Social A Judge Asked Harvard to Find Out Why So Many Black People Were In Prison

[ElKarlo]

It's funny you mention that because the 60's is when the communist ideological subversion in the west kicked into gear.

The Black Panther Party was a revolutionary socialist political organization founded by Marxist college students Bobby Seale and Huey Newton in October 1966 in Oakland, California.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party

There's so much communist interference happening. The black population is being used and abused so badly they're putting the chains back on.

They are. It'd interesting that the black family survived Jim crow and slavery, but not welfare.
Blacks were actually succeeding despite the system set up to hold them down. Soon as welfare shower up all their gains were wiped out. The commies got them hard

 

[kenetics]

And black wealth stopped going in the late 60s.
So blacks are poor forever because of racism?
That's not what's holding them back now.
My dad grew up incredibly poor. His dad was an alcoholic and a gambler. His parents never had the money to give him anything. He was able get into the middle class by working, having kids after being married and not commiting crimes.
My black godmother didn't resort to criminality and her son did well. She never let him act like a fool or get into hang tyoe stuff.
There was a reason why blacks are poor, but that reason can't be the same reason forever. Not when Asians and Hispanics come with no money and no English x yet they still are able to succeed

I agree, accountability is number one. Without that you'll never make it regardless where you come from.

 

[ElKarlo]

I agree, accountability is number one. Without that you'll never make it regardless where you come from.

Fully agreed. People that hold themselves and those around them accountable, succeed.

 

[Pullmyfinger]

Yes, that's a part of it. Chasing being at the cost of everything else keeps you poor. I long ago worked with for the govt. Half were back the others white. The black guys constantly were spending money on women and second or third girls. They never had any money because they spent it on dumb stuff all the time

Lol!
That's funny you mentioned that!

I have noticed a similar trend among coworkers during overseas trips.
The things people value and spend their money on. Mind boggling.

Make a ton of money.
And soon.......they have none.

Many people are poor because they are financially self-destructive.

 

[Pseudo Sane]

That is not how the courts work here.... at all. Especially the lower courts. Sorry bud the study is not "dumb and wrong"

They don't hear simple cases first. They deal with the lawyers first. Then the court lawyers. Then those without. Generally the lawyers are hired and given to those who are dealing with the potential for greater times n fines.

Dumb and wrong? No . It's not.

Guess again.

https://www.annieduke.com/no-judges...nces-hungry-annies-newsletter-october-5-2018/

HUNGRY
HOW A SEXY NARRATIVE CAN MAKE US FORGET THAT CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION
Ego depletion is the hypothesis that willpower and self-control are limited resources that diminish with use, like when we exercise or resist a plate of cookies or do hard math problems.

The original result that kicked off the ego-depletion hypothesis came from Roy Baumeister, et. al. in 1998 showing that people who are forced to resist a plate of cookies give up on solving hard puzzles more quickly.

Other results followed including a famous study showing that willpower could be replenished with sugary drinks.

It’s a sexy narrative.

Break down and eat a pint of ice cream at the end of the day? Ego Depletion!

Eat that huge muffin after working out? Ego Depletion!

It turns out, though, that many of the more famous ego depletion studies don’t replicate.

One of the more well-publicized studies found that judges issued harsher sentences right before lunch.

The interpretation?

“Judges’ Rulings Are Harsher When They Are Hungrier“ declared just one headline describing the findings.

Shai Danziger and colleagues took data from 1,112 parole decisions by Israeli judges. They found “the likelihood of a favorable ruling is greater at the very beginning of the work day or after a food break than later in the sequence of cases.”

What followed was the prescriptive advice that simply taking a food break “may lead judges to rule differently in cases with similar legal characteristics.”

That fit neatly with the then-hot concept of ego depletion.

But a subsequent paper by Keren Weinshall-Margel and John Shapard revealed a much more mundane explanation for the harsher sentencing: prisoners without lawyers receive parole at a much lower rate.

And, guess what?

Defendants without representation have their hearings scheduled at the end of sessions, before breaks.

Like lunch breaks.

No one is questioning the data collection of the original research. The correlation was based on facts (the dispositions and the time of day of the dispositions) ascertainable with a high degree of certainty.

The conclusion of ego depletion (in this case the judges being hungry), however, was not a fact. It was an inference of what caused the correlation between time of day and how the judges granted or denied parole.

Facts and truth aren’t the same thing.

 

[Anewt]

Guess again.

https://www.annieduke.com/no-judges...nces-hungry-annies-newsletter-october-5-2018/

It literally says

* Shai Danziger and colleagues took data from 1,112 parole decisions by Israeli judges. They found “the likelihood of a favorable ruling is greater at the very beginning of the work day or after a food break than later in the sequence of cases.”*



But a subsequent paper by Keren Weinshall-Margel and John Shapard revealed a much more mundane explanation for the harsher sentencing: prisoners without lawyers receive parole at a much lower rate.

And, guess what?

Defendants without representation have their hearings scheduled at the end of sessions, before breaks.

Like lunch breaks.


Defendants without representation have their hearings scheluded at the end of sessions means nearing the end of the day. After the cases with lawyers and representatives. Ie those who are broke or have minor charges not paying for representation goes after those with money.

I don't see how your article disproves anything I stated. People with money will be seen first. Generally people are much more likely to spend money if facing a greater charge.


You tried to state small crimes go first... you're completely wrong and your article does not address your claim.... at all.

 

[ElKarlo]

Lol!
That's funny you mentioned that!

I have noticed a similar trend among coworkers during overseas trips.
The things people value and spend their money on. Mind boggling.

Make a ton of money.
And soon.......they have none.

Many people are poor because they are financially self-destructive.

Yeah man. I feel bad for people that are poor and struggle. But it's hard to feel bad for people that are poor because they spend money like it's on fire.
I worked construction right out of high school. Knew of s guy that dropped hundreds of bucks a week at s strip club.

 

[MicroBrew]

And black wealth stopped going in the late 60s.
So blacks are poor forever because of racism?
That's not what's holding them back now.
My dad grew up incredibly poor. His dad was an alcoholic and a gambler. His parents never had the money to give him anything. He was able get into the middle class by working, having kids after being married and not commiting crimes.
My black godmother didn't resort to criminality and her son did well. She never let him act like a fool or get into hang tyoe stuff.
There was a reason why blacks are poor, but that reason can't be the same reason forever. Not when Asians and Hispanics come with no money and no English x yet they still are able to succeed

Hispanics are not a race though, so can't compare them to Blacks. You can compare substantially Amerindian Hispanics but not Hispanics as a whole. Asians were not and are not viewed with as much disdain as Blacks, and part of this is down to phenotype. People in most of the world just hate dark skin and broad features. Lots of Asians have broad features but not dark skin, not dark like Blacks, and not curly frizzy hair. Asians also have their culture intact when they came here. Really the only group one can compare to Blacks is Amerindians, because they have undergone genocide and mass depopulation.

For decades the US government had programs to financially help working and middle class Whites become successfull but these programs / aid was withheld from Blacks. Farm subsidies is a classic example. USDA discriminated against Black farmers for decades. For most of American history the government either overtly or covertly withheld assistance to Blacks that was afforded to Whites.

 

[Pseudo Sane]

It literally says

* Shai Danziger and colleagues took data from 1,112 parole decisions by Israeli judges. They found “the likelihood of a favorable ruling is greater at the very beginning of the work day or after a food break than later in the sequence of cases.”*



But a subsequent paper by Keren Weinshall-Margel and John Shapard revealed a much more mundane explanation for the harsher sentencing: prisoners without lawyers receive parole at a much lower rate.

And, guess what?

Defendants without representation have their hearings scheduled at the end of sessions, before breaks.

Like lunch breaks.


Defendants without representation have their hearings scheluded at the end of sessions means nearing the end of the day. After the cases with lawyers and representatives. Ie those who are broke or have minor charges not paying for representation goes after those with money.

I don't see how your article disproves anything I stated. People with money will be seen first. Generally people are much more likely to spend money if facing a greater charge.


You tried to state small crimes go first... you're completely wrong and your article does not address your claim.... at all.

I'm confused; your initial claim was that it was because judges were 'crankier' as time went on, which is simply not true; the study definitely addresses that issue. That study is about decision fatigue anyway. Rereading your post, your bigger point seems to be that people with lawyers do better, which is trivially true.

I admit that I misremembered the study since I posted from memory; the confounding variable wasn't simplicity, but legal representation.

 

[A Very Serious Cat]

Yeah man. I feel bad for people that are poor and struggle. But it's hard to feel bad for people that are poor because they spend money like it's on fire.
I worked construction right out of high school. Knew of s guy that dropped hundreds of bucks a week at s strip club.

I think that most peoples criminal and economic problems can be traced back a lack of impulse control and the inability to delay gratification for future benefit

 

[Anewt]

I'm confused; your initial claim was that it was because judges were 'crankier' as time went on, which is simply not true; the study definitely addresses that issue. That study is about decision fatigue anyway. Rereading your post, your bigger point seems to be that people with lawyers do better, which is trivially true.

I admit that I misremembered the study since I posted from memory; the confounding variable wasn't simplicity, but legal representation.

I

Yeah sorry it wasn't so much about the hunger as the length of time and how your financial situation matters as much if not more so than being just racial bias.

. The fact that money and soo many people go before you get to see a judge has quite a bit of ability to create a negative outcome. It was more so on how your financial situation can drastically produce a negative outcome in terms of someone with money and representation.

 

[jeremyemilio]

I agree for this most part.

We as a society shouldn't be putting people i prison for drugs . Especially around criminals who have severe crimes such as murder, rape etc..


The police killing numbers can be argued that those poverty communities are being over policed compared to white communities. Also you have video of corrupted cops in those neighborhoods abusing there power .( Not saying they should be killed)


Every animal, bacteria, insects etc kill each other in their own ecosystem when resources are low. This includes humans. Whites will kill whites just like blacks will kill blacks in the areas they live in.

Well yes. All of this is true. (I might have a quibble with the idea that poor communities are "overly" policed. I think a lot of people in those communities would say they are under policed. But they are certainly improperly policed, so I'll go with it.)

The problem is, being able to give possible (probable) reasons for WHY the crime rate in black communities is significantly higher than in white communities is not the same as trying pretend that's a myth and that black people and white people engage crime at the same rate in America but black people are being jailed more for it.

It's a brutal misrepresentation that almost guarantees that the problem of over-incarceration of black people will never be solved.

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

They are. It'd interesting that the black family survived Jim crow and slavery, but not welfare.
Blacks were actually succeeding despite the system set up to hold them down. Soon as welfare shower up all their gains were wiped out. The commies got them hard

I do not think it's only welfare. Wage increase has been almost zero for the working class of any race.
Whites were at a higher level so they aren't fairing that badly but economic mobility has been very low starting in the 70s

 

[Brodels]

"The average Black person’s sentence is 168 days longer than a sentence for a white person. Even when the researchers controlled for criminal history, jurisdiction, and neighborhood, they concluded: “[R]acial disparities in sentence length cannot solely be explained by the contextual factors that we consider and permeate the entire criminal justice process.”

Was behavior while in prison accounted for? I'm pretty sure judges don't hand out sentences in days. And if you go to prison you aren't going to be spending only a few months there that's what jail is for.

 

[ElKarlo]

I do not think it's only welfare. Wage increase has been almost zero for the working class of any race.
Whites were at a higher level so they aren't fairing that badly but economic mobility has been very low starting in the 70s

Oh yes if course things got bad for everyone. But for blacks.it happened much earlier and during a continued economic expansion that was the 60s

 

[ElKarlo]

I think that most peoples criminal and economic problems can be traced back a lack of impulse control and the inability to delay gratification for future benefit

There is probably a lot to that. I agree. Even success is linked to that. Guys who are dumb and do dumb stuff and don't change tend to not do well.

 

[The ScorpioN]

Hispanics are not a race though, so can't compare them to Blacks. You can compare substantially Amerindian Hispanics but not Hispanics as a whole. Asians were not and are not viewed with as much disdain as Blacks, and part of this is down to phenotype.

I don't know about this assumption. Indians are often dark and are viewed just like Asians are. It's about noticing a pattern of behavior one would rather avoid. I immigrated to America awhile ago, went to a nice "diverse" school and the patterns are too obvious.

 

[ElKarlo]

I don't know about this assumption. Indians are often dark and are viewed just like Asians are. It's about noticing a pattern of behavior one would rather avoid. I immigrated to America awhile ago, went to a nice "diverse" school and the patterns are too obvious.

Yes Indians usually though dark tend to hang with whites and Asians. As they avoid the behavior of others.
Hispanics are all over the place and associate with various groups with varying outcomes.

 

[MicroBrew]

I don't know about this assumption. Indians are often dark and are viewed just like Asians are. It's about noticing a pattern of behavior one would rather avoid. I immigrated to America awhile ago, went to a nice "diverse" school and the patterns are too obvious.

Most Indians are dark but don't have frizzy curly short hair , and their features are not broad like Sub Saharan African features. They are very recent immigrants, so they enjoy all the progressive gains America has made and faced none of the historical animosity Blacks faced. Whites also do not have the kind of baggage with Indians that they have with Blacks. Indians in the US are a very self selected group, they are not the masses.

Looking past the US, Indians do face a lot of discrimination in large part because they are dark. Most of the discrimination is from fellow Indians / South Asians. Indians in the MiddleEast are looked down on , and a big part of the reason is the dark skin and features. Arabs/MidEastern people , in general, look down on South Asians. East Asians also discriminate against dark skinned Indians and darker East Asians. In most parts of the world, having dark skin is a handicap.

 

[The ScorpioN]

Most Indians are dark but don't have frizzy curly short hair , and their features are not broad like Sub Saharan African features. They are very recent immigrants, so they enjoy all the progressive gains America has made and faced none of the historical animosity Blacks faced. Whites also do not have the kind of baggage with Indians that they have with Blacks. Indians in the US are a very self selected group, they are not the masses.

Looking past the US, Indians do face a lot of discrimination in large part because they are dark. Most of the discrimination is from fellow Indians / South Asians. Indians in the MiddleEast are looked down on , and a big part of the reason is the dark skin and features. Arabs/MidEastern people , in general, look down on South Asians. East Asians also discriminate against dark skinned Indians and darker East Asians. In most parts of the world, having dark skin is a handicap.

I'm talking about the phenotype, seems like you're picking arbitrary metrics there. I think behavior is much more salient than appearance.