Racial disparity in policing is distinct from proof of racism

Evidence

But, as I have personally said to police officials, ignoring unflattering evidence will not make it go away. The term “disparity” as typically used by scholars, and as I use it here, means there is some observable difference between the likelihood of a given outcome (e.g., being searched during a traffic stop) for different groups. The term does not convey what causes the difference and is certainly not automatic proof of deliberate racism. In the approach that my collaborators and I take in our research on race and policing, and in our many conversations with the members of law enforcement with whom we partner, finding disparities is not an indictment of racism nor is it the final word, but rather it is the starting point for a dialogue about how to improve policecommunity relations. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 356

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines ‘disparity’ in the legal/social-science sense as observable group difference in outcome likelihood, explicitly not attributing cause or intent.
• SHARE: For someone engaged in policing or criminal justice reform: a definitional distinction that frames disparity findings as dialogue-starters rather than racism indictments.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law: A Definitive Look at…, 356
• XREF: connects to: Ambiguous police stops confirm minorities’ belief that officers are racist