Racial Profiling Bill Stalled in Committee
Saturday, April 13, 2013
Legislators, law enforcement personnel and advocacy groups gathered before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday evening presenting their arguments in favor of advancement of the Comprehensive Racial Profiling Prevention Act of 2013.
Racial profiling bills have been presented for several years
Sponsored by Representatives Grace Diaz (D-Dist. 11) and Joseph Almeida (D-Dist. 12) of Providence, the bill has been brought before the committee on several occasions over many years.
“I have hoped for the last two years that the bill would be passed,” said Diaz. “It is an issue that is very close to my heart. Most of my district is of color - there are many ethnicities - Hispanic, Asian, Latino. They feel they are being profiled, being stopped and searched for no reason. It’s not fair for our community.”
Almeida, who co-sponsored the bill is a retired Providence police officer who served for 20 years. Almeida founded the Rhode Island Minority Police Association and was the first black member of the Providence Swat team.
“As I’ve said for years, driving while black – or brown or any other color – is not a crime. More than a decade after we first started collected traffic stop information, those of us in the minority community know that we are still being stopped more often, and getting searched for no good reason,” Almeida said in press release.
“Kids tell us that just being outside with their friends can be enough to attract attention from the police, even when they’re doing nothing wrong at all. Police need to be able to fight criminal activity, but they shouldn’t treat people with suspicion solely because of the color of their skin,” said Almeida.
Racial profiling per the current law means the detention, interdiction or other disparate treatment of an individual on the basis, in whole or in part, of the racial or ethnic status of such individual, except when such status is used in combination with other identifying factors in seeking to apprehend a specific suspect whose racial or ethnic status is part of the description of the suspect.
ACLU support
Members of the Rhode Island chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union were also in attendance on Thursday.
“We fully support the bill in its present form,” said an ACLU representative. “We were not included in the language changes or the drafting of the bill. We hope that the bill passes. It has been seven years.”
The original legislation, titled Traffic Stop Statistics was enacted in 2000, declaring the use of racial profiling for stopping or searching motorists on the public highways of the state against public policy and violative of the civil rights of the motorist. The legislation established the parameters of a 24 month study of all traffic stops made by the state police and each Rhode Island municipal police department the results of which were reported to the state attorney general’s office.
Following the study, the Racial Profiling Prevention Act of 2004 was enacted. The act established guidelines for reporting complaints of police misconduct by members of the public and required that written documentation of the guidelines be made available to the public.
The 2004 legislation also required that each instance of traffic stop be recorded detailing the reason for the stop and search that was conducted, the manner of each search and the reasoning behind conducting the search. The 2004 data collection was to take place over a period of 12 months. Each police department in the state was required to establish a written policy prohibiting the use of racial profiling in routine traffic stops.
Record keeping standards established also required that the race or ethnicity, gender, and approximate age of the driver stopped be recorded. That information was to be established by the police officer’s observation without asking the individual stopped to provide the answers.
This requirement posed several concerns for law enforcement administrators and personnel who had to balance the requirements of the new legislation within the scope of their job. Diaz recently had the opportunity to work with the State Police and does not want to inhibit law enforcement personnel from performing their jobs.
Purpose isn't to interfere with law enforcement
“I had the opportunity to see what they do - what they have to deal with every day,” she said. “I honor these jobs, the police. I don’t want to interfere with the police. We are reaching out to law enforcement to respect each other. We are asking, “Please do not judge people because of their color.”
According to Diaz, the legislation has died in the General Assembly in past years due to law enforcement organizations testifying that it could prohibit police officers attempting to do their job.
Recounting a story of an incident she witnessed, Diaz explained that profiling extends farther than the automobile.
“I saw police stop and search two students walking home from school,” she said. “They looked like they were around 13 to 15 years old. The officers got out of their car and stopped the boys. They put them up against the car and searched them. The officers got back in their car and drove away. They weren’t arrested. They hadn’t done anything wrong. They were just walking home. There was no probable cause.”
.
“There should be a concern for police to search someone - a reason,” she said. “This bill is a great opportunity for all of us to work together, to say that we are all equal to each other. I only hope that we can find common ground.”
“Colonel O’Donnell, the police commissioner and police representatives came. It was very well attended,” said Diaz.“I hope to see the bill go to the floor for a full vote this session.”
Colonel Steven G. O'Donnell and Representative Almeida could not be reached for comment prior to final posting.
Related Articles
- NEW: Groups to March in Support of Racial Profiling Prevention Bill
- NEW: Lawmakers Unveil Racial Profiling Bill
- NEW: Groups Slam Police Chiefs for Opposing Racial Profiling Bill
