In December of 2007, there were two hate crime incidents. One involved the spray painting of two sets of residents. The other involved the vandalism of Holmes Junior High. As it turned out, the second incident involved students of color seeking to either deflect blame or rile up the adults. However, that makes it no less insidious or hurtful to the broader community.
The presentation was recorded by the folks at Davis Community Television for rebroadcast on Channel 17. I strongly encourage people to watch this presentation it is very informative and deals with a number of myths and misperceptions.
In what follows, I will discussion some of the things that are of most interest that came up during the presentation.
First is the myth that hate crimes or what is sometimes referred to as “bias-related crimes” are aimed at certain “protected” groups with a special status under the law.
According to author David Neiwert writes, “Every citizen, regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, gender or sexual preference, is protected equally. Indeed, the most significant test case for hate crimes laws – Wisconsin v. Mitchell, a unanimous 1993 Supreme Court ruling – involved a white victim and a black perpetrator….” (p. 131). According to U.S. Department of Justice statistics, approximately 20% of hate crimes victims are White.
In a hate crime, the victim is not merely the individual but rather “entire groups of people who share the same characteristic.” Moreover, “controlling for type of crime, they leave victims more chronically traumatized.”
According to the presentation:
“A 2006 U.S. Department of Justice study reports that there are more than 7,000 hate crimes or bias-related crimes across the country per year.
In an average year, watchdog agencies like Southern Poverty Law Center receive a dozen or so reports of noose incidents from across the country.”
Dr. Murray-Garcia also showed in her slides a January 21, 2003 letter to the editor from a Fairfield High School basketball player (see below in the slides and pictures section).
“In 2002, Fairfield High School basketball player, Ian Blair, wrote a letter to the editor of the Davis Enterprise, shocked at the behavior of Davis High School students. By his report, confirmed later at a Davis High student forum, “cheering” students shouted some of the following slurs when Ian came down to their side of the court:
“Cornrows!”
“Who’s your baby’s momma?”
“Food stamps don’t buy a Hummer!” (apparently in reference to then high school star Lebron James, who purchased a Hummer automobile prior to signing with the NBA.)
“Who’s your fifth baby?”
“We go to college; you go to jail!”
Students were reprimanded only for “negative cheering” and “poor sportsmanship,” given what was reported to DHS administrators. Less than two weeks later, the spray painting of the N-word in West Davis occurred.”
Dr. Murray-Garcia then went on to describe a series of recent hate crimes perpetrated by Davis Students.
Winter 2002: A white Davis High (DHS) student serially harassed an African American DHS student, ultimately featuring the Black student on a sophisticated web site, frequented by several DHS students, graphically detailing the physical harm he would like to do to this student (whom he named).
February 2003: a White DHS student spray-painted the N-word in red on the cul-de-sac where a high school party had been held the evening before.
October 2003: Four young people, including at least one DHS student, tagged with graffiti and threw more than several dozen eggs at the car of an openly gay Davis man who lived in Central Davis. The victim had a gay pride flag hanging on the door of his townhouse.
December 2004: The newest constructed building of DHS (the P-building) was vandalized with racist and sexually explicit graffiti, targeting an African American staff member by name (with the N-word) and a White female vice principal.
February 2005: During the night, two Davis students vandalized Fairfield Elementary School and Holmes Junior High School (both in Davis) and two Davis churches. They went from rural West Davis to East Davis, causing almost $30,000 worth of damage. They used swastikas, satanist language, and phrases including, “Kill the Jews! Kill the N_g_ers!”
December 2007: The garages of two East Davis homes were vandalized with horribly vulgar hate graffiti. In the house least affected, the writing read, “KKK. F__k N_g_ers.” Two DHS students were arrested. Though the incident was allegedly sparked by a conflict between longstanding friends, the intensity, sophistication and volume of the hate graffiti are particularly disturbing.
December 2007: Five days following the incident above in east Davis, a “large” amount of racist graffiti targeting African Americans and Asians was found on the Holmes Junior High School buildings. Five students were involved and were arrested for felony vandalism. The “ring leader” was allegedly angry with one of the school’s administrators.
Who are those most likely to commit hate crimes? Not surprisingly, not those who are on a “life mission” to commit acts of hate like members of the KKK. Dr. Jann Murray-Garcia cites David Neiwert:
“The reality is that…”local kids’ are in fact the most common perpetrators of bias crimes. Numerous studies have demonstrated that only a small percentage of hate crimes are committed by people with any connection to or background involving organized “hate groups”…What these studies have found instead is that the majority of bias crimes are committed by seemingly normal, mostly law-abiding young people who often see nothing wrong with their behavior. Bias crime offenders are predominantly young white males, typically from working-class or middle class backgrounds. And though ties to hate groups are rare, the perpetrators are clearly inspired by these groups’ rhetoric, shouting their well known slogans, parroting their political rhetoric, and displaying such symbols of white supremacism as the swastika or the Confederate flag.” (p.46)
Instead most are committed by what they term as “thrill seekers.” This means the hatred behind these crimes is superficial. The offenders are not “profoundly convinced of the legitimate of their criminal acts.” They can be more easily dissuaded from repeating them. And the threat of criminal sanctions may be enough to convince a group of “bored young men” to do another activity.
This makes it important to apprehend and deal with hate crime perpetrators at this point in time. It takes a concerted community effort however to do so before they graduate from property crimes to crimes that involve physical injury.
When these crimes are not taken seriously however, the perpetrators become more violent, it tends to be an affront to the offended community. We need to assume that any such crime is the tip of the iceberg until and unless proven otherwise. Moreover, we miss a teachable moment, such as this, for the community and its young people.
Dr. Jann Murray-Garcia repeatedly has found that students are more aware of the hate crime problem than adults.
These are quotes from in-depth interviews that were done with former Davis High School Youth In Focus Student Research Scholars from the academic year 2003-2004. “The students express disappointment with the lack of adult leadership and guidance regarding troublesome issues of race relations in Davis, including the incidence of hate crimes.”
“[T]here is a problem and like students know it is a problem more than I think adults do. Students are more aware that there is racial tension and racial inequality in Davis more than adults do.
[T]wo years ago, I mean someone spray painted the, you know, n_g_er on this guy’s lawn pretty much and I look back at my family and no one talked about it at all…It was never talked about…no one would of ever really known about it if this group of African Americans hadn’t, you know, said what the hell is going on…
[W]hat really happened in Davis, um, most of it is swept under the rug and they do a very good job of just keeping things under wraps.”
Lt. Darren Pytel of the Davis Police Department discussed a number of crime related issues. One point of particular interest was the difference between hate crimes and a hate incident. A hate crime is an act of bias crime perpetrated against a specific individual. A hate incident is an act that involves the same sorts of features but is not directed against an individual. For instance, if someone spray paints an racial epithet on the home of an African-American that would be a hate crime. But if they spray painted the same thing on a park bench with no clear target, that would be a hate incident.
Pam Mari spent a good deal of time talking about cyber-crimes including cyber-stalking and cyber-bullying. These types of crimes are on the increase as students become more technologically sophisticated.
This was a good start for a community discussion, the one real draw-back was the limited number of people actually from the community.
In what follows is a serious of slide from the presentation that were of most interest. The reader should be warned in advanced that some of these images may be disturbing. However, I think the community needs to see some of these things and the blog is a better vehicle than the newspaper which is governed with strict laws about what they can and cannot publish.
Here’s what I endured at Holmes Jr High…I was spit on, punched in the chest and called all manner of racial epithets by a couple of other students (I’m Black and the other students were white). At Davis Senior High, the words racist threats and insults were spray-painted on the walls, students of color were treated like garbage and one was stabbed on campus.I DESPISE Davis. The schools. The bullying. The sickening cliques. The hypocrisy. The rampant materialism. The whole stifling little town. Davis should just become an enclave for entitled new-money white narcissists with a …Whites Only… sign at the city gates…at least it would be an honest representation of what you’re stumbling into when you go there. Damn all the school administrators who turned a blind eye and behaved as if it what was happening to us was OUR fault…our fault for daring to be Black or Latino or Asian or different in any way from their cookie-cutter white …ideal….All praises to the tiny group of teachers who cared…if any of you still works for DHS, I hope you find a way OUT…give your positive energy to a school district that cares as much as you do.I’m EXTREMELY glad I left. Clearly, not much has changed. The bigotry and denial is so deeply entrenched, I doubt it will ever improve. My advice to any families-of-color living in Davis today: GET OUT NOW!
This is only one part of the “bullying” issue. For too long bullying has not been addressed in this nation’s public school system as a whole, and Davis schools in particular. Bullying has been viewed as “boys will be boys”. My son went through hell in the Davis public school system – picked on because of his small size. He was not supported by teachers/administrators. Instead, a gang was allowed to roam free and commit crimes, uninmpeded – with the leader living with the vice principal of the high school.
While these sorts of “hate crime forums” are fine, they are not nearly enough. There has to be buy in at the school level, where bullying of any kind is not tolerated. Schools are a breeding ground for this sort of venomous stuff. Teachers need to be attuned to it, administrators need to watch and address it. Instead, if two students are caught “fighting” (where one student picked on another, and the bullied student was trying to defend himself/herself), both are suspended from school. That way the school does not have to look any deeper into what happened.
Had the school done a more thorough investigation, and stopped some of this garbage at its inception, I suspect we would not see as much “hate crime”. Bullying escalates into bigger things – and spills over into after school hazing, taunting, and stalking. I suspect you will find a good deal of hate crime started as some disagreement in school, that magnified into much more intense criminal activity later on…
My son came close to being knifed to death at DHS, which stemmed from a much earlier minor incident that never was addressed, but instead was allowed to fester and percolate. The perpetrator ended up in jail, after a) assaulting my son on his high school graduation day, and b) beating up on a drunken college student. The girl gang member also ended up incarcerated. Yet my son had to constantly put up with harassment every day at school, and no assistance forthcoming from the DHS administration.
Furthermore, this happened at all grade levels. I watched it happen to other children as well – especially those who were small in stature. Bullying is endemic to our public school system, where administrators have lost control of their schools. Stop hate crime at its source!
This is only one part of the “bullying” issue. For too long bullying has not been addressed in this nation’s public school system as a whole, and Davis schools in particular. Bullying has been viewed as “boys will be boys”. My son went through hell in the Davis public school system – picked on because of his small size. He was not supported by teachers/administrators. Instead, a gang was allowed to roam free and commit crimes, uninmpeded – with the leader living with the vice principal of the high school.
While these sorts of “hate crime forums” are fine, they are not nearly enough. There has to be buy in at the school level, where bullying of any kind is not tolerated. Schools are a breeding ground for this sort of venomous stuff. Teachers need to be attuned to it, administrators need to watch and address it. Instead, if two students are caught “fighting” (where one student picked on another, and the bullied student was trying to defend himself/herself), both are suspended from school. That way the school does not have to look any deeper into what happened.
Had the school done a more thorough investigation, and stopped some of this garbage at its inception, I suspect we would not see as much “hate crime”. Bullying escalates into bigger things – and spills over into after school hazing, taunting, and stalking. I suspect you will find a good deal of hate crime started as some disagreement in school, that magnified into much more intense criminal activity later on…
My son came close to being knifed to death at DHS, which stemmed from a much earlier minor incident that never was addressed, but instead was allowed to fester and percolate. The perpetrator ended up in jail, after a) assaulting my son on his high school graduation day, and b) beating up on a drunken college student. The girl gang member also ended up incarcerated. Yet my son had to constantly put up with harassment every day at school, and no assistance forthcoming from the DHS administration.
Furthermore, this happened at all grade levels. I watched it happen to other children as well – especially those who were small in stature. Bullying is endemic to our public school system, where administrators have lost control of their schools. Stop hate crime at its source!
This is only one part of the “bullying” issue. For too long bullying has not been addressed in this nation’s public school system as a whole, and Davis schools in particular. Bullying has been viewed as “boys will be boys”. My son went through hell in the Davis public school system – picked on because of his small size. He was not supported by teachers/administrators. Instead, a gang was allowed to roam free and commit crimes, uninmpeded – with the leader living with the vice principal of the high school.
While these sorts of “hate crime forums” are fine, they are not nearly enough. There has to be buy in at the school level, where bullying of any kind is not tolerated. Schools are a breeding ground for this sort of venomous stuff. Teachers need to be attuned to it, administrators need to watch and address it. Instead, if two students are caught “fighting” (where one student picked on another, and the bullied student was trying to defend himself/herself), both are suspended from school. That way the school does not have to look any deeper into what happened.
Had the school done a more thorough investigation, and stopped some of this garbage at its inception, I suspect we would not see as much “hate crime”. Bullying escalates into bigger things – and spills over into after school hazing, taunting, and stalking. I suspect you will find a good deal of hate crime started as some disagreement in school, that magnified into much more intense criminal activity later on…
My son came close to being knifed to death at DHS, which stemmed from a much earlier minor incident that never was addressed, but instead was allowed to fester and percolate. The perpetrator ended up in jail, after a) assaulting my son on his high school graduation day, and b) beating up on a drunken college student. The girl gang member also ended up incarcerated. Yet my son had to constantly put up with harassment every day at school, and no assistance forthcoming from the DHS administration.
Furthermore, this happened at all grade levels. I watched it happen to other children as well – especially those who were small in stature. Bullying is endemic to our public school system, where administrators have lost control of their schools. Stop hate crime at its source!
This is only one part of the “bullying” issue. For too long bullying has not been addressed in this nation’s public school system as a whole, and Davis schools in particular. Bullying has been viewed as “boys will be boys”. My son went through hell in the Davis public school system – picked on because of his small size. He was not supported by teachers/administrators. Instead, a gang was allowed to roam free and commit crimes, uninmpeded – with the leader living with the vice principal of the high school.
While these sorts of “hate crime forums” are fine, they are not nearly enough. There has to be buy in at the school level, where bullying of any kind is not tolerated. Schools are a breeding ground for this sort of venomous stuff. Teachers need to be attuned to it, administrators need to watch and address it. Instead, if two students are caught “fighting” (where one student picked on another, and the bullied student was trying to defend himself/herself), both are suspended from school. That way the school does not have to look any deeper into what happened.
Had the school done a more thorough investigation, and stopped some of this garbage at its inception, I suspect we would not see as much “hate crime”. Bullying escalates into bigger things – and spills over into after school hazing, taunting, and stalking. I suspect you will find a good deal of hate crime started as some disagreement in school, that magnified into much more intense criminal activity later on…
My son came close to being knifed to death at DHS, which stemmed from a much earlier minor incident that never was addressed, but instead was allowed to fester and percolate. The perpetrator ended up in jail, after a) assaulting my son on his high school graduation day, and b) beating up on a drunken college student. The girl gang member also ended up incarcerated. Yet my son had to constantly put up with harassment every day at school, and no assistance forthcoming from the DHS administration.
Furthermore, this happened at all grade levels. I watched it happen to other children as well – especially those who were small in stature. Bullying is endemic to our public school system, where administrators have lost control of their schools. Stop hate crime at its source!
Why wasn’t this event publicized more?
Why wasn’t this event publicized more?
Why wasn’t this event publicized more?
Why wasn’t this event publicized more?
“This was a good start for a community discussion, the one real draw-back was the limited number of people actually from the community.”
From the description of the meeting, it sounds like the “good start” was very similar to good starts made in the past. It is fine to identify a problem (over and over again) but no progress is made unless you get past the first step.
The focus should be expanded slightly to “prevent all bias related crime”. All displays of bias should be discouraged – it really does not matter if the diplays were hate related or not. The expanded focus would eliminate all of the confusion related to “hate crimes”, “hate incidents” and “false alarms”.
It might be helpful to dissect the two most recent cases – determine the underlying causes and what could be done to prevent similar incidents from happening in the future. As part of their sentances the students involved should be asked to participate in these study groups. I would bet the students and the community would gain more from this than simply having the student pick up trash long county roads.
“This was a good start for a community discussion, the one real draw-back was the limited number of people actually from the community.”
From the description of the meeting, it sounds like the “good start” was very similar to good starts made in the past. It is fine to identify a problem (over and over again) but no progress is made unless you get past the first step.
The focus should be expanded slightly to “prevent all bias related crime”. All displays of bias should be discouraged – it really does not matter if the diplays were hate related or not. The expanded focus would eliminate all of the confusion related to “hate crimes”, “hate incidents” and “false alarms”.
It might be helpful to dissect the two most recent cases – determine the underlying causes and what could be done to prevent similar incidents from happening in the future. As part of their sentances the students involved should be asked to participate in these study groups. I would bet the students and the community would gain more from this than simply having the student pick up trash long county roads.
“This was a good start for a community discussion, the one real draw-back was the limited number of people actually from the community.”
From the description of the meeting, it sounds like the “good start” was very similar to good starts made in the past. It is fine to identify a problem (over and over again) but no progress is made unless you get past the first step.
The focus should be expanded slightly to “prevent all bias related crime”. All displays of bias should be discouraged – it really does not matter if the diplays were hate related or not. The expanded focus would eliminate all of the confusion related to “hate crimes”, “hate incidents” and “false alarms”.
It might be helpful to dissect the two most recent cases – determine the underlying causes and what could be done to prevent similar incidents from happening in the future. As part of their sentances the students involved should be asked to participate in these study groups. I would bet the students and the community would gain more from this than simply having the student pick up trash long county roads.
“This was a good start for a community discussion, the one real draw-back was the limited number of people actually from the community.”
From the description of the meeting, it sounds like the “good start” was very similar to good starts made in the past. It is fine to identify a problem (over and over again) but no progress is made unless you get past the first step.
The focus should be expanded slightly to “prevent all bias related crime”. All displays of bias should be discouraged – it really does not matter if the diplays were hate related or not. The expanded focus would eliminate all of the confusion related to “hate crimes”, “hate incidents” and “false alarms”.
It might be helpful to dissect the two most recent cases – determine the underlying causes and what could be done to prevent similar incidents from happening in the future. As part of their sentances the students involved should be asked to participate in these study groups. I would bet the students and the community would gain more from this than simply having the student pick up trash long county roads.
I would have gone if I had known about it.
I would have gone if I had known about it.
I would have gone if I had known about it.
I would have gone if I had known about it.
I have a problem w/ the approach that seems to be going on here. The message that a person (student, me, whomever) gets from such a meeting is “don’t do this”. But not offering a positive alternative.
Many of theses incidents could be mitigated by creating more positive campus activities — sports, clubs, music — for students to be connected. I see incidents like this happening because the perpetrators feel marginalized, unconnected to anything positive at school. Of course the very situation we’re in now — cutting programs, music, Da Vinci — will, I think, exacerbate this situation.
Closing schools, cutting programs would tend to create an isolating environment where hate crimes and other related activities would flourish.
I have a problem w/ the approach that seems to be going on here. The message that a person (student, me, whomever) gets from such a meeting is “don’t do this”. But not offering a positive alternative.
Many of theses incidents could be mitigated by creating more positive campus activities — sports, clubs, music — for students to be connected. I see incidents like this happening because the perpetrators feel marginalized, unconnected to anything positive at school. Of course the very situation we’re in now — cutting programs, music, Da Vinci — will, I think, exacerbate this situation.
Closing schools, cutting programs would tend to create an isolating environment where hate crimes and other related activities would flourish.
I have a problem w/ the approach that seems to be going on here. The message that a person (student, me, whomever) gets from such a meeting is “don’t do this”. But not offering a positive alternative.
Many of theses incidents could be mitigated by creating more positive campus activities — sports, clubs, music — for students to be connected. I see incidents like this happening because the perpetrators feel marginalized, unconnected to anything positive at school. Of course the very situation we’re in now — cutting programs, music, Da Vinci — will, I think, exacerbate this situation.
Closing schools, cutting programs would tend to create an isolating environment where hate crimes and other related activities would flourish.
I have a problem w/ the approach that seems to be going on here. The message that a person (student, me, whomever) gets from such a meeting is “don’t do this”. But not offering a positive alternative.
Many of theses incidents could be mitigated by creating more positive campus activities — sports, clubs, music — for students to be connected. I see incidents like this happening because the perpetrators feel marginalized, unconnected to anything positive at school. Of course the very situation we’re in now — cutting programs, music, Da Vinci — will, I think, exacerbate this situation.
Closing schools, cutting programs would tend to create an isolating environment where hate crimes and other related activities would flourish.
if this event was important enough to admonish elected officials for not attending, why wasn’t it advertised?
if this event was important enough to admonish elected officials for not attending, why wasn’t it advertised?
if this event was important enough to admonish elected officials for not attending, why wasn’t it advertised?
if this event was important enough to admonish elected officials for not attending, why wasn’t it advertised?
This was in The Enterprise on March 9.
This was in The Enterprise on March 9.
This was in The Enterprise on March 9.
This was in The Enterprise on March 9.
I have a problem w/ the approach that seems to be going on here. The message that a person (student, me, whomever) gets from such a meeting is “don’t do this”. But not offering a positive alternative.
Actually, Pam Mari addressed offerring positive alternatives. It was talked about.
Also, one of Jann’s important points (in my opinion) was making sure when these incidents occur, that we use them as TEACHABLE MOMENTS, regardless of how they are treated within the law. Parents, educators and community members need to speak VERY LOUDLY when these things happen or the silence will speak for itself. I don’t think that is controversial.
I have a problem w/ the approach that seems to be going on here. The message that a person (student, me, whomever) gets from such a meeting is “don’t do this”. But not offering a positive alternative.
Actually, Pam Mari addressed offerring positive alternatives. It was talked about.
Also, one of Jann’s important points (in my opinion) was making sure when these incidents occur, that we use them as TEACHABLE MOMENTS, regardless of how they are treated within the law. Parents, educators and community members need to speak VERY LOUDLY when these things happen or the silence will speak for itself. I don’t think that is controversial.
I have a problem w/ the approach that seems to be going on here. The message that a person (student, me, whomever) gets from such a meeting is “don’t do this”. But not offering a positive alternative.
Actually, Pam Mari addressed offerring positive alternatives. It was talked about.
Also, one of Jann’s important points (in my opinion) was making sure when these incidents occur, that we use them as TEACHABLE MOMENTS, regardless of how they are treated within the law. Parents, educators and community members need to speak VERY LOUDLY when these things happen or the silence will speak for itself. I don’t think that is controversial.
I have a problem w/ the approach that seems to be going on here. The message that a person (student, me, whomever) gets from such a meeting is “don’t do this”. But not offering a positive alternative.
Actually, Pam Mari addressed offerring positive alternatives. It was talked about.
Also, one of Jann’s important points (in my opinion) was making sure when these incidents occur, that we use them as TEACHABLE MOMENTS, regardless of how they are treated within the law. Parents, educators and community members need to speak VERY LOUDLY when these things happen or the silence will speak for itself. I don’t think that is controversial.
From the article:
“Instead most are committed by what they term as “thrill seekers.” This means the hatred behind these crimes is superficial. The offenders are not “profoundly convinced of the legitimate of their criminal acts.” They can be more easily dissuaded from repeating them. And the threat of criminal sanctions may be enough to convince a group of “bored young men” to do another activity.”
This information matches current research concerning effective handling of juvenile offenders in general.
Yolo County Probation has recently implemented an assessment tool to help in separating low, mid and high level risk in juvenile offenders. It has been repeatedly found that juveniles who have low criminogenic risk factors will respond negatively to intensive treatment and supervision programs and will actually get worse.
I was told by Yolo County’s Chief Probation Officer that, after putting all juvenile offenders currently being handled by Probation through this extensive assessment process, 44% have been found to be low risk and need very little in terms of services. This is helping Probation focus their services on the mid to high risk juveniles and in handling the cases of low risk offenders more appropriately.
It is my understanding that the Police Departments of Woodland, West Sacramento and Davis are all now using the same assessment process to help in deciding which youth cases should be kept in-house (local diversion) and who should be referred to the Yolo County Probation & DA. Yolo County is the only county in the state implementing this kind of collaboration in using this assessment tool.
Time will tell if this is movement in the right direction, but it sounds like it is.
From the article:
“Instead most are committed by what they term as “thrill seekers.” This means the hatred behind these crimes is superficial. The offenders are not “profoundly convinced of the legitimate of their criminal acts.” They can be more easily dissuaded from repeating them. And the threat of criminal sanctions may be enough to convince a group of “bored young men” to do another activity.”
This information matches current research concerning effective handling of juvenile offenders in general.
Yolo County Probation has recently implemented an assessment tool to help in separating low, mid and high level risk in juvenile offenders. It has been repeatedly found that juveniles who have low criminogenic risk factors will respond negatively to intensive treatment and supervision programs and will actually get worse.
I was told by Yolo County’s Chief Probation Officer that, after putting all juvenile offenders currently being handled by Probation through this extensive assessment process, 44% have been found to be low risk and need very little in terms of services. This is helping Probation focus their services on the mid to high risk juveniles and in handling the cases of low risk offenders more appropriately.
It is my understanding that the Police Departments of Woodland, West Sacramento and Davis are all now using the same assessment process to help in deciding which youth cases should be kept in-house (local diversion) and who should be referred to the Yolo County Probation & DA. Yolo County is the only county in the state implementing this kind of collaboration in using this assessment tool.
Time will tell if this is movement in the right direction, but it sounds like it is.
From the article:
“Instead most are committed by what they term as “thrill seekers.” This means the hatred behind these crimes is superficial. The offenders are not “profoundly convinced of the legitimate of their criminal acts.” They can be more easily dissuaded from repeating them. And the threat of criminal sanctions may be enough to convince a group of “bored young men” to do another activity.”
This information matches current research concerning effective handling of juvenile offenders in general.
Yolo County Probation has recently implemented an assessment tool to help in separating low, mid and high level risk in juvenile offenders. It has been repeatedly found that juveniles who have low criminogenic risk factors will respond negatively to intensive treatment and supervision programs and will actually get worse.
I was told by Yolo County’s Chief Probation Officer that, after putting all juvenile offenders currently being handled by Probation through this extensive assessment process, 44% have been found to be low risk and need very little in terms of services. This is helping Probation focus their services on the mid to high risk juveniles and in handling the cases of low risk offenders more appropriately.
It is my understanding that the Police Departments of Woodland, West Sacramento and Davis are all now using the same assessment process to help in deciding which youth cases should be kept in-house (local diversion) and who should be referred to the Yolo County Probation & DA. Yolo County is the only county in the state implementing this kind of collaboration in using this assessment tool.
Time will tell if this is movement in the right direction, but it sounds like it is.
From the article:
“Instead most are committed by what they term as “thrill seekers.” This means the hatred behind these crimes is superficial. The offenders are not “profoundly convinced of the legitimate of their criminal acts.” They can be more easily dissuaded from repeating them. And the threat of criminal sanctions may be enough to convince a group of “bored young men” to do another activity.”
This information matches current research concerning effective handling of juvenile offenders in general.
Yolo County Probation has recently implemented an assessment tool to help in separating low, mid and high level risk in juvenile offenders. It has been repeatedly found that juveniles who have low criminogenic risk factors will respond negatively to intensive treatment and supervision programs and will actually get worse.
I was told by Yolo County’s Chief Probation Officer that, after putting all juvenile offenders currently being handled by Probation through this extensive assessment process, 44% have been found to be low risk and need very little in terms of services. This is helping Probation focus their services on the mid to high risk juveniles and in handling the cases of low risk offenders more appropriately.
It is my understanding that the Police Departments of Woodland, West Sacramento and Davis are all now using the same assessment process to help in deciding which youth cases should be kept in-house (local diversion) and who should be referred to the Yolo County Probation & DA. Yolo County is the only county in the state implementing this kind of collaboration in using this assessment tool.
Time will tell if this is movement in the right direction, but it sounds like it is.
DPD,
What is it exactly that has been swept under the rug? If you could explain that it would be helpful. When you make statements like that without valid examples it seems as if you are making an accusation with “no proof”,(your favorite question).
Were the members of the city council and the DA’s office invited? Perhaps the very low turnout was maybe due to the fact that no one wants to hear what murray garcia has to say. I am wondering why.
I understand that murray garcia is an MD is that correct? Does she still practice?
DPD,
What is it exactly that has been swept under the rug? If you could explain that it would be helpful. When you make statements like that without valid examples it seems as if you are making an accusation with “no proof”,(your favorite question).
Were the members of the city council and the DA’s office invited? Perhaps the very low turnout was maybe due to the fact that no one wants to hear what murray garcia has to say. I am wondering why.
I understand that murray garcia is an MD is that correct? Does she still practice?
DPD,
What is it exactly that has been swept under the rug? If you could explain that it would be helpful. When you make statements like that without valid examples it seems as if you are making an accusation with “no proof”,(your favorite question).
Were the members of the city council and the DA’s office invited? Perhaps the very low turnout was maybe due to the fact that no one wants to hear what murray garcia has to say. I am wondering why.
I understand that murray garcia is an MD is that correct? Does she still practice?
DPD,
What is it exactly that has been swept under the rug? If you could explain that it would be helpful. When you make statements like that without valid examples it seems as if you are making an accusation with “no proof”,(your favorite question).
Were the members of the city council and the DA’s office invited? Perhaps the very low turnout was maybe due to the fact that no one wants to hear what murray garcia has to say. I am wondering why.
I understand that murray garcia is an MD is that correct? Does she still practice?
Anyone who criticizes Jann Murray-Garcia has obviously never met her.
Anyone who criticizes Jann Murray-Garcia has obviously never met her.
Anyone who criticizes Jann Murray-Garcia has obviously never met her.
Anyone who criticizes Jann Murray-Garcia has obviously never met her.
Vincente,
It was not a criticism, it was a question, hence the question marks.
Vincente,
It was not a criticism, it was a question, hence the question marks.
Vincente,
It was not a criticism, it was a question, hence the question marks.
Vincente,
It was not a criticism, it was a question, hence the question marks.
The answer is: Jan Murray-Garcia is a well-respected, well-educated Davis community member, who has taken on very difficult issues in our community. Her information is well-researched and her manner is very polite and easy to listen to. If people did not come because they “didn’t want to hear what Murray-Garcia had to say”, then I’d say that they are 1) part of the problem or 2) in denial about the seriousness of racism and discrimination in our community.
The answer is: Jan Murray-Garcia is a well-respected, well-educated Davis community member, who has taken on very difficult issues in our community. Her information is well-researched and her manner is very polite and easy to listen to. If people did not come because they “didn’t want to hear what Murray-Garcia had to say”, then I’d say that they are 1) part of the problem or 2) in denial about the seriousness of racism and discrimination in our community.
The answer is: Jan Murray-Garcia is a well-respected, well-educated Davis community member, who has taken on very difficult issues in our community. Her information is well-researched and her manner is very polite and easy to listen to. If people did not come because they “didn’t want to hear what Murray-Garcia had to say”, then I’d say that they are 1) part of the problem or 2) in denial about the seriousness of racism and discrimination in our community.
The answer is: Jan Murray-Garcia is a well-respected, well-educated Davis community member, who has taken on very difficult issues in our community. Her information is well-researched and her manner is very polite and easy to listen to. If people did not come because they “didn’t want to hear what Murray-Garcia had to say”, then I’d say that they are 1) part of the problem or 2) in denial about the seriousness of racism and discrimination in our community.
Former PTA president.., I heartily agree with you. Dr. Jann Murray Garcia MD, MPH a grad of Stanford Univ. is a pediatrician. However, it seems the focus of her work is public health (MPH) she does research and consulting re physician cultural competance with multicultural racial and ethnic patient populations (I looked her up on the internet). She is married to a doctor and they have two children in the Davis schools. Murray-Garcia has worked seemingly tirelessly as a volunteer in the Davis schools and community to improve race relations and student performance. Her work with Youth in Focus is awsome, I also agree with the first commenter, What else is new.., that bullying and the mishandling of it is huge in the schools and I see it as a strong precursor to hate crimes but I believe the element of race in America is a double whammy. Racially involved bullying is more likely to be mishandled. I think we need to rethink forums on bullying, race and hate crimes to engage larger participation of parents, students, teachers and others.
Former PTA president.., I heartily agree with you. Dr. Jann Murray Garcia MD, MPH a grad of Stanford Univ. is a pediatrician. However, it seems the focus of her work is public health (MPH) she does research and consulting re physician cultural competance with multicultural racial and ethnic patient populations (I looked her up on the internet). She is married to a doctor and they have two children in the Davis schools. Murray-Garcia has worked seemingly tirelessly as a volunteer in the Davis schools and community to improve race relations and student performance. Her work with Youth in Focus is awsome, I also agree with the first commenter, What else is new.., that bullying and the mishandling of it is huge in the schools and I see it as a strong precursor to hate crimes but I believe the element of race in America is a double whammy. Racially involved bullying is more likely to be mishandled. I think we need to rethink forums on bullying, race and hate crimes to engage larger participation of parents, students, teachers and others.
Former PTA president.., I heartily agree with you. Dr. Jann Murray Garcia MD, MPH a grad of Stanford Univ. is a pediatrician. However, it seems the focus of her work is public health (MPH) she does research and consulting re physician cultural competance with multicultural racial and ethnic patient populations (I looked her up on the internet). She is married to a doctor and they have two children in the Davis schools. Murray-Garcia has worked seemingly tirelessly as a volunteer in the Davis schools and community to improve race relations and student performance. Her work with Youth in Focus is awsome, I also agree with the first commenter, What else is new.., that bullying and the mishandling of it is huge in the schools and I see it as a strong precursor to hate crimes but I believe the element of race in America is a double whammy. Racially involved bullying is more likely to be mishandled. I think we need to rethink forums on bullying, race and hate crimes to engage larger participation of parents, students, teachers and others.
Former PTA president.., I heartily agree with you. Dr. Jann Murray Garcia MD, MPH a grad of Stanford Univ. is a pediatrician. However, it seems the focus of her work is public health (MPH) she does research and consulting re physician cultural competance with multicultural racial and ethnic patient populations (I looked her up on the internet). She is married to a doctor and they have two children in the Davis schools. Murray-Garcia has worked seemingly tirelessly as a volunteer in the Davis schools and community to improve race relations and student performance. Her work with Youth in Focus is awsome, I also agree with the first commenter, What else is new.., that bullying and the mishandling of it is huge in the schools and I see it as a strong precursor to hate crimes but I believe the element of race in America is a double whammy. Racially involved bullying is more likely to be mishandled. I think we need to rethink forums on bullying, race and hate crimes to engage larger participation of parents, students, teachers and others.