decisions on these stereotypes. Which actually only goes to further substantiate the systemic racial biases apparent within the US criminal justice system. 

 

59 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Do you honestly expect me to read each one of these articles

I don't really figure you for the reading type seeing as you have even failed to read a singulary introduction and conclusion from one article.

 

59 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

t was "peer reviewed"...it must be solid gold

I invite you to google the link of that study and observe the kinds of websites it is being posted on, and the kind of theories it is being used to support. Hint: it isn't pretty.

 

59 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

as I said, when the system is full of minority, police, judges, prosecutors, these arguments are just garbage.

It is almost like systemic racism that has developed over an extended period of time does not magically disappear when a number of people from minority backgrounds rise to a position of power within the criminal justice system. It is almost like this actually goes far deeper.

 

59 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

I agree that police can be racist, most if these outcomes can attributed to prejudice as opposed to genuine racism

Ah now we have a purity test for racism. Do tell me what according to you "genuine racism" entails. As apparently black people being convicted of murder being 50% more likely to be innocent, yet spend longer in prison before exoneration has nothing to do with racism?

 

I will do you a favour and ignore the remainder of your post consisting of ad hominem attacks.

 

[CosmicBuffalo]

21 hours ago, Raavi said:

 

This shows me three things. 1. you didn't even read the introduction in whole, let alone the conclusion. 2. you do not understand what you're even trying to argue. 3. you have a sophomoric understanding of racial biases in criminal justice. The study says that they found "several pieces of evidence consistent with our results being driven by racially biased prediction errors in risk, as opposed to racial animus among bail judges." In other words, the racial bias stems not from individually racist judges but rather as they posit in the conclusion "bail judges relying on inaccurate stereotypes that exaggerate the relative danger of releasing black defendants versus white defendants at the margin. According to this study these minority bail judges (of which there are few in the districts where they collected their data as they point out) are just as prone to base their bail decisions on these stereotypes. Which actually only goes to further substantiate the systemic racial biases apparent within the US criminal justice system. 

 

I don't really figure you for the reading type seeing as you have even failed to read a singulary introduction and conclusion from one article.

 

I invite you to google the link of that study and observe the kinds of websites it is being posted on, and the kind of theories it is being used to support. Hint: it isn't pretty.

 

It is almost like systemic racism that has developed over an extended period of time does not magically disappear when a number of people from minority backgrounds rise to a position of power within the criminal justice system. It is almost like this actually goes far deeper.

 

Ah now we have a purity test for racism. Do tell me what according to you "genuine racism" entails. As apparently black people being convicted of murder being 50% more likely to be innocent, yet spend longer in prison before exoneration has nothing to do with racism?

 

I will do you a favour and ignore the remainder of your post consisting of ad hominem attacks.

 

Let me get this straight, you read the introduction to the bond article, and did not see the blatant bias in favor of the justice system being racially biased...this is accepted as fact.  Yet, there are multiple studies contradicting this fact, 9 are cited in the article that you claim proves this is a fact due to the sheer volume of studies, not just the ones I found with relative ease by googling for 15 mins.  Pretending the social science studies are the same as medical science studies another low in this conversation as your back up. This bond study actually makes very little sense as a whole unless you accept that the justice system is racially biased as fact at the outset.   

 

I did not conclude that black judges are racially biased...they did that all on their own.  Not only is this conclusion glossed over, its flagrantly wrong...anyone who would read this and not seriously question this conclusion is not a critical thinker...blinded by ideology.  These so called scientist again concluded, black judges are racially biased against black people...you cannot make this crap up.

 

If "ad hominem attacks" were a basis to ignore relevant comments, I would have ignored most of your most almost immediately, chief.  Put on your big boy pants, I have let you lash out repeatedly without much a defense.  You have a true and pure victim mentality. 

Edited February 27, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[Raavi]

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Let me get this straight, you read the introduction to the bond article, and did not see the blatant bias in favor of the justice system being racially biased...

 

You are experiencing something called cognitive dissonance your entire existence professionally is predicated on this notion of the superiority of the US criminal justice system. Yet here your anecdote is now being challenged, shattered even by peer reviewed studies. Deep down you know these studies are not some giant liberal conspiracy but rather grounded in reality. A very sad reality that innumerate black people have gone through and continue to go through each day.

 

As for the study at hand. In the beginning part of the introduction they cited multiple studies to substantiate the fact that there exist racial disparities at every stage of the US criminal justice system; including but not limited to: blacks being more likely to be searched for contraband, blacks more likely to experience police force, blacks being more likely to be charged with a serious offence, blacks being more likely to be convicted. This is not a controversial statement as it is backed up by statistical fact. Unless you have any cause or basis to challenge the challenge the academic rigour of  each of these studies individually, your point is moot. 

 

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Yet, there are multiple studies contradicting this fact, 9 are cited in the article that you claim proves this is a fact due to the sheer volume of studies, not just the ones I found with relative ease by googling for 15 mins.

I invite you to link them here, so I can peruse them and comment on them. I never take someone on their word when they say "X studies prove Y" without citations. For you even less so because you have demonstrated on multiple occasions to either completely misinterpret and then subsequently misrepresent what a certain study/article finds, or fail completely to read the literature you are citing.

 

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Pretending the social science studies are the same as medical science studies another low in this conversation as your back up.

Please point out to me exactly where I said medical sciences are the same as social sciences? I will spare you 5 minutes of searching, because you are the first and only one here bringing up medical sciences. The relevance of which to this conversation is non-existent. It is also rather telling how when confronted with well-researched and well-sourced studies that run counter to your worldview your knee jerk response is to try and impeach the credibility of entire areas of academia. 

 

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

 This bond study actually makes very little sense as a whole unless you accept that the justice system is racially biased as fact at the outset.   

You have quite evidently not even finished reading the introduction of the study you are trying to ridicule. Unless you want to deny the very premise that there are glaring racial disparities within the US criminal justice system? 

 

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

I did not conclude that black judges are racially biased...they did that all on their own.

You actually went a step further then that and stated that the study said, and I'm quoting you verbatim here: "black judges are racist as well" which it categorically did not do. In fact it went against the notion of racial animus playing a considerable role in these disparate bail decisions. What it did mention, and what forms a major part of the findings of that study is that bail judges relied on inaccurate racial stereotypes that exaggerate the apparent danger black defendants pose. This was more apparent in less experienced and part-time judges. Including minority judges of this same repute. Which once again demonstrates that you in fact did not read the actual study you are so desperately trying to impugn.

 

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

anyone who would read this and not seriously question this conclusion is not a critical thinker...blinded by ideology. 

You commenting on the critical thinking abilities of others is particularly rich considering you are yourself so blinded by your perceived superiority and infallibility of the US criminal justice system in the face of mounts of evidence to the contrary.

[CosmicBuffalo]

8 minutes ago, Raavi said:

 

You are experiencing something called cognitive dissonance your entire existence professionally is predicated on this notion of the superiority of the US criminal justice system. Yet here your anecdote is now being challenged, shattered even by peer reviewed studies. Deep down you know these studies are not some giant liberal conspiracy but rather grounded in reality. A very sad reality that innumerate black people have gone through and continue to go through each day. (No, its wrong and I am pushing back.)

 

As for the study at hand. In the beginning part of the introduction they cited multiple studies to substantiate the fact that there exist racial disparities at every stage of the US criminal justice system; including but not limited to: blacks being more likely to be searched for contraband, blacks more likely to experience police force, blacks being more likely to be charged with a serious offence, blacks being more likely to be convicted. This is not a controversial statement as it is backed up by statistical fact. Unless you have any cause or basis to challenge the challenge the academic rigour of  each of these studies individually, your point is moot. (Alright, social sciences arent susceptible to bias.)

 

I invite you to link them here, so I can peruse them and comment on them. I never take someone on their word when they say "X studies prove Y" without citations. For you even less so because you have demonstrated on multiple occasions to either completely misinterpret and then subsequently misrepresent what a certain study/article finds, or fail completely to read the literature you are citing. (I will do nothing you say.  The fact that I went and pointed out this study with an absurd conclusion for you...was more than you deserved.)

 

Please point out to me exactly where I said medical sciences are the same as social sciences? I will spare you 5 minutes of searching, because you are the first and only one here bringing up medical sciences. The relevance of which to this conversation is non-existent. It is also rather telling how when confronted with well-researched and well-sourced studies that run counter to your worldview your knee jerk response is to try and impeach the credibility of entire areas of academia.  (Vaccines arent medical science...hard to make these connections.)

 

You have quite evidently not even finished reading the introduction of the study you are trying to ridicule. Unless you want to deny the very premise that there are glaring racial disparities within the US criminal justice system?  (Dude, I actually have to work, I am not wasting my time reading bogus studies, the one I thought might be legitimate, was complete dog crap.)

 

You actually went a step further then that and stated that the study said, and I'm quoting you verbatim here: "black judges are racist as well" which it categorically did not do. In fact it went against the notion of racial animus playing a considerable role in these disparate bail decisions. What it did mention, and what forms a major part of the findings of that study is that bail judges relied on inaccurate racial stereotypes that exaggerate the apparent danger black defendants pose. This was more apparent in less experienced and part-time judges. Including minority judges of this same repute. Which once again demonstrates that you in fact did not read the actual study you are so desperately trying to impugn. (Yes, it did, go read the quote again.  Its literally a conclusion.)

 

You commenting on the critical thinking abilities of others is particularly rich considering you are yourself so blinded by your perceived superiority and infallibility of the US criminal justice system in the face of mounts of evidence to the contrary. (You are a biased person.  Not searching for the truth, but searching for your ideas to be validated.  One of many indications that you have a victim mentality.)

 

Edited February 27, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[Raavi]

10 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

No, it wrong and I am pushing back

Alright, social sciences are susceptible to bias

ill do nothing you say.  The fact that I went and pointed out this study with an absurd conclusion for you...was more than you deserved.

Dude, I actually have a work, I am not wasting my time reading bogus studies, the one I thought might be legitimate, was complete dog crap.

You are a biased person.  Not searching for the the truth, but searching for your ideas to be validated.  One of many indications that you have a victim mentality

Don't even have to separate the quotes anymore because there really is no substance there and it reads like essentially the D&D equivalent of you throwing in the towel. You cannot respond with actual refutations of the academic literature I have provided you with so you resort to curt non-responses, tu quoque and some half-baked flailing personal attacks. 

 

Thanks for playing.

 

[CosmicBuffalo]

2 minutes ago, Raavi said:

Don't even have to separate the quotes anymore because there really is no substance there and it reads like essentially the D&D equivalent of you throwing in the towel. You cannot respond with actual refutations of the academic literature I have provided you with so you resort to curt non-responses, tu quoque and some half-baked flailing personal attacks. 

 

Thanks for playing.

 

Sounds like you concede.

[Raavi]

You just did exactly that, buddy. But if at any point you want to cross sabers again - always happy to shake one's misconstrued foundations and misguided notion of superiority about law and the US criminal justice system. 

[CosmicBuffalo]

1 hour ago, Raavi said:

You just did exactly that, buddy. But if at any point you want to cross sabers again - always happy to shake one's misconstrued foundations and misguided notion of superiority about law and the US criminal justice system. 

Is it nice when, the other side gets to determine the concession.  I have refuted your points.  You have already admitted multiple times that you believe the minority judges are racially biased towards minorities...you expect me to be persuaded by such absolute garbage.  The burden is on you and your side to convince not just the professionals involved, but everyone else.  Your side is failing.

 

Here is the quote again, that you claimed I misrepresented...this is a conclusion that their alleged study found...its horse crap, has no basis in reality, as it shows that your side is willing to dust under the rug the facts that go against your arguments.  Anyone who believe it, is a naive rube or trying promote an agenda of overturning the American system for which there many reasons.

 

"First, we find that both white and black bail judges are racially biased against black defendants, a finding that is inconsistent with most models of racial animus."  

 

Go ahead tell me again, that Black Judge who have been apart of the system for 30 plus years are still operating with racial bias toward black defendants....such assertions have no basis in reality...all cases turn on their facts, and you have failed to show, that racial bias is cause of these outcomes.

[Raavi]

Just now, CosmicBuffalo said:

I have refuted your points. 

No you categorically haven't. Saying "this study is crap because it runs counter to my understanding that is solely predicated on anecdotal evidence != refutation.

 

3 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

You have already admitted multiple times that you believe the minority judges are racially biased towards minorities...

I have, at this point nearing ad nauseam, outlined to you what the study found in terms of judging relying on inaccurate racial stereotypes that exaggerate the apparent danger black defendants. This included minority judges. Once again, this does not speak to it being "garbage, crap" or one of the other disparaging wordings you so flatteringly tarred it as, but rather to the pervasiveness of the systemic racial biases apparent within the criminal justice system. 

 

7 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

The burden is on you and your side to convince not just the professionals involved, but everyone else.  Your side is failing.

You are acting as systemic racial biases within the criminal justice system are some kind of whacky conspiracy theory, whilst in actuality it is widely accepted in academia.  And it's not just academia, countless professionals are also keenly aware of the endemic racial biases within the US criminal justice system. Problem is, when for example a judge speaks out against these issues in an area where it is especially stark - other 'professionals' try to shut them up. Illustrated by the case of judge Lori Landry

 

16 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Go ahead tell me again, that Black Judge who have been apart of the system for 30 plus years are still operating with racial bias toward black defendants....

Thanks for once more proving you did not in fact read the study that you are trying to impugn. 

 

[CosmicBuffalo]

1 minute ago, Raavi said:

No you categorically haven't. Saying "this study is crap because it runs counter to my understanding that is solely predicated on anecdotal evidence != refutation. (No it runs counter to the actual system and its underlying goals, my personal opinion does not matter.)

 

I have, at this point nearing ad nauseam, outlined to you what the study found in terms of judging relying on inaccurate racial stereotypes that exaggerate the apparent danger black defendants. This included minority judges. Once again, this does not speak to it being "garbage, crap" or one of the other disparaging wordings you so flatteringly tarred it as, but rather to the pervasiveness of the systemic racial biases apparent within the criminal justice system. (The whole study is in question if they claim to find black judges are racially biased...here is a much more simple explanation, it does not take a study, but basic understanding of the legal system...all cases turn their facts, Judges, some the most intelligent and educated members of society, are not racially biased, they apply the law as fairly as can be applied to each individual or an individual basis.   You have the burden here...and as I stated you are failing.)

 

You are acting as systemic racial biases within the criminal justice system are some kind of whacky conspiracy theory, whilst in actuality it is widely accepted in academia.  And it's not just academia, countless professionals are also keenly aware of the endemic racial biases within the US criminal justice system. Problem is, when for example a judge speaks out against these issues in an area where it is especially stark - other 'professionals' try to shut them up. Illustrated by the case of judge Lori Landry (I already posted an article where the professionals were queried, and most do not accept such simplistic arguments.  And the fact that you do it telling.)

Thanks for once more proving you did not in fact read the study that you are trying to impugn. (Yeah, I misrepresented the the quote..keep trying.)

 

 

[Raavi]

41 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

No it runs counter to the actual system and its underlying goals, my personal opinion does not matter

Of course it runs counter to the lofty ideals behind criminal justice that are parroted by its agents. The actual system in theory is one thing. How it plays out in practice is quite another. As is illustrated by innumerate studies, a handful of which I have linked you to in this thread. 

 

41 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

The whole study is in question if they claim to find black judges are racially biased.

Please explain to me how the less-experienced and part-time minority bail judges cannot have similar implicit biases to their caucasian counterparts? Noting the fast-paced and continuously revolving environment of bail hearings. The study goes into stereotyping of black defendants in terms of exaggerating the danger they pose, not explicit biases i.e. "racist black judges" as you not so eloquently misread it is. Also note that it examined a total of 162,836 court cases representing 93,914 defendants in Philadelphia County from 2010 to 2014 as well as 93,417 cases from 65,944 defendants in Miami-Dade County between 2006 and 2014. Which is more than a representative sample size. 

 

But please do tell how your anecdotal evidence as a presumably small fry atty in god-knows-where GA trumps this study covering 160k+ cases.

 

41 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

it does not take a study, but basic understanding of the legal system...

Which you exhibited very little of.

 

41 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

judges, some the most intelligent and educated members of society, are not racially biased

1 second on google.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/kansas-judge-accused-racial-bias-cases-under-review-n1097061

https://www.ksla.com/2020/02/26/gov-edwards-calls-judge-who-admitted-sending-racist-texts-resign/

 

41 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

I already posted an article where the professionals were queried, and most do not accept such simplistic arguments.  And the fact that you do it telling.

You know what is a simplistic, and frankly dumb argument? "The US criminal justice system is infallible, superior and there is no racial disparities" in the face of mounts of evidence to the contrary. Your response also does not address the case of judge Lori Landry.

 

 

 

[CosmicBuffalo]

8 minutes ago, Raavi said:

Of course it runs counter to the lofty ideals behind criminal justice that are parroted by its agents. The actual system in theory is one thing. How it plays out in practice is quite another. As is illustrated by innumerate studies, a handful of which I have linked you to in this thread.  (right..I am the conspiracy theorist for citing well known and accepted principles of law.)

 

Please explain to me how the less-experienced and part-time minority bail judges cannot have similar implicit biases to their caucasian counterparts? Noting the fast-paced and continuously revolving environment of bail hearings. The study goes into stereotyping of black defendants in terms of exaggerating the danger they pose, not explicit biases i.e. "racist black judges" as you not so eloquently misread it is. Also note that it examined a total of 162,836 court cases representing 93,914 defendants in Philadelphia County from 2010 to 2014 as well as 93,417 cases from 65,944 defendants in Miami-Dade County between 2006 and 2014. Which is more than a representative sample size.   (Cases turn on their facts, sample size means bupkis if the underlying premise is flawed.)

 

But please do tell how your anecdotal evidence as a presumably small fry atty in god-knows-where GA trumps this study.  (I already quote an article from California.)  (Ad hominem...I am offended)

 

Which you exhibited very little of.

 

1 second on google. (So, Judges are not highly intelligent or educated?...right?)

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/kansas-judge-accused-racial-bias-cases-under-review-n1097061

https://www.ksla.com/2020/02/26/gov-edwards-calls-judge-who-admitted-sending-racist-texts-resign/

 

8 minutes ago, Raavi said:

You know what is a simplistic, and frankly dumb argument? "The US criminal justice system is infallible, superior and there is no racial disparities" in the fact of mounts of evidence to the contrary. Your response also does not address the case of judge Lori Landry.  (right..I acknowledge multiple issues with the system and believe this is a problem, racial disparity outcomes, but do not accept your cause...I am so simple minded.)

 

 

 

 

[Raavi]

1 minute ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

right..I am the conspiracy theorist for citing well known and accepted principles of law

Principles of law do not exist in a vacuum. Practice deviates substantially from the lofty ideals you hold so dear. There are whole bodies of legal research dedicated to just evaluate the effect of the black letter and principle on practice. In which the racial disparities prevalent in the US criminal justice system are wholly uncontroversial. The numbers do not lie either.

 

11 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Cases turn on their facts sample size means bupkis if the underlying premise is flawed

The underlying premise isn't flawed though. It is very well sourced and substantiated. But you reject anything that doesn't conform to your sophomoric perception of US criminal justice.

 

14 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

I already quote an article from California

Please tell me how half a dozen statements from judges and lawyers out of California on broad notions of racial biases in criminal justice in anyhow contradicts or refutes the study that looked specifically at over 160k+ decisions from bail judges in Philadelphia County and Miami-Dade County.

 

17 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

So, Judges are not highly intelligent or educated?...right?

You said and I quote once more verbatim: "judges, some the most intelligent and educated members of society, are not racially biased" I showed you two recent examples that contradict your statement. I would have shown you a study that showed the exact same thing if with a larger sample size and more robust but you for some bizarre reason seem more receptive to tertiary sources like news articles as opposed to secondary sources like reports and academic literature. 

 

21 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

right..I acknowledge multiple issues with the system and believe this is a problem, racial disparity outcomes, but do not accept your cause

Ah yes you're right I forgot. You believe these racial disparities can be explained away by black people on average being dumber than whites. Silly me.

[CosmicBuffalo]

2 hours ago, Raavi said:

Principles of law do not exist in a vacuum. Practice deviates substantially from the lofty ideals you hold so dear. There are whole bodies of legal research dedicated to just evaluate the effect of the black letter and principle on practice. In which the racial disparities prevalent in the US criminal justice system are wholly uncontroversial. The numbers do not lie either. (Says who, you...you have 11 studies that disagree and bolstered by such arguments...why arent you gobbling them down?)

 

The underlying premise isn't flawed though. It is very well sourced and substantiated. But you reject anything that doesn't conform to your sophomoric perception of US criminal justice. (Again, see point 1...racial disparity caused by racism is not a fact, pretending that racism is the root cause is " your sophomoric perception of US criminal justice")

 

Please tell me how half a dozen statements from judges and lawyers out of California on broad notions of racial biases in criminal justice in anyhow contradicts or refutes the study that looked specifically at over 160k+ decisions from bail judges in Philadelphia County and Miami-Dade County.  (Do I need to quote that conclusion again, I do not care how many times time you try to validate this study, black judges are not racially biased against black defendants...if you disagree, youre naive or have an agenda...my cite was 3/4, attributed racial disparity to some other cause or list of causes, if I had to guess...less than 15% of professionals that actually practice law genuinely belief this farce)

 

You said and I quote once more verbatim: "judges, some the most intelligent and educated members of society, are not racially biased" I showed you two recent examples that contradict your statement. I would have shown you a study that showed the exact same thing if with a larger sample size and more robust but you for some bizarre reason seem more receptive to tertiary sources like news articles as opposed to secondary sources like reports and academic literature. (Yeah, two examples...whooped dee do...you are making the same argument here that I am making in regards to studies... I am not trying to convince you...never was.  Also two judges are idiots...I am sure you can find 100s more...each judge should be evaluated on his/her decisions.  If you can prove racism, remove them...already suggested this, but yet...another fail, to take a small group and apply it to everyone..nice try.)

 

Ah yes you're right I forgot. You believe these racial disparities can be explained away by black people on average being dumber than whites. Silly me.  (I put that study in there just to trigger you, which it did...and I laughed...it also allowed me to expose your peer review argument, and allowed me to attack your arguments when you pushed back as emotional...as you cry racism at any chance you can.)

 

Edited February 27, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[Raavi]

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Says who, you...you have 11 studies that disagree and bolstered by such arguments...why arent you gobbling them down?

Once again references to mythical studies without actually citing them. We have been over this, cite and outline what part you agree/disagree with and why. It isn't difficult, buddy.

 

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

again, see point 1...racial disparity caused by racism is not a fact, pretending that racism is the root cause is " your sophomoric perception of US criminal justice"

It is quite striking how you in the face of mounts of academic literature to the contrary continue to insist that racism doesn't play in US criminal justice. Whilst it is glaringly obvious to anyone with a modicum of common sense. You do not find these gross disparities at quite literally every stage of the criminal process without racial biases being present. In fact there have been numerous cases that established this. Racism also comes in various shapes and sizes and runs the gamut from unconscious and implicit bias to institutional bias to explicit overt racism. Is it the only cause of these disparities? Probably not. But that requires an examination on an issue-by-issue basis. In broad strokes it can be said that there are numerous socio-economic factors and the like that play a role as well. Though racial issues within these are also apparent, hence the notion of systemic and entrenched racism. Some level of racial bias is however in many cases the causa proxima. I note again the practice of stop-and-frisk. This is also once again not some kind of tinfoil hat conspiracy theory, pretending it does ironically only reinforces the stereotype about the type of person you appear to be. An unflattering stereotype, I might add.

 

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

black judges are not racially biased against black defendants..

It is interesting how you seem to be convinced minority judges are immune to implicit biases against minority defendants. Do explain to me exactly how about that works? What about the colour of their skin prevents implicit biases from taking hold? Do they have a certain gene that filters it out? 

 

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

f I had to guess...less than 15% of professionals that actually practice law genuinely belief this farce

Nice job pulling a completely random number out of your ass that represents absolutely nothing and has zero value to this discussion.

 

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Yeah, two examples...whooped dee do..

You said and I quote once again verbatim: "judges, some the most intelligent and educated members of society, are not racially biased". Those two examples already contradict that statement. I could easily find a lot more as well.

 

58 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

I put that study in there just to trigger you, which it did...and I laughed...it also allowed me to expose your peer review argument, and allowed me to attack your arguments when you pushed back as emotional...as you cry racism at any chance you can

That would require a level of planning and foresight capacities far beyond anything you have demonstrated to be capable of. The more likely scenario, applying Occam's razor here, is that you simply cited a study without reading anything beyond the title. Which seems to be a common theme for you in this thread.

 

 

[CosmicBuffalo]

10 minutes ago, Raavi said:

Once again references to mythical studies without actually citing them. We have been over this, cite and outline what part you agree/disagree with and why. It isn't difficult, buddy. (If you think I couldnt cite more, youre sadly mistaken...why should I, you will just cry racism.)

 

It is quite striking how you in the face of mounts of academic literature to the contrary continue to insist that racism doesn't play in US criminal justice. Whilst it is glaringly obvious to anyone with a modicum of common sense. You do not find these gross disparities at quite literally every stage of the criminal process without racial biases being present. In fact there have been numerous cases that established this. Racism also comes in various shapes and sizes and runs the gamut from unconscious and implicit bias to institutional bias to explicit overt racism. Is it the only cause of these disparities? Probably not. There are numerous socio-economic factors and the like that play a role as well. Though racial issues within these are also apparent, hence the notion of systemic and entrenched racism. Some level of racial bias is however in many cases the causa proxima. I note again the practice of stop-and-frisk. This is also once again not some kind of tinfoil hat conspiracy theory, pretending it does ironically only reinforces the stereotype about the type of person you appear to be. An unflattering stereotype, I might add. (TLDR)

 

It is interesting how you seem to be convinced minority judges are immune to implicit biases against minority defendants. Do explain to me exactly how about that works? What about the colour of their skin prevents implicit biases from taking hold? Do they have a certain gene that filters it out?  (Lets see, how can a person be racially biased against their own race?  Thats more of a question for you to answer.)

 

Nice job pulling a completely random number out of your ass that represents absolutely nothing and has zero value to this discussion. (What?  I am allowed to guess...what a I submitting my ideas for peer review board of gta forum members?)

 

You said and I quote once again verbatim: "judges, some the most intelligent and educated members of society, are not racially biased". Those two examples already contradict that statement. I could easily find a lot more as well. (So, I guess you dispute that Judges are neither...what is your cure to racism? Education oh I bet its extermination?)

 

That would require a level of planning and foresight capacities far beyond anything you have demonstrated to be capable of. The more likely scenario, applying Occam's razor here, is that you simply cited a study without reading anything beyond the title. Which seems to be a common theme for you in this thread. (I am laughing right now...you bit so hard on that one...lol.)

 

 

https://www.city-journal.org/html/what-criminologists-dont-say-and-why-15328.html 

Here is good read that counters your narrative..go ahead and make your out cries.

Edited February 27, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[Raavi]

24 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

If you think I couldnt cite more, youre sadly mistaken...why should I, you will just cry racism.

If you cite studies that make claims that racial disparities in US criminal justice can be explained away by black people being dumber. Of course I will point out the transparent racism. In any event: less blabbering, more citing.

 

24 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

TLDR

Right. Perhaps you should go back off to the RDR section since that level of intellectual engagement seems to be more your speed.

 

24 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

(Lets see, how can a person be racially biased against their own race?  Thats more of a question for you to answer

Internalized racism is a thing. Though in the instance of the study it is more so attributable to implicit biases that exist just as much in white people as minorities in a certain position in this instance a bail judge, and are by that same token equally less likely to exist when the person is of more seniority / been a judge for a longer period of time. I would in this context also not rule out the in-group effect, where the in-group in casu is judges.

 

24 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

..what is your cure to racism? Education

Education place a huge role in it yes. 

 

24 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

(I am laughing right now...you bit so hard on that one...lol

Keep telling yourself that, buddy. I would not laugh if I was boneheaded enough to city a study that was overtly racist.

 

24 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

https://www.city-journal.org/html/what-criminologists-dont-say-and-why-15328.html 

Here is good read that counters your narrative..go ahead and make your out cries.

 

Are you taking the piss? You are linking to the exact same authors of the article that made the claim that average lower IQ explains away racial disparities in US criminal justice. 

 

Subtitle from that article "Monopolized by the Left, academic research on crime gets almost everything wrong."

 

I get it now, yo are just a right wing hack.

[CosmicBuffalo]

1 minute ago, Raavi said:

If you cite studies that make claims that racial disparities in US criminal justice can be explained away by black people being dumber. Of course I will point out the transparent racism. In any event: less blabbering, more citing. (Lol..you cannot even let it go)

 

Right. Perhaps you should go back off to the RDR section since that level of intellectual engagement seems to be more your speed.  (You wish)

 

Internalized racism is a thing. Though in the instance of the study it is more so attributable to implicit biases that exist just as much in white people as minorities in a certain position in this instance a bail judge, and are by that same token equally less likely to exist when the person is of more seniority / been a judge for a longer period of time. I would in this context also not rule out the in-group effect, where the in-group in casu is judges. (I am trying to follow, but this same argument could be explained by a just applying law to facts.)

 

Education place a huge role in it yes. (Yet, Judges one the most educated groups is still racist....why? Because of the previous rational, maybe they are not and the outcomes are an actual application of law and facts.)

 

Keep telling yourself that, buddy. I would not laugh if I was boneheaded enough to city a study that was overtly racist. (Buts it peer reviewed...must be solid gold.)  (I have literally been laughing at you...and yet, now I explicitly state it and I am some now lying about it...lol.)

 

[Raavi]

2 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

You wish

Or you can keep completely embarrassing yourself here. If that's your fetish, have at it.

 

3 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

am trying to follow, but this same argument could be explained by a just applying law to facts.

By all means go ahead and show me your work analysing all 160k instances and explaining away the racial disparities by applying the law to the facts. 

 

5 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Yet, Judges one the most educated groups is still racist....why? 

Ah yes because an essential part of the average education a judge goes through deals with preventing implicit racial biases. Do also note that racial biases, and racism full stop are not monopolised by the 'uneducated'.

 

[CosmicBuffalo]

7 minutes ago, Raavi said:

Or you can keep completely embarrassing yourself here. If that's your fetish, have at it.  (I have slaughtered you on this issue...it has not even been close.  If R* were to fix the gd game though, I might be far less active on here though to be fair.)

 

By all means go ahead and show me your work analysing all 160k instances and explaining away the racial disparities by applying the law to the facts. (Every time the judge ruled...it was on an individual basis with the known facts.)

 

Ah yes because an essential part of the average education a judge goes through deals with preventing implicit racial biases. Do also note that racial biases, and racism full stop are not monopolised by the 'uneducated'. (Right, so the "right" kind of education.  The kind you approve of...right?) 

 

 

Edited February 27, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[Raavi]

Just now, CosmicBuffalo said:

I have slaughtered you on this issue...it has not even been close.

Mate, you have exhibited the intellectual prowess of a damp tea towel. But whatever makes you sleep better at night.

 

6 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

(Every time the judge ruled...it was on an individual basis with the facts known

Do tell me how that explains away the racial disparities that they encountered. Oh, and let's just stop pretending we are only talking about one study on bail here. Let's also note that virtually every single study examining the issue of race in bail determinations has found that black people are put in pretrial detention at a higher rate and are subject to higher bail amounts than are whites with similar charges and similar criminal histories.

 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07418820500088929

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2003.tb01007.x

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/073401680202700202

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1229062?seq=1

[CosmicBuffalo]

12 hours ago, Raavi said:

Mate, you have exhibited the intellectual prowess of a damp tea towel. But whatever makes you sleep better at night.

 

Do tell me how that explains away the racial disparities that they encountered. (criminal history = higher bond...crime involves worse behavior = higher bond) Oh, and let's just stop pretending we are only talking about one study on bail here. Let's also note that virtually every single study examining the issue of race in bail determinations has found that black people are put in pretrial detention at a higher rate and are subject to higher bail amounts than are whites with similar charges and similar criminal histories.

 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07418820500088929

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2003.tb01007.x

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/073401680202700202

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1229062?seq=1

Its not every study...thats your problem relying on studies.  Its a similar argument to the one you tried to make because you found a few judges.  Except, Judges are individual just like every criminal defendant...patterns may be present, but this is not cause and effect.  You are willing to buy in that all judges are racist because a few judges have been proven racist.  Yet, you are discounting the few studies, although there are many, that deny the so called fact that racism is the root cause.  As stated, academia is not working in the field directly, they are sitting on the side observing...and their bias taints these studies.

Edited February 28, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[Raavi]

2 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Its not every study...thats your problem relying on studies.  Its a similar argument to the one you tried to make because you found a few judges.  Except, Judges are individual just like every criminal defendant...patterns may be present, but this is not cause and effect.  You are willing to buy in that all judges are racist because a few judges have been proven racist.  Yet, you are discounting the few studies, although there are many, that deny the so called fact that racism is the root cause.  As stated, academia is not working in the field directly, they are sitting on the side observing...and their bias taints these studies.

See, that's just not how it works. You cannot take a wealth of robust and rigorous studies covering decades worth of empirical data that establish very glaring racial disparities and substantiate the reality that there are various levels of racial biases apparent within the bail court process and then just go "nah, all just liburel bias hurhurhur" proceeding to back up that assertion by linking to über-partisan article from a right wing hack in a right wing magazine that in the first few sentences deliberately misrepresents the recent criminological history and then goes on to bemoan feminism and marxism and applaud the practice of broken-windows policing and mass-incarceration. An article that in no way shape or form counters any of the points made by me or some of the other posters here, let alone refutes any of the plethora of studies I have linked you to and in practice is little more than a glorified opinion piece penned by someone who after some research turns out to have dedicated his latter years to bemoaning universities for not forcing right wing talking points down students throats. To add insult to injury you throw in an assertion that "academia just sits on the sidelines" which is demonstrably erroneous and also serves to demonstrate your lack of experience with and knowledge of the role of academia as a whole. Many of the people calling a spade a spade and pointing to the gross racial disparities in the criminal justice system are actual fact professionals within that same field. Many of these professors and academics in legal academia are practicing law themselves. You are fighting a losing battle.

[sivispacem]

2 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

As stated, academia is not working in the field directly, they are sitting on the side observing...and their bias taints these studies.

How is an impartial external observer with no vested interest, and whose reputation rides entirely on the fact their work is open to peer review, more biased than the personal opinions of people who have a vested personal and economic interest in presenting the notion of the US judicial system being fair and non-discriminatory?

[CosmicBuffalo]

7 hours ago, Raavi said:

See, that's just not how it works. You cannot take a wealth of robust and rigorous studies covering decades worth of empirical data that establish very glaring racial disparities and substantiate the reality that there are various levels of racial biases apparent within the bail court process and then just go "nah, all just liburel bias hurhurhur" proceeding to back up that assertion by linking to über-partisan article from a right wing hack in a right wing magazine that in the first few sentences deliberately misrepresents the recent criminological history and then goes on to bemoan feminism and marxism and applaud the practice of broken-windows policing and mass-incarceration.  (Is this really one sentence?  I mean yeah they are biased because they have accepted a fact that is not a fact and this flaw causes all their studies to be invalidated or at minimum severely distorted...for instance, if I were to accept that racial bias is the cause of higher bond...when I am confronted with the fact that minority judges also impose higher bonds, I would say minority judges are also biased against minorities rather than attempting to find another cause) An article that in no way shape or form counters any of the points made by me or some of the other posters here, let alone refutes any of the plethora of studies I have linked you to and in practice is little more than a glorified opinion piece penned by someone who after some research turns out to have dedicated his latter years to bemoaning universities for not forcing right wing talking points down students throats. (there are many, studies they are in your own cites...spend your time reading them if you must.)  To add insult to injury you throw in an assertion that "academia just sits on the sidelines" which is demonstrably erroneous and also serves to demonstrate your lack of experience with and knowledge of the role of academia as a whole. (Right, so these so called unbiased researcher are working in the systems that they claim to have no bias against or are not working in them and collecting data and applying flawed conclusions to them...whatever you want pick you poison.) Many of the people calling a spade a spade and pointing to the gross racial disparities in the criminal justice system are actual fact professionals within that same field. (Ok, are they racist, they are working for the justice system after all, they are probably racist.  Opinions invalidated.) Many of these professors and academics in legal academia are practicing law themselves. You are fighting a losing battle.

Your own cite has 9 separate articles that are allegedly held up to the so called rigor of peer reviews. 

[CosmicBuffalo]

7 hours ago, sivispacem said:

How is an impartial external observer with no vested interest, and whose reputation rides entirely on the fact their work is open to peer review, more biased than the personal opinions of people who have a vested personal and economic interest in presenting the notion of the US judicial system being fair and non-discriminatory?

Umm...social sciences are not the most scientific studies of all studies...its a commonly acknowledged issue in social sciences.  A lot of data applied with crappy ideas as the "rules" lead to distorted conclusions...which is exactly what is happening in these studies of criminal justice.

 

If every so called peer, believe the cause of racial disparity outcomes is inherent racism as fact at the outset of the studies, then the study is flawed. 

Just one example of social sciences trying to make accurate predictions of an outcome, polling data...some of the most reliable and statistically accurate data, continues to be wrong on a significant basis.

 

Imagine the herculian effort that this so called bond study claimed to analyze and review 160,000 ((It's spelled Raavi, go edit your post)  Really, are you monitoring my posts in real time???? How butt hurt are you?  I dont give two craps how you spell your name..I have not committed to memory nor will I. (I honestly would not care if they claimed to analyze 10 millions case) bonds after the fact.  It would take 2666 hours...to look at each bond order for 1 second a piece.  Every second doubles that amount of time.  Even if you claim 10 seconds for each bond order and nothing more 26,000 hours...10 seconds would not provide enough time to include the conditions imposed let alone the criminal history of each defendant.  The factual allegations of each charge...please no where to be found.  This is study a farce.  Add a second to each case and you double the amount of time required to research the time.  They probably took the charge and some data that was input for them and claim to run a formula to give them wonderful conclusions and honestly as skipped this horse crap, that seemed to be exactly what they did. 

 

In order for me to even believe this study even came close to properly assessing the courts, the researcher would have had to sit in court taking detailed notes each day and then inputting the data including the notes to make an accurate determination every day for at least 5 years.  To be honest, once I got their methodology I skipped to conclusion, but I seriously doubt this was there method of data collection, because no one in their right mind would fund such a foolish study.  If you are not going to into court and sit there day in and day out watching the people and their interactions, well I am sorry your review of some data...is going to be off.

 

On the flip side, guess what each Judge did with each defendant, probably spent 5 to 10 minutes reviewing each case and when you add that up...its a colossal amount of time and human effort in the spirit of fairness.  So, yeah I am going to say these studies are bull crap...time spent reviewing data you did not collect yourself is time better spent huffing your own farts...especially when you take into account the first sentence of this paragraph.

 

Edited February 28, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[Raavi]

1 minute ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

 mean yeah they are biased because they have accepted a fact that is not a fact and this flaw causes all their studies to be invalidated or at minimum severely distorted

Just because you say the sky is in fact neon green does not magically make it so. Saying that racial bias is in fact a non-issue does not magically erase the experiences of innumerate black people that have been victimised by racial biases at every level. 

 

3 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

for instance, if I were to accept that racial bias is the cause of higher bond...when I am confronted with the fact that minority judges also impose higher bonds, I would say minority judges are also biased against minorities rather than attempting to find another cause

Which is exactly what the study you have tried to consistently ridicule did. They stated that less experienced and part-time bail judges both causation and minority are prone to rely on inaccurate stereotypes exaggerating the danger minorities pose. The other studies found that for the same crimes, with similar criminal histories black defandants disparately received higher bail amounts and were more likely to have bail denied and be subject to pre-trial detention than their white counterparts. This is not something that just 'can be explained away by the facts'. If I have two cases of larceny from a convenience store one white and one black, both with one prior offence, both represented by public defenders, both residing in the district where the alleged offence was committed, and one gets a significantly higher bail amount than the other. The only variable here is ethnicity. Which is precisely the type of disparities these studies found. This being said, the issues with the cash bail system go far deeper and the bail system as a whole is in massive need of a complete overhaul. 

 

22 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

there are many, studies they are in your own cites...spend your time reading them if you must.

See you keep pointing to these mythical "many studies" but the only literature you have so far been able to produce have been two pieces by a right wing hack (one of them not even being academic) an individual, I might add, that has a set agenda on undermining his academic foes and is transparently partisan. That does not constitute a refutation by any stretch of the imagination.

 

26 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Right, so these so called unbiased researcher are working in the systems that they claim to have no bias against or are not working in them and collecting data and applying flawed conclusions to them...whatever you want pick you poison

Keep on moving those goalposts. First the research was unreliable because it came from evil academics who are not professionals in the field and now I point you to a multitude of studies that were actually authored by highly respected experts in the legal field whom are also professors at some of the top law schools in the US, and now those all of a sudden are biased inherently because they actually work in the system? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

 

32 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Ok, are they racist, they are working for the justice system after all, they are probably racist.  

This is just farcical. 

 

[CosmicBuffalo]

3 minutes ago, Raavi said:

They stated that less experienced and part-time bail judges both causation and minority are prone to rely on inaccurate stereotypes exaggerating the danger minorities pose. (The study is horse crap...a minority cannot have a racial bias against their own race...the bias is based on something different....how hard is this to understand?)

 

Keep on moving those goalposts.   ( I am not moving anything...you are.)

 

This is just farcical. (Right, but if you disagree with a conclusion, racism has already been used a justification as invalidation.)

 

Are you really that concerned about my opinions that you are watching me write, maybe that's what your researchers should do it court and they might have a better understanding of how court actually works.