HomeMy WebLinkAbout2. 2002 POLICE PROFILING REPORTPort Arthur Police Department
Contact Data:
Annual Report
(2002)
Port Arthur Police Department
Contact Data:
Annual Report
(2002)
(I) Introduction
Opening Statement
February 12, 2003
Port Arthur City Council
P. O. Box 1089
Port Arthur, TX 77641-1089
Dear Distinguished Council Members,
Since January 1, 2002, the Port Arthur Police Department, in accordance with the
Texas Racial Profiling Law (S.B. No. 1074), has been collecting police contact data for
the purpose of identifying and responding (if necessary) to concerns regarding racial
profiling practices. It is my hope that the findings provided in this report will serve as
evidence that the Port Arthur Police Department has made a commitment to ban and
respond to concerns regarding racial profiling while maintaining a strong relationship
with the community.
In this report, you will find several sections designed to provide background
information on the rationale and objectives of the Texas Racial Profiling Law. Section 1
contains the table of content in addition to the Texas Law on Racial Profiling. Also, in
this section, you will find the list of requirements relevant to the Racial Profiling Law as
established by TCLEOSE (Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards
and Education). In section 2, information is presented which relates to the city of Port
Arthur in general and the Port Arthur Police Department specifically; including the
demographics of the Port Arthur Police Department. Further, information is provided,
which demonstrates, the police department's commitment to develop and maintain
partnerships wkh the local community.
The last two sections of this report (3 and 4) contain documentation which
demonstrates compliance by the Port Arthur Police Depat'tment with the Texas Racial
Profiling Law. That is, documents relevant to the implementation of an institutional
policy banning racial profiling, the implementation of a racial profiling complaint
process, which was later disclosed to the public, and the training administered to all law
enforcement personnel, are included.
The final components of this report provide statistical data relevant to public
contacts, made during the course of traffic stops, between I/1/02 and 12/31/02. This
information has been analyzed and compared to the data deriving from the Department of
Public Safety (DPS). The analysis on the data and recommendations for future areas of
research are also included. It is my sincere hope that the channels of communication
between community leaders and the Port Arthur Police Department continue to
strengthen as we move forward to meet the challenges of the near future.
Sincerely, / ~.~,
Alex/del Carmen, Ph.D.
C~inologist
Table of Content
Police Contact Data
Annual Report
January 1, 2002---December 31, 2002
Table of Content
Introduction
a) Opening Statement Outlining Rationale and Objective of Report
b) Table of Content
c) The Texas Law on Racial Profiling
d) Outline of Requirements Introduced by The Texas Racial Profiling Law
OlD Background
a) City/County Historical and Demographical Information
b) Police Department's Background/Demographics
c) Report on Inventory/l. lsage of Video/Audio Equipmem in Police Vehicles
d) Police Depm tment' s Partnerships with the Local Community
OH) Responding to the Texas Racial Proffiing Law
a) Institutional Policy on Racial Profiling (definition/prohibition of racial
profiling)
b) Implememation of Complaint Process Addressing Allegations of Racial
Profiling Practices (includes efforts relevant to the implementation of an
educational campaign aimed at informing the public on the complaint
process)
c) Training Administered to Law Enforcement Personnel
d) Tables Depicting Police Contact Information ( 1/1/02--12/31/02).
Includes Tier 1 information (Comparative Analysis)
e) Report on Complaints (if any) Filed Against Officers for Violating Racial
Profiling Policy (includes institutional procedures/corrective action used
when responding to racial profiling complaints)
f) Analysis and Interpretation of Data
(IV) Summary of Findings
a) Summary Statement Regarding Findings
b) Check List/Contact Information
The Texas Law on Racial Profiling
S.B. No. 1074
AN ACT
relating to the prevention of racial profiling by certain peace officers.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF TIlE STATE OF
TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 2, Code of Criminal Procedure, is amended by
adding Articles 2.131 through 2.138 to read as follows:
Art. 2.131. RACIAL PROFILING PROHIBITED. A peace officer
may not engage in racial profiling.
Art. 2.132. LAW ENFORCEMENT POLICY ON RACIAL
PROFILING. (a) Inthis article:
(1) "Law enforcement agency" means an agency of the state,
or of a county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state, that employs peace
officers who make traffic stops in the routine performance of the officers' official duties.
(2) "Race or ethnicity" means ora particular descent,
including Caucasian, African, Hispanic, Asian, or Native American descent.
(b) Each law enforcement agency in this state shall adopt a detailed
written policy on racial profiling. The policy must:
(1) clearly define acts constituting racial profiling;
(2) strictly prohibit peace officers employed by the agency
from engaging in racial profiling;
(3) implement a process by which an individual may file a
complaint with the agency if the individual believes that a peace officer employed by the agency
has engaged in racial profiling with respect to the individual;
complaint process;
(4) provide public education relating to the agency's
(5) require appropriate corrective action to be taken against a
peace officer employed by the agency who, after an investigation~ is shown to have engaged in
racial profiling in violation of the agency's policy adopted under this article;
(6) require collection of information relating to traffic stops
in which a citation is issued and to arrests resulting from those traffic store, including
information relating to:
(A) the race or ethnicity of the individual detained~
and
03) whether a search was conducted and, if so,
whether the person detained consented to the search; and
(7) require the agency to submit to the governing body of
each county or municipality served by the agency an annual report of the information collected
under Subdivision (6) if the agency is an agency ora county, municipality, or other political
subdivision of the state.
{c) The data collected as a result of the reporting requirements of this
article shall not constitute prima facie evidence of racial profiling.
(d) On adoption of a policy under Subsection (b), a law enforcement
agency shall examine the feasibility of installing video camera and transmitter-activated
equipment in each agency law enforcement motor vehicle regularly used to make traffic stops
and transmitter-activated equipment in each agency law enforcement motorcycle regularly used
to make traffic stops. Ifa law enforcement agency installs video or audio equipment as provided
by this subsection, the policy adopted by the agency under Subsection (b) must include standards
for reviewing video and audio documentation.
(e) A report requked under Subsection (b)(7) may not include
identifying information about a peace officer who makes a traffic stop or about an individual
who is stopped or arrested by a peace officer. This subsection does not affect the collection of
information as requked by a policy under Subsection (b)(6).
(f) On the commencement of an investigation by a law enforcement
agency of a complaint described by Subsection (b)(3) in which a video or audio recording of the
occurrence on which the complaint, is based was made, the agency shall promptly ~rovide a copy
of the recording to the peace officer who is the subject of the complaint on written request by the
officer.
Art. 2.133. REPORTS REQUIRED FOR TRAFFIC AND
PEDESTRIAN STOPS. (a) In this article:
(1) "Race or etlmicit¥" has the meaning assigned by Article
2.132(a).
(2) "Pedestrian stop" means an interaction between a peace
officer and an individual who is being detained for the purpose of a criminal investigation in
which the individual is not under arrest.
(b) A peace officer who stops a motor vehicle for an alleged violation
ora law or ordinance red, la*lng traffic or who stops a pedestrian for any suspected offense shall
report to the law enforcement agency that employs the officer information relating to the stop.
including:
(1) a physical description of each person detained as a result
of the stop, including:
(A) the person's gender; and
(B) the person's race or ethnicity, as stated by the
person or, if the person does not state the person's race or ethnicitv, as determined by the officer
to the best of the officer's ability;
(2) the traffic law or ordinance alleged to have been violated
or the suspected offense;
(3) whether the officer conducted a search as a result of the
stop and, if so, whether the person detained consented to the search;
(4) whether any contraband was discovered in the course of
the search and the type of contraband discovered;
(5) whether probable cause to search existed and the facts
supporting the existence of that probable cause;
(6) whether the officer made an arrest as a result of the stop
or the search, including a statemem of the offense charged;
(7) the street address or approximate location of the stop;
and
(8) whether the officer issued a warning or a citation as a
result of the stop, including a description of the warning or a statemem of the violation charged.
Art. 2.134. COMPILATION AND ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION
COl J.F. CTED. (a) In this article, "pedestrian stop" means an interaction between a peace
officer and an individual who is being detained for the purpose ora criminal investigation in
which the individual is not under arrest.
Co) A law enforcement agency shall compile and analyze the
information contained in each report received by the agency under Article 2.133. Not later than
March 1 of each year, each local law enforcement agency shall submit a report containing the
information compiled during the previous calendar year to the governing body of each county or
municipality served by the agency in a manner approved by the agency.
(c) A report required under Subsection (b) must include:
(1) a comparative analysis of the information comviled
under Article 2.133 to:
(Al determine the prevalence of racial profiling by
peace officers employed by the agency; and
qB) examine the disposition of traffic and
pedestrian stops made by officers employed by the agency, including searches resulting fi-om the
stops; and
(2) information relating to each complaint filed with the
agency alleging that a peace officer employed by the agency has engaged in racial profiling.
(d) A report required under Subsection Co) may not include
identifying information about a peace officer who makes a traffic or oedestrian stop or about an
individual who is stopped or arrested by a peace officer. This subsection does not affect the
reporting of information required under Article 2.13300)(1).
(e) The Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and
Education shall develop guidelines for compiling and reporting information as rea_uired by this
article.
(f} The data collected as a result of the reporting requirements of this
article shall not constitute prima facie evidence of racial profiling.
Art. 2.135. EXEMPTION FOR AGENCI]~S USING VIDEO AND
AUDIO EQUIPMENT. (a) A peace officer is exempt fi-om the reporting requirement under
Article 2.133 and a law enforcement agency is exempt fi-om the compilation, analysis, and
reporting requirements under Article 2.134 if:
(1) during the calendar year preceding the date that a r~ort
under Article 2.134 is required to be submitted:
(.6,) each law enforcement motor vehicle regularly
used by an officer employed by the agency to make traffic and pedestrian stops is equipped with
video camera and transmitter-activated equipment and each law enforcement motor~cle
regularly used to make traffic and pedestrian stops is equipped with transmitter-activated
en_uipmeut: and
(B) each traffic and pedestrian stop made by an
officer employed by the agency that is capable of being recorded by video and audio or audio
equipment, as appropriate, is recorded by using the ea_uipment: or
(2) the governing body of the county or municipality served
by the law enforcement agency, in conjunction with the law enforcement agency, certifies to the
Department of Public Safety, not later than the date specified by rule by the department, that the
law enforcement agency needs fhn~t~ or video and audio equipment for the pumose ofinstallin~
video and audio equipment as described by Subsection (a)(1){A) and the agency does not receive
from the state funds or video and audio equipment sufficient, as determined by the department,
for the agency to accomplish that purpose.
C0) Except as otherwise provided by this subsection~ a law
enforcement agency that is exempt from the requirements under Article 2.134 shall retain the
video and audio or audio documentation of each traffic and pedestrian stop for at least 90 days
after the date of the stop. If a complaint is filed with the law enforcement agency alleging that a
peace officer employed by the agency has engaged in racial profiling with respect to a traffic or
pedestrian stop, the agency ahall retain the video and audio or audio record of the stop until final
disDosition of the complaint.
(c) This article does not affect the collection or reporting
requirements under Article 2.132.
Art. 2.136. LIABILITY. A peace officer is not liable for damages
arising from an act relating to the collection or reporting of information as required by Article
2.133 or under a policy adopted under Article 2.132.
Art. 2.137. PROVISION OF FUNDING OR EQUIPMENT. (a) The
Department of Public Safety shall adopt rules for providing funds or video and audio equipment
to law enforcement agencies for the purpose of installing video and audio eauipment as
described by Article 2.135{aXD(A), including specifying criteria to prioritize funding or
equipment provided to law enforcement agencies. The criteria may include consideration of tax
effort, financial hardship, available revenue, and budget surpluses. The criteria must ~ive
priority to:
(1) law enforcement agencies that employ peace officers
whose primary_ duty is traffic enforcement;
(2) smaller jurisdictions; and
(3) municipal and county law enforcement agencies.
(b) The Depa~hx~ent of Public Safety shall collaborate with an
institution of higher education to identify_ law enforcement agencies that need funds or video and
audio equipmem for the purpose ofinstallinq video and audio equipment as described by Article
2.135(a)(1)(A). The collaboration may include the use of a survey to assist in developing criteria
to prioritize flmcllng or equipment provided to law enforcement agencies.
(c) To receive funds or video and audio equipment from the state for
the purpose of installing video and audio equipment as described by Article 2.135(a~(1XA~. the
governinE body ofa counW or municipality, in conjunction with the law enforcement agency
serving the counW or municipaliw, nhall certify to the Depa~h~ent of Public Safety that the law
enforcement agency needs funds or video and audio equipment for that pumose.
(d) On receipt of funds or video and audio equipment from the state
for the purpose of installing video and audio equipment as described by Article 2.135(a)(1)(A),
the governln~ body ora county or municipality, in conjunction with the law enforcement agency
serving the county or mnnlcipality, shall certify to the Department of Public Safety that the law
enforcement agency has installed video and audio equipment as described by Article
2.135(a)(1)(A) and is using the equipment as required by Article 2.135(a)(1).
Art. 2.138. RULES. The Departmem of Public SafeW may adopt
rules to implement Articles 2.131-2.137.
SECTION 2. Chapter 3, Code of Criminal Procedure, is amended by
adding Article 3.05 to read as follows:
Art. 3.05. RACIAL PROFILING. In this code, "racial profiling"
means a law enfomement-initiated action based on an individual's race, ethnicity, or national
origin rather than on the individual's behavior or on information identifying the individual as
having engaged in criminal activity.
SECTION 3. Section 96.641, Education Code, is amended by adding
Subsection (j) to read as follows:
(j) As part of the initial training and continuing education for police
ch/els required under this section, the institute shall establish a program on racial profiling. The
program must include an examination of the best nracfices for:
(1) monitoring peace officers' compliance with laws and
internal agency policies relating to racial profiling:
(2) implementing laws and internal agency policies relatin~
to preventing racial profiling; and
(3) analyzing and reporting collected information.
SECTION 4. Section 1701.253, Occupations Code, is amended by
adding Subsection (e) to read as follows:
(e) As part of the minimum curriculum requirements, the commission
shall establish a statewide comprehensive education and training prom on racial profiling for
officers licensed under this chapter. An officer shall complete a program established under this
subsection not later than the second anniversary of the date the officer is licensed under this
chapter or the date the officer applies for an intermediate proficiency certificate, whichever date
is earlier.
SECTION 5. Section 1701.402, Occupations Code, is amended by
adding Subsection (d) to read as follows:
(d) As a requirement for an intermediate proficiency certificate, an
officer must complete an education and training program on racial profiling established by the
commission under Section 1701.253(e).
read as follows:
SECTION 6. Section 543.202, Transportation Code, is amended to
Sec. 543.202. FORM OF RECORD. (a) In this section~ "race or
v. thnicity" means of a particular descent, including Caucasian~ African~ Hispanic, Asian, or
Native American descent.
~ The record must be made on a form or by a data processing
method acceptable to the department and must include:
(1) the name, address, physical description~ including race or
ethnicity, date of birth, and driver's license number of the person charged;
(2) the registration number of the vehicle involved;
(3) whether the vehicle was a commercial motor vehicle as
defined by Chapter 522 or was involved in transporting hazardous materials;
(4) the person's social security number, if the person was
operating a commercial motor vehicle or was the holder of a commercial driver's license or
commercial driver learner's permit;
(5) the date and nature of the offense, including whether the
offense was a serious traffic violation as defined by Chapter 522;
(6) whether a search of the vehicle was conducted and
whether consent for the search was obtained:
7~ the plea, the judgment, and whether bail was forfeited;
(8) [x,~j the date of conviction; and
(~ [(8)] the amount of the fine or forfeiture.
SECTION 7. Not later than January 1, 2002, a law enforcement
agency shall adopt and implement a policy and begin collecting information under the policy as
required by Article 2.132, Code of Criminal Procedure, as added by this Act. A local law
enforcement agency shall first submit information to the governing body of each county or
municipality served by the agency as requked by Article 2.132, Code of Criminal Procedure, as
added by this Act, on March 1, 2003. The first submission of information shall consist of
information compiled by the agency during the period beginning January 1, 2002, and ending
December 31, 2002.
SECTION 8. A local law enforcement agency shall first submit
information to the governing body of each county or municipality served by the agency as
required by Article 2.134, Code of Criminal Procedure, as added by this Act, on March 1, 2004.
The first submission of information shall consist of information compiled by the agency during
the period beginning January 1, 2003, and ending December 31, 2003.
SECTION 9. Not later than January 1, 2002:
(1) the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards
and Education shall establish an education and training program on racial profiling as requked
by Subsection (e), Section 1701.253, Occupations Code, as added by this Act; and
(2) the Bill Blackwood Law Enforcement Management
Institute of Texas shall establish a program on racial profiling as required by Subsection (j),
Section 96.641, Education Code, as added by this Act.
SECTION 10. A person who on the effective date of this Act holds
an intermediate proficiency certificate issued by the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer
Standards and Education or has held a peace officer license issued by the Commission on Law
Enforcement Officer Standards and Education for at least two years shall complete an education
and training program on racial profiling established under Subsection (e), Section 1701.253,
Occupations Code, as added by this Act, not later than September I, 2003.
SECTION 11. An individual appointed or elected as a police chief
before the effective date of this Act shall complete a program on racial profiling established
under Subsection (j), Section 96.641, Education Code, as added by this Act, not later than
September 1, 2003.
SECTION 12. This Act takes effect September 1, 2001.
S.B. No. 1074
President of the Senate
Speaker of the House
I hereby certify that S.B. No. 1074 passed the Senate on April 4, 2001,
by the following vote: Yeas 28, Nays 2; May 21, 2001, Senate refused to concur in House
amendments and requested appointment of Conference Committee; May 22, 2001, House
granted request of the Senate; May 24, 2001, Senate adopted Conference Committee Report by a
viva-voce vote.
Secretary of the Senate
I hereby ce~-y that S.B. No. 1074 passed the House, with
amendments, on May 15, 2001, by a non-record vote; May 22, 2001, House granted request of
the Senate for appointment of Conference Committee; May 24, 2001, House adopted Conference
Committee Report by a non-record vote.
Chief Clerk of the House
Approved:
Date
Gove~lor
S.B. No. 1074
Texas Racial Profiling Law
Requirements
Guidelines for Compiling and Reporting Data under Senate Bill 1074
Bacl~round
Senate Bill 1074 of the 77~ Legislature established requirements in the Texas Code of
Criminal Procedure (TCCP) for law enforcement agencies. The Commission developed
this document to assist agencies in complying with the statuto~ requirements.
The guidelines are written in the form of standards using a style developed from
accreditation organizations including the Commission on Accreditation for Law
Enforcement Agencies (CALEA). The standards provide a description of what must be
accomplished by an agency but allows wide latitude in determining how the agency will
achieve compliance with each applicable standard.
Each standard is composed of two parts: the standard statement and the commentary.
The standard statement is a declarative semence that places a clear-cut requirement, or
multiple requirements, on an agency. The commentary supports the standard statement
but is not binding. The commentary can serve as a prompt, as guidance to clarify the
intent of the standard, or as an example of one possible way to comply with the standard.
Standard 1
Each law enforcement agency has a detailed written directive that: · clearly defines acts that constitute racial profiling;
· strictly prohibits peace officers employed by the agency fi-om engaging in racial
profiling;
· implements a process by which an individual may file a complaint with the
agency if the individual believes a peace officer employed by the agency has
engaged in racial profiling with respect to the individual filing the complaint;
· provides for public education relating to the complaint process;
· requires appropriate corrective action to be taken against a peace officer
employed by the agency who, after investigation, is shown to have engaged in
racial profiling in violation of the agency's written racial profiling policy; and
· requires the collection of certain types of data for subsequent reporting.
Commentary
Article 2.131 of the TCCP prohfoits officers from engaging in racial profiling, eand article 2.132 of the
TCCP now requires a written policy that COl~Iainn the elements listed in this siandarck The article also
specifically defines a law enforcement agency as it applies to this me as an" agency of the state, or of a
coumy, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state, that employs peace officers who make
traffic stops in the routille pei'formance of the officers' official duties."
The article further d~n~ race or ethnicity as being of "a psrdcular descenl, including Caucastun,
African, Hispanic, Asian, or Native Americmt" The statule does not limit the required policies to just
these ethnic groups.
This written policy is to be adopted and implemented no later than January 1, 2002.
1 of 4
Standard 2
Each peace officer who stops a motor vehicle for an alleged violation of a law or
ordinance regulating traffic, or who stops a pedestrian for any suspected offense reports
to the employing law enforcement agency information relating to the stop, to include:
· a physical description of each person detained, including gender and the person's
race or ethnicity, as stated by the person, or, if the person does not state a race or
ethnicity, as determined by the officer's best judgment;
· the traffic law or ordinance alleged to have been violated or the suspected offense;
whether the officer conducted a search as a result of the stop and, if so, whether
the person stopped consented to the search;
· whether any contraband was discovered in the course of the search, and the type
of contraband discovered;
· whether probable cause to search existed, and the facts supporting the existence of
that probable cause;
· whether the officer made an arrest as a result of the stop or the search, including a
statement of the offense charged;
· the street address or approximate location of the stop; and
· whether the officer issued a warning or citation as a result of the stop, including a
description of the warning or a stmement of the violation charged.
Commentary
The reformation required by 2.133 TCCP is used to complete the ageacy reporfin~g requirements found in
Article 2.134. A peace officer ami an agency may be exemp~l fi.om this requirement under Article 2.135
TCCP Exemption for Agencies Using Video and Audio Equipment. An agency may be exempt from this
reporffug requirement by applying for the funds from the Department of Public Safety for video and audio
equipment and the State does not supply those funds. Section 2.135 (a)(2) states, ~the governing body of
the county or municipality served by the law enforcement agency, in conjunction with the law enforcement
agency, certifies to the Depaxtment of Public Safety, not later than the date specified by nde by the
department, that the law enforcement agency needs funds or video and audio equipment for ~he purpose of
il~qtallin~ video and audio equipment as descntn~d by Subsection (a) (1) (A) and the agency does not
receive fi.om the stale funds for video and audio equipment sufficient, as determined by the department, for
the agency to accomplish that purpose."
Standard 3
The agency compiles the information collected under 2.132 and 2.133 and analyzes the
information identified in 2.133.
Commentary
Senate Bill 1074 from the 77th Session of the Texas Legislature created requirements for law enforcement
agencies to gather specitic information and to xe~ort it to each county or municipality served. New sections
of law were added to the Code of Criminal ~ rogardillg the repolling of la'affic and pedestrian
stops. Detained is defined as whoa a persell stopped is not flee to leave.
Article 2.134 TCCP requires the agency to coutpile and provide and analysis of the knformafion collected
by peace officer employed by the agency. The report is provided to the governing body of the municipality
or county no later than March 1 of each year and covers the previous calendar year.
There is data collection and reporfin4 required based on Atldcle 2.132 CCP (tier one) and Article 2.133
CCP (tier two).
2 of 4
Thc minimum requirements for "tier one" data for traffic stops in which a citation results are:
1) tho race or ethnicity of individual detained (race and e~hnicity as defined by the bill means of "a
particular descent, including Canea~ian. African, Hispanic, Asian, or Native American");
2) whether a search was conducted, and if there was a search, whether it was a consent search or a
probable cause search; and
3) whetber there was a custody arrest.
The minimum requirements for reporfin4 on '~der two" reports include traffic and pedestrian stops. Tier
two data include:
1) the detained person's gender and race or ~thnicity;
2) the type of law violation suspected, e.g., baTantous Uaffic, ann-hazardous traffic, or other crirrfinal
investigation (the Texas Department of Public Safety publishes a categorization of traffic offenses
into hazardous or non-ha~'ardous);
3) whether a search was conducted, and if so whether it was based on consent or probable cause;
4) rants suppordug probable cause;
5) the t~l~e, ff any, of contraband that was enllected;
6) disposition of the stop, e.g., attest, tiekeL warning, or release;
7) location of stop; and
8) statement of the charge, e.g., felony, misdemeanor, or traffic.
Tier one reports are made to the governing body of each county or municipality served by the agency an
annual report of information ff the agency is an agency of a eotmty, municipality, or other political
subdivision of the state. Tier one and two reports are repotted to the county or municipality not later than
March 1 for the previous calendar year begianing March 1, 2003. Tier two reports include a comparative
analysis between the race and etlmicity of persons detained to see if a differential pattern of treatment can
be diseemed based on the disposition of stops ineluding searches resulting from the stops. The reports also
include information relating to each complaint filed With the ~ alleging that a peace officer employed
by the agency has engaged in racial profiling. An agency ~ be exempt flora the tier two rel~orfing
requirement by applying for the funds fi'om the Department of Pablic Safety for video and audio equipment
and the State does not supply those fonds [See 2.135 (a)(2) TCCP].
Reports should include both mw numbers and percentages for each group. Caution should be exercised in
interpreting the data involving percemages because of statistical distortions caused by very ~mall numbers
in any particular categovd, for e,,ample, if only one American ln-llma is stopped and searched, that stop
would not provide an accmate comparison with 201) stops among Can~ian~ with 100 ~hes. In the first
case, a 100% search rate would be skewed data when compared to a 50% rate for Caucagiang.
Standard 4
Ifa law enforcemem agency has video and audio capabilities in motor vehicles regularly
used for traffic stops, or audio capabilities on motorcycles regularly used to make traffic
stops, the agency:
· adopts standards for reviewing and retaining audio and video documentation; and
· promptly provides a copy of the recording to a peace officer who is the subject of
a complaint on written request by the officer.
Commentary
The agency should have a ~pecific review and retemion policy, baticle 2.132 TCCP specifically requires
that the peace officer be promptly provided with a copy of the audio or video recordings ff the officer is the
subject of a complaint and the officer makes a written request.
Standard 5
Agencies that do not currently have video or audio equipmem must examine the
feasibility of installing such equipment.
3 of 4
Commentary
Nolle
Standard 6
Agencies that have video and audio recording capabilities are exempt from the reporting
requiremems of Article 2.134 TCCP and officers are exempt from the reporting
requirements of Article 2.133 TCCP provided that:
· the equipment was in place and used during the proceeding calendar year; and
· video and audio documentation is retained for at least 90 days.
Commentary
The audio and video eqinpm~at and policy must have been in place during thc previous calendar year.
Audio and video documentafioa waist be kept for at least 90 days or longer if a complaint has been filed.
The documentation must be retained .mil tl~ complaint is resolved. Peace officers are not exempt from
the requirements under Article 2.132 TCCP.
Standard 7
Agencies have citation forms or other electronic media that comply with Section 543.202
of the Transportation Code.
Commentary
Seaate Bill 1074 changed Section 543.202 of the Transportation Code requiring citations to include:
* race or e~hni¢ity, and
· whether a search of the vehicle was conducted and whether consent for the search was obtalntgd.
4 of 4
(II) Background
Historical and Demographical
Information
Table DP-4. Profile of Selected Housing Characteristics: 2000
Geographic area: Port Arthur city, Texas
[Data based on a sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, no,sampling error, and definitions. ~ee text~
Subject Number Percent Subject Number Percent
Total housing units .................... 24,713 100.0~ OCCUPANTS PER ROOM
UNITS IN STRUCTURE Occupied housing units ............... 21,834 100.0
1-unit, detached .............................. 18.416 74.5 1.00 or less .................................. 19,700 90.2
l~unit, attached .................. 634 2.6 1.01 to 1.50 ....................... 1.176 5.4
2 units .......................... 446 18 1.51 or more ............................ 958 44
3 or 4 units ................................. 641 2.6
5 to 9 units ................................. 952 3.9 Specified owner-occupied units ........ 12,747 100.0
10 to 19 units ............................. 1,301 5.3 VALUE
20 or more ulitts ............................. 1,922 7.8 Less than $50,000 ........................... 8,813 69.1
Mobile home ................................ 359 1.5 $50,000 to $99,999 ......................... 3,101 243
Boat, RV, van, ets ............................ 42 0.2 $t00,000 to $149,999 ....................... 611 4.8
$150,000 to $199,999 ......................... 101 0.8
YEAR. STRUCTURE BUtLT $200,0043 to $299,999 ........................ 52 0.4
1999 to March 2000 ...................... 295 1.2 $300,900 to $499,999 ......................... 32 0,3
1995 to 1998 .............................. 499 2.0 $500,000 to $999,999 ........................ 37 0.3
1990 to 1994 ............................ 3951 1.6 $1.000,000 or more ........................
1980 to 1989 ................ 2.890 11.7 Median (dollars) ....................... 35,900 (X)
1970 to 1979 ............................... 3,656! 14.8
1960 to 1969 .............................. 4,343 17.6 MORTGAGE STATUS AND SELECTED
1940 to 1959 ............................. 9,852 39.9 MONTHLY OWNER COSTS
1939 or earlier ............................ 2.783 11.3, With a moflgag~ ............................. 4.780 37.5
Less than $300 .......................... 225 1 8
ROOMS $300 to $499 ............................ 1,149 9.0
1 room ............................... 510 2.1 $500 to $699 ......................... 1,562 12.3
2 moms ................................. 1,461 5.9 $700 to $999 ....................... 1,114 8.7
3 moms .................................... 3.018 12.2 $1,000 to $1,499 ......................... 576 4.5
4 rooms .................................... 4,055 16.4 $1,500 to $1,999 ......................... 91 0.7
5 rooms ..................................... 6,722 27.2 $2.000 or more .......................... 63 0.5
6 rooms .................................... 5,146 20.8 Median (dollars) .......................... 627 (X)
7 rooms ............................ 2,161 8.7 Not mortgaged ......................... 7.967 62.5
8 rooms ............................. 1,092 4.4 Median (dollars) ....................... 254 iX)
9 or more rooms ......................... 548 2.2
Median (rooms) .......................... 5.0 {X) SELECTED MONTHLY OWNER COSTS
AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD
Occupied housing units ............... 21,834 1{}0.0 INCOME IN 1999
YEAR HOUSEHOLDER MOVED INTO UNIT Less than 15,0 pen;ant ........................ 8,927 52.0
1999 to March 2000 ......................... 3,933 18,0 ~15.0 to 19.9 percent .......................... 1,608 12.6
1995 to 1996 ........................... 5,295 23.6 20.0 to 24.9 pement .......................... 1,162 9.1
1999 to 1994 ...................... 3,208 14,7 25.0 to 29.9 percent ......................... 828 6.5
1980 to 1989 ........................... 3,243 14.9 ~ 30.0 to 34.9 percent ......................... 500 39
1970 to 1979 ............................. 2,400 11.0 35.0 percent or mere ........................ 1,736 136
1969 or earlier ............................. 3.845 17.6 Not computed ........................ 286 2.2
VEHICLES AVAILABLE Specified renter-occupied units ........ 8,253 100.0
None ..................................... 3,440 15.8 GROSS RENT
1 ..................................... 9,224 42.2 Less than 5200 ............................. 1.287 15.4
2 ................................... 6,045 30.4 $200 to $299 .............................. 1,080 13.1
3 or more ................................. 2,525 11.6 $300 to $499 ............................. 2,975 36.0
$500 to $?49 ............................ 1,795 21.7
HOUSE HEATING FUEL $750 to $999 ............................ 305 3.7
Utility gas ................................... 13,325 61.0 $1,000 lo $1,499 ............................ 110 1.3
Bottled, lank, or LP gas ...................... 304 1.4 $1,500 or more ............................. 47 0,6
Elactdclty ................................... 8,099 37.1 No cash rent ................................ 674 8.2
Fuel oil, kerosene, otc ........................ 6 - Median (dollars) ............................ 405
Coal of coke ..............................
Wood ................................. 6 DROSS RENT AS A PERCENTAGE OF
Solar energy ............................ 7 HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN 1999
Other fuel ......................... 32 0.1 Less than 15.0 percent ..................... 1,965 238
No fuel used ............................. 55 0.3 15.0 to 19.9 percent ......................... 998 12.1
20.0 to 24.9 percent ......................... 836 10.1
SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS 25.0 to 29.9 percent .......................... 653 7.9
Lacking complete plumbin9 facilities ........... 243 1.1 30.0 to 34.9 percent ........................ 427 5.2
-Represents zero or rounds Io zero. (X} Not applicable.
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000
4
Table DP-3. Profile of Selected Economic Characteristics: 2000
Geoqraphic area: Port Arthur city, Texas
[Dat~ based on a sample. For information on con6dentiaiiW protection, samphng error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see text]
Number Percent Subject I Number Percent
Subject
EMPLOYMENT STATUS INCOME tN 1999
Population 16 years and over ............ 4~3,268 100.0 Households ............................. 21,869 100.0
Civilian labor force ........................ 22,620 52.8 $10,000 io $14,999 .......................... 2,664 12.2
Employed .............................. 9.790 45.7 $15,000 io $24,999 .......................... 3,461 15.8
Unemployed ........................... 3,036 7.0 $25,000 to $34,999 ........................ 2,896 132
Percent of civilian labor force .......... 13.3 {XJ $35,000 to $49,999 ....................... 3,903 151
Armed Forc~es ............................. 31 0.1 $50,000 to $74,999 ........................ 2,949 13.5
Nol in labor force ............................ 20,411 47.2 $75,000 to $99,999 ........................... 1,219 5.6
Females 16 yearn and over .............. 23,164 100.0 $100,000 to $149,999 ...................... 715 3.3
In labor force ............................. 10,594 45.7 i$150,000 to $199,999 ........................ 109 0,5
Civilian labor force ..................... 10,589 45.7 $200,000 or more ......................... 204 0.9
Own children under 6 years .............. 4,987 t00.0 With earnings .............................. 15,102 69.1
All parents in family in labor force ............ 2,450 49.1 Mean earnings (dollars)~ ............... 40,209 (X)
With Social Security income ................. 7,375 33.7
COMMUTING TO WORK Mean Social Secudty income (dollars)~ ....... 10.696 (X)
Workers 16 years and over .............. 19,203 100.0 With Supplemental Secudty ncome ............ 1,547 7.1
Car. truck, or van - - drove alone ............... 14,479 75.4 Mean Supplemental Security Income
Car, truck, or van - caq:xsotad ............. 3,477 18.1 (dollars)~ ............................. 6,113 (X)
Public transportation (including taxicab) ......... 157 0.9 With p~blio assistance income ................ 1,291 59
Walked ................................... 379 2,0 Mean public assistance income (dollars)~ ..... 1,761 (X)
Other means .............................. 416 2.2 With retirement income ...................... 3,594 16,4
Worked at home ........................... 286 1.5 Mean retirement income (doltars)1 ........... 11,764 (X)
Families ................................ 14,842 100,0
Employed civUian population Less than $10,000 .......................... 2,331 15,7
16 years and over ..................... 19,790 100.0 $10,000 to $14,999 .......................... 1,355 9.1
OCCUPATION $15,000 to $24,999 ......................... 2,240 151
Management, professional, and related 25,000 to $34.999 ........................ 2,091 14.1
occupations ............................... 4.118 20.8 $35,000 to $49,999 ....................... 2,568 173
Service occupations ....................... 4,594 23.2 $50,000 to $74,999 ...................... 2,335 157
Sales and office occupations ............... 4.713 23.5 $75,000 to $99,999 ................... 1,020 69
Farmta9, fishiog, and forestry occupations ....... 227: 1.1 $100,900to5149.999 ......................... 642 4.3
Construction, extraction, and maintenance $150,000 to $199,999 ........................ 104 07
occupations ............................... 2,419 12,2 $200,000 of more ............................ 156 1.1
Production. transportation, and material moving Median family income (dollars) ................. 32,143 (X)
occupations ............................. 3,719 18.8
Per capita income (dollars)~ ............... 14,183 (X)
INDUSTRY Median earnings (dollars):
Agboutture, forestry, fishing and hunting, Male full-time, year-round workers ............. 30,915 (X)
and mining ................................ 568 2.9 Female full-time, year-round workers ........... 21,063 (X)
Construction ................................ 1,880 9.5 Number Percent
Manufacturin9 ................................ 2,583 13.1 below below
Whotasata trade ............................. , 487 2.4 poverty ~overtv
Re~ait trade ................................. 2,502 12.6
Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 1,072 5.4 Subject level level
Information ................................ 385
Finance, insurance, real estate, and rental and POVERTY STATUS IN 1999
leasing ........................... 585 3.0 Families ................................ 3,396 22.9
Professional, scientific, management, adminis- I With related children under 18 years ............ 2,643 31.1
trafive, and wasta management services ...... 1,381 7.0 With related children under 5 years ........... 1,349 39.0
Educaitonal, health and social services ......... 4,348 22,0
Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation Families with female householder, no
and food services ..................... 1,419 7.2 husband present ....................... 2,158 48.8
Other services (except public administration) .... 1,225 6,2 With related children under 18 years ........... 1,804 55.6
Public administration ....................... 1,395 7.0 With related children under 5 years ........... 799 67.9
CLASS OF WORKER Individuals .............................. 14,350 25,2
Private wage and salary workers ............... 15,190 76.8 18 years and over ........................... 8,550 21 9
Government workers ......................... 3,360 17.0 65 years and over .......................... 1.256 14.4
Serf-employed workers in own not incorporated Related children under 18 years ............. 5,733 35.2
business ...................... %193 8,0 Related children 5 to 17 years ............ 4,023 332
Unpaid family workers .................... 47 0.2 Unrelated individuals 15 years and over ........ 2,696 30.f
-Represents zero or rounds to zero. (X) Not applicable.
See text.
Source: U,S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000.
3
Table DP-2. Profile of Selected Social Characteristics: 2000
Geographic area: Port Arthur city, Texas
[Data based on a sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see text]
Subject Number Pement Subject 57,786
SCHOOL ENROLLMENT NATIVITY AND PLACE OF BIRTH
Population 3 years and over Total population .......................... t00.0
enrolled in school .................... 15,682 100.0 Native ...................................... 50,588 87.6
Nursery school, preschool ..................... 1,29§ 8.3 Born in United States ............... 50,352 872
Kindergarten ................................ 993 6.3 State ot residence .................. 37,179 644
Elementary school (grades 1-8) ............ 7,394 47.1 Different state .......................... 13,173 22,8
High school (grades 9-12) ................. 3,969 25,3 Born outside United States ............... 236 0.4
College or graduate school ................. 2,028 12.9 Foreign born ............................... 7,168 12.4
Entered 1990 to March 2000 .............. 3,286 5.7
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT Naturalized c~tiaen .......................... 2.319 4.0
Population 25 years and over .......... 35,575 lo0.t Not a citizen ............................... 4,849 8.4
Less than 9th grade .................... 5,113 14.4
9th to 12th grade, no diploma ................ 5,651 , 15.9 REGION OF BIRTH OF FOREIGN BORN
High school graduate (includes equivaisncy) 12,335 34.7 Total (excluding bom at sea) .............. 7,166 100.0
Some college, no degree .................. 7,621 21.4 Europe .................................... 122 1.7
Associate degree.. 1,541 4.3 ! Asia ................................... 2,096 29.2
........................ 16 02
Bachelor's degree ................... 2.438 e.9 i Africa ....................................
Graduate or protessional d~Jree .............. 877 2.5 Oceania .................................... 26 0.4
Latin Amenca .............................. 4,882 68.1
Percent high school graduate or higher ......... 69.7 tX) Norihem Amedca ............................. 26 0.4
Percent bacheloCs degree or higher ............ 9.3 (X)
LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT ~OME
MARITAL STATUS Population 5 years and over .............. 53,336 100.0
Population 15 years and over .......... 44,137 100.0 English only ................................ 40,937 76.8
Never married ............................... 12.285 27.8 Language other than English ................. 12,399 23.2
Now married, except separated ............... Z0,985 47.5 Speak English less than 'very wail# . ....... 6,776 12.7
Separated .................................. 1,535 3.5 Spanish ................................... 8,023 15.0
Widowed ................................... 4,060 9.2 Speak English less than ~very well'. ...... 4,587 56
Female .................................... 3,372 7.6 Other Indo-European languages .......... 1,421 2.7
Divorced ............................... 5,272 11.9 Speak English lass than %ery well~ ....... 400 07
Female .............................. 2,958 6.7 Asian and Pacific Island languages ....... 2,888 5.4
Speak English less than ~vety well" . ...... 1,757 3.3
GRANDPARENTS AS CAREGIVERS
Grandparent living in household with ANCESTRY (single or multiple)
one or more own grandchildren under Total population .......................... 57,758 100,0
18 years ............................. 1,955 100.0 Total ancestries reported .................. 52,398 90.7
Arab ....................................... 49 0.1
Grandparent responsible for grandchiidren ..... 1,054 53.9 Czech~ ................................... 68 0.1
VETERAN STATUS Danish .................................... 19
Civilian population 18 years and over . 41,175 100.0: Dutch .................................... 248 9.4
Civilian veterans .......................... 5,275 12.8 English ................................... 1,833 3.2
French (except Basque)~ ................... 3,416 5.9
DISABILITY STATUS OF THE CIVILIAN French Canadian~ ........................... 1,473 I 2.6
NONINSTITUTIONALIZED POPULATION German ..................................... 2,432 4.2
Population 5 to 20 years ............... '14,708 100.0 Greek ...................................... 83 01
With a disability ....................... 1,245 84 Hungarian .................................. 10
Idsh~ ................................. 2,325 40
Population 21 to 64 years .............. 29,274 100.0 Italian .................................. 1,032 1.8
With a disability 7,455 25.5 Lithuanian ................................. 13
Percent employed ..................... 44.5 (X) NonNegian ................................ 112 0.2
NO disability ......................... 21,819 74.5 Polish ................................... 183 0.3
Percent employed ......................... 64.5 tX) Portuguese .................................. 35 01
Population 55 years and over .......... S,705 '100.0 Russian ................................... 28
With a disability ............................ 3,933 45.2 Scotch-Irish ............................... 528 09
Scottish ............................... 304 0.5
RESIDENCE IN t995 Slovak ......................... 4
Population 5 years and over ........... 53,336 100.0 Subsaharan African ................... 339 0.6
Same house in 1995 ....................... 31,847 59.3 Swedish .................................... 146 0.3
Different house in the U.S. in 1995 ......... 20,480 38.4 Swiss ................................. 2
Same county ............................ 14,843 27.8 Ukrainian .................................... 4
Different county ............................ 5,637 10.6 United States or Amedcan .................... 2,275 3.9
Same sta~e ............................. 3,268 6.1 Welsh ...................................... 92 0.2
Different state ......................... 2,369, 4.4 West indian (excluding Hispanic groups) ........ 109 0.2
Elsewhere in 1995 ......................... 1,209 2.3 Other ancestnes ........................ 35,258 I 61.0
-Represents zero or rounds to zero. tX) Not applicable.
~The data represent a combination of two ancestries shown separately in Summary File 3 Czech includes Czechoslovakian. French includes Alsa-
tian. French Canadian includes Acadian/Cajun. Idsh includes Celtic.
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000.
2
Table DP-I. Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000
Geographic area: Port Arthur city. Texas
[For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see text]
Subject Number Percent Subject Number Percent
Total population .......................... 57,758 100.0 HISPANIC OR LATINO AND RACE
Total population .......................... 57,755 100.0
SEX AND AGE Hispanic or LaSno (of any race) ................ 10,O81 17.5
Male ...................................... 27.525 47.7 Mexican ............................... 7,830 13.6
Femate .................................. 30,230 52,3 Puerto Ridan ............................. 49 0.1
Under 5 years ............................ 4,513 78 Cuban ................................ 31 0.1
5 to 8 years ........................ 4,692 8.1 Other Hispanic or Latino ................... 2,172 3.8
10 to 14 years ................. 4,579 7.9 Not Hispanic or Latino ...................... 47,674 82,5
15 to 19 years ............................ 4,567 7.9 white alone ................................ 18,387 31.8
20 to 24 years ............................. 3,790 6,6 RELATIONSHIP
25 to 34 years ............................ 7,011 12.1 Total population .......................... 87,755 100.0
35 to 44 years ...................... 6,128 14.1 In households .............................. 57,021 987
45 to 54 years ........................... 6,950 12,0 Householder ............................. 21,839 37.8
55 to 59 years ............................... 2.,340 4.1 Spouse ................................ 9,310 181
60 to 64 years ............................. 2,207 3.8 Child ............................... 19,059 330
65 to 74 years ............................. 4,460 77 Own child under 18 years .............. t4,062 243
75 to 84 years ............................. 3,324 5.8 Other rela0ves ........................... 4,645 80
85 years and over ........................... 1,194 2.1 Under 18 years ......................... 2,181 3,8
Median age (years) .......................... 34.6 (X) Nonrelaaves ............................... 2,168 3.8
Unmarried parer, er ....................... 896 1.6
16 years and over ......................... 41,206 71.3 In group quarters ......................... 734 1.3
Male ............................... 19,142 33.1 , InslJtutienaliaed population ................. 497 0.9
Female 22., g64 38,2 Noninstitutieaa fized poputatten ............. 237 0.4
21 years and over ....................... 38,536 66.7
62 years and over ........................... 10,267 17.8 HOUSEHOLD BY TYPE
65 years and over ....................... 8, g78 15.6 Total househokls ......................... 21,839 100.0
Male ................................ 3,536 6.1 Family households (families) ................... 14,665 67.2
Female ................................. 5,442 9.4 With owf~ children under 18 years .......... 7,245 33,2
Manied-coupie fatally .................... 9,310 426
RACE With own children under 18 years ......... 4,200 19.2
One race ............................. 56,568 97.9 Female householder, no husband present .... 4,300 197
White .............................. 22,528 39.0 With own children under 18 years ....... 2,606 11.9
Black or African Amedcan ................ 25.240 43.7 Nonfamily househotds ....................... 7,174 328
American Indian and Alaska Nabve ........... 260 0.5 Householder living alone .................... 6,421 29.4
Asian ..................................... 3,404 5.9 Householder 65 years and over ............ 2,964 13.6
Asian Indian ............................ 297 0.5
Chinese ................................. 28 . Households with indiwduals under 18 years 8,374 38.3
Filipino 76 0.1 Households with individuals 65 years and over., 6,610 30.3
Japanese 9 Average household size .................. 261 (X)
Korean ......................... 35 01 Average family size ....................... 3,25 (X}
Vietnamese .......................... 2,781 4,8
Other Asian ~ ......................... 178 ! 0.3 HOUSING OCCUPANCY
Native Hawaiian and Other Paci8c Islander 9 ' Total housing units ....................... 24,713 log.0
Native Hawaiian ......................... Occupied housing units ..................... 21,839 884
Guamanian or Chamorro ................ Vacant housing units ........................ 2,874 11.6
Samoan ............................... 5 ' For seasonal, recreational, or
Other Pacific islander 2 .................. 3 occasional use ......................... 146 0.6
Some other race ......................... 5,127 8.9
Two or more races ....................... 1,187 2.1 Homeowner vacancy rate (percent} ........... 1 8 (X)
Rental vacancy rate (percent) ................. 8,4, (X)
Race alone or in combination with one
or more other races: ~ HOUSING TENURE
White .................................... 23,445 40.6 Occupied housing units .................. 21.839 100.0
Black or African American ................... 25,564 44.3 O'wner-occupie~ housing un,ts ................ 13,578 62.2
Arnerican Indian and Alaska Native ........... 484 0.8 Renter-occupieh housing units ............ 8,281 378
Asian .................................... 3,596 6,2
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander ..... 49 01 JAVerage househotd size of owner-occupied units. 269 (X',
Some other race ....................... 5,900 10.2 Avera9e househoM size of renter-occupied units. 2.48 (Xl
- Represents zero or rounds to zero. (X) Not applicable.
~ Other Asian alone, or two or more Asian categories.
2 Other Pacific Islander alone, or two or more Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander categories.
3 in combination with one or more of the other races listed. The six numbers may add to more fi]an the tetal popuiafion and the six percentages
may add to more than 100 percent because iddividuals may report more than one race.
Source; U,S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
2000
REGIONAL
PROFILE
A recompilation of 2000 Census Data
for the South East Texas Region
SOUTH EAST TEXAS REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
Regional Development & Services Division
2210 Eastex Freeway
Beaumont, Texas 77703
(409) 727-2384 ext.121
Police Department's
Background~emographics
John L. Tyler, Chief of Police
The Port Arthur Police Department is currently under the command of Chief of Police
John L. Tyler.
Chief John Tyler oversees all functions of the department.
Assistant Chief Mark Blanton oversees the Field Operations Division.
Deputy Chief Raymond Clark oversees the Criminal Investigations Division
Deputy Chief John Owens oversees the Administration Division.
nternal Affairs Division
Internal Affairs Commander: Lieutenant John Leger
(409)983-8629
The Port Arthur Police Department's Internal Affairs Division is mandated to investigate
allegations of misconduct against employees of the Port Arthur Police Department. The
Internal Affairs Division has three purposes:
D Protection of the Public- The public has the fight to receive fair, efficient and impartial
law enfomement. Any misconduct by Department Personnel must first be detected, then
thoroughly investigated and finally, properly adjudicated to assure maintenance of these
qualities.
2) Protection of the Department- The Police Department is often judged and evaluated by
the conduct of it's employees. It is imperative that the whole organization not be
criticized because ofthe misconduct of a few. An informed public must have confidence
that its Police Department honestly and fairly investigates and adjudicates all allegations
of misconduct against its employees.
3) Protection of the Employee- Employees must be protected against false or
misinformed allegations of misconduct.
Complaints against members of the Port Arthur Police Department can be made in
person, by phone or by letter. State Law requires that complaints involving Police
Officers be sworn under oath and notarized. For that reason Internal Affairs attempts to
obtain a sworn statement fxom persons who make complaints against police personnel.
The Internal Affairs Division can be contacted at the following address:
Port Arthur Police Department
Internal Affairs Division
P.O. Box 1089
Port Arthur, TX 77641-1089
(409)983-8629
How Do I Commend An Officer?
Citizens who feel an officer has performed his or her duties in a particularly courteous,
helpful or
competent manner may express thek appreciation in a number of ways.
Contact any supervisor (in person or by telephone.)
Write a letter to the Officer's Lieutenant or to:
Chief John L. Tyler
Port Arthur Police Department
P.O. Box 1089
Port Arthur, TX 77641-1089
Training Division
Training Coordinator: Lieutenant Bob Williamson
(409)983-8633
It is essential to keep up with rapid advances in law enforcement technology, to assist in
crime fighting and in the manner we provide services to the public. It is the objective of
the Port Arthur Police Department's Training Division to produce highly trained,
qualified law enforcement officers to better serve and protect the members of our
community.
The Training Division's primary goal is to manage:
The research, development, and administration of training at the Port Arthur
Police Department, including recruit training, and dispatcher training.
The continuing education of all sworn officers.
The utilization of specialized schools and outside agencies for officer training.
The compliance of training with the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement
Standards and Education (TCLEOSE), the departments rules, regulations,
policies, and procedures.
The preparation of the departments long range training and educational
requirements.
Maintaining Officers Certification, scheduling schools and keeping up with the
Department's training records.
Emergency Management
Emergency Management Coordinator: Deputy Chief John Owens
(409)983-8616
The Emergency Management Coordinator is responsible for coordinating response and
recovery activities during a major emergency or disaster. The primary role of our
Emergency Management Coordinator is to help develop and implement comprehensive
disaster planning, mitigation and response activities within the City of Port Arthur and
Jefferson County under the provisions of Texas statutes. Additionally, the Coordinator
works closely with other local, state and federal Emergency Management Coordinators to
help develop and maintain emergency plans for all types of natural and man-made
hazards, and provide the analysis and recommendations necessary to make decisions that
will effectively save lives and protect property in such emergencies.
Texas DPS Emergency Management
Jefferson County Emergency_ Management Division
Federal Emergency Management Agency Jefferson County_ Local Emergency
('FEMA) Planning Committee
Port Arthur Weather (NWS)
Policy on Usage of Video/Audio
Equipment
~C~ / GO ~o.
Racial Profiling Policy 1600-25
IV. Collection of Information and Annual Report When Citation Issued or Arrest
Made
a. For each traffic stop in w~ich a citation is issued and for each arrest resulting fr6m
such traffic stops, a peace officer involved in the stop shall collect information
identifying the race or ethnicity of the person detained, stating whether a search was
conducted, and ifa search was conducted, whether th~ person detained consented to the
search.
b. The information collected shall be compiled in an annual report covering the period
Jarluary I through December 31 of each year, and shall be submitted to the governing
body' of the City of Port Arthur no later than March 1 of the following year. The annual
report shall not include identifying inf0~nation about any individual stopped or'arrested,
and shall not include identifying information about any peace officer involved in .a stop or
arrest.
V. Audio and Video Equipment
a. The Chief of Police of the City of Port Arthur shall, immediately upon enactment of
this policy, commence examination of the feasibility of ingtailing video camera
equipment and transmitter-activated equipment in each City motor vehicle regularly used
to make traffic stops, and shall report to the governing body of the City of Port Arthur on
the findings of such examination no later than six months following enactment of this
policy. The report shall include funding options available to the City, including any
funding available through the Department of Public Safety.
b. In the event that the findings of such examination support the installation of such
equipment, the governing body shall consider and take action on installing the equipment,
applying for funding to secure and install such equipment, or such other action as the
governing body considers appropriate. In the event the examination does not support
installing such equipment, the Chief of Police of the City shall periodically update the
governing body on such feasibility.
c. In the event that the governing body determines that funds are needed in order to
install the equipment, it shall pass a resolution certifying that fact to the Department of
Public Safety. On receipt of either sufficient funds or video and audio equipment, the
governing body shall install video and transmitter-activated equipment in each motor
vehicle regularly used to make traffic stops, and shall install transmitter-activated
equipment on each motorcycle regularly used to make traffic stops, and the governing
body shall pass a resolution certifying to the Department of Public Safety that such
equipment has been installed and is being used to redord each traffic and pedestrian stop
made by a peace officer employed by the City that is capable of being recorded by video
and audio or audio equipment, as appropriate.
Partnerships with Community
Community Partnerships
The Port Arthur Police Department has always enjoyed from the support of the
community. However, since January 1, 2002, it has made extraordinm-y efforts to reach
out to community members. These efforts have been well received by the Port Arthur
community at large.
The Port Arthur Pohce Department, in 2002 reached out to the community through
the following efforts:
· Assisted 14 neighborhood action groups
· Maintains active liaisons with:
· NAACP
· YMCA
· Port Arthur Ministerial Alliance
· Port Arthur Independent School District
· Port Arthur Housing Authority
· Operated the DARE program until the end of 2002
· Participated in the State Tobacco Education Program
There is no question that these efforts clearly demonstrate the strong commitment of
the Port Arthur Police Department to maintain a firm relationship with the community
while adhering to the principles of community policing.
(III) Responding to the
Texas Racial Profiling Law
Institutional Policy on Racial
Profiling
Current Policy in Effect
GENERAL ORDER
PORT ARTHUR
POLICE DEPT
Racial Profiling
600-25
Racial ProfiLing Policy
POLICY AND PURPOSE
This'Racial Profiling Policy is adopted in compliance with the requirements of Articles
2.131 through 2.136, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, which prohibits Texas peace officers
from engaging in racial profiling. ~
· DEFINITIONS
A. Racial Profiling: a law enforcement-initiated action based on an individual's race, ethnicity,
or national origin rather than on the individual's behavior or on information identifying the
inaividual as having engaged in criminal activity. Racial profiling pertains to persons.who
are viewed as suspects or potential suspects of criminal behavior. The term is not relevant as_
it pertains to witnesses, complainants, persons needing assistance, or other citizen contacts.
B. Race or Ethnicit~: ora particular descent, including Caucasian, African, Hispanic, Asian,
or-Native American descent.
C. Acts Constituting Racial Profiling: acts initiating law enforcement action, such as a traffic
stop, a detention, a search, issuance of a citation, or an arrest based solely upon an
individual's race, ethnicity, or national origin or on the basis of racial or ethnic stereotypes,
rather than upon the individual's behavior, information identifying the individual as having
possibly engaged in criminal activity, or other lawful reasons for the law enforcement action.
D. Pedestrian Stop: an interaction between a peace officer and an individual who is being
detained for the purposes of a criminal investigation in which the individual is not under
arrest.
E. Traffic Stop: the stopping ora motor vehicle by a peace officer for an alleged violation of
law or ordinance regulating traffic.
I. Prohibition
a. Peace officers of the City of Port Arthur are strictly prohibited from engaging in racial
profiling. The prohibition against racial profiling does not preclude the use of race,
ethnicity, or national origin as factors in a detention decision by a peace officer. Race,
ethnicity, or national origin may be legitimate factors in such a decision when used as
part ora descr/ption ora suspect or witness for whom a peace officer is searching.
GENERAL ORDER
GO
Racial Profiling Policy 600-25
12/21/0'1 2 of 4
II.
Complaint Process and Public Education
a. Any person xvho believes that a peace officer employed by the City has engaged in
racial profiling with respect to that person may file a complaint with the City, and no.
person shall be discouraged,'intimidated, or coemed from filing such a complaint, 6r be
discriminated against because they have filed such a complaint. The City shall accept and
investigate citizen complaints alleging racial pm.filing by its peace officers. Such ·
complaints shall be in writing, or the city employee, Officer, or official receiving the
complaint should reduce the same to writing, and should include the time, place, and
details o'S'the incident of alleged ra~ial profiling, the identity or description of the peace
officer or officers involved, and the identity and manner of contacting the complainant..
b. Ahy peace officer;city employee, or city official who receives a citizen co~plaint
alleging racial pm'filing shall forward the complaint to the internal affairs division.
Receipt of each complaint shall be acknowledged to the complainant in writing, all such
complaints shall be reviewed and investigated by the internal affairs investigator within a
reasonable period of time, and the results of the investigator's review and investigation
ghall be filed with the Chief of Police and with the complainant.
c. In investigating a complaint alleging racial profiling, thb internal affairs investigator
shall seek to determine if the officer who is subject of the complaint has engaged in a
pattern of racial profiling that includes multiple acts constituting racial profiling 'for
which there is no reasonable, credible explanation based on established police and law
enforcement procedures. A single act constituting racial profiling may not be considered
a pattern of racial profiling, and shall not be grounds for corrective action. The officer
who is the subject of the complaint may request in writing to the internal affairs
investigator a copy of the recording. A copy of the recording will be promptly provided
to the officer.
d. The City of Port Arthur Police Department shall provide education to the public
concerning the racial profiling complaint process. A summary of the public education
efforts made during the preceding year shall be included with the annual report filed with
the governing body of the City of Port Arthur under Part VI below. (This education shall
be conducted through the Public Information Office)
III. Corrective Action
a. Any peace officer who is found, after investigation, to have engaged in racial profiling
in violation of this policy shall be subject to corrective action, which may include
reprimand; diversity, sensitivity or other appropriate training or counseling; paid or
unpaid suspension; termination of employment, or other appropriate action as determined
by the Chief of Police.
Proposed/Revised Policy
(Not Yet in Effect)
Subject: RACIAL PROFILING
Effective Date: 10- -02
PORT ARTHUR POLICE DEPARTMENT
RULES, POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND SPECIAL ORDERS
IN, mber: GO: 200-2
Pages: 4
Section: ALL PERSONNEL
CALEA Standards: 1.2.9
PURPOSE
The purpose of this policy is to reaffmn the Port Arthur Police Department's commitment to
unbiased policing in all its encounters between officer and any person; to reinfome procedures
that serve to ensure public confidence and mutual trust through the provision of services in a fair
and equitable fashion; and to protect our officers from unwarranted accusations of misconduct
when they act within the dictates of departmental policy and law. This Racial Profiling Policy is
adopted in compliance with the requirements of Axticles 2.131 through 2.136, Texas Code of
Criminal Procedure, which prohibits Texas peace officers from engaging in racial profiling.
It is the policy of this department to police in a proactive manner and, to aggressively investigate
suspected violations of law. Officers shall actively enforce state and federal laws in a responsible
and professional manner, without regard to race, ethnicity or national origin. Officers are strictly
prohibited from engaging in racial profiling as defined in this policy. This policy shall be
applicable to all persons, whether drivers, passengers or pedestrians.
Officers shall conduct themselves in a dignified and respectful manner at all times when dealing
with the public. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed by both the United States and Texas
constitutions are equal protection under the law and freedom from unreasonable searches and
seizures by government agents. The right of all persons to be treated equally and to be free from
unreasonable searches and seizures must be respected. Racial profiling is an unacceptable patrol
tactic and will not be condoned.
This policy shall not preclude officers from offering assistance, such as upon observing a
substance leaking from a vehicle, a flat tire, or someone who appears to be ill, lost or confused.
Nor does this policy prohibit stopping someone suspected of a crime based upon observed
actions and/or information received about the person.
DEFINITIONS
A. Racial Profiling: A law enforcement-initiated action based on an individual's race, ethnicity,
or national origin rather than on the individual's behavior or on information identifying the
individual as having engaged in criminal activity. Racial profiling pertains to persons who are
viewed as suspects or potential suspects of criminal behavior. The term is not relevant as it
pertains to witnesses, complainants, persons needing assistance, or other citizen contacts.
B. Race or Ethnicity: Of a particular descent, including Caucasian, African, Hispanic, Asian, or
Native American.
C. Pedestrian Stop: An interaction between a peace officer and an individual who is being
detained for the purposes of a criminal investigation in which the individual is not under arrest.
1 nf~.
GO:
D. Traffic Stop: A peace officer that stops a motor vehicle for an alleged violation of law or
ordinance regulating traffic.
PROCEDURE
I. PROHIBITION
A. Peace officers of the City of Port Arthur are strictly prohibited from engaging in racial
profihng. The prohibition against racial profiling does not preclude the use of race, ethnicity, or
national origin as factors in a detention decision. Race, ethnicity, or national origin may be
legitimate factors in a detention decision when used as part of an actual description ora specific
suspect for whom an officer is searching. Detaining an individual and conducting an inquiry into
that person's activities simply because of that individual's race, ethnicity or national origin is
racial profiling. Examples of racial profiling include but are not limited to the following:
1. Citing a driver who is speeding in a stream of traffic where most other drivers are
speeding because of the cited driver's race, ethnicity or national origin.
2. Detaining the driver of a vehicle based on the determination that a person of that race,
ethnicity or national origin is unlikely to own or possess that specific make or model of vehicle.
3. Detaining an individual based on the determination that a person of that race, ethnicity or
national origin does not belong in a specific part of town or a specific place.
II. TRAINING
A. All officers shall complete a TCLEOSE training and education program on racial profiling
not later than the second anniversary of the date the officer is licensed under Chapter 1701 of the
Texas Occupations Code or the date the officer applies for an intermediate proficiency
certificate, whichever date is earlier. A person who on September 1, 2001, held a TCLEOSE
intermediate proficiency certificate, or who had held a peace officer license issued by TCLEOSE
for at least two years, shall complete a TCLEOSE training and education program on racial
profiling not later than September 1, 2003.
B. The Chief of Police, as part of the initial training and continued education for such
appointment, will be required to attend the LEMIT (Law Enforcement Management Institute of
Texas) program on racial profiling.
1. An individual appointed or elected as a police chief before the effective date of this Act
shall complete the program on racial profiling established under Subsection (j), Section 96.641,
Education Code, as added by this Act, not later than September 1, 2003.
III. COMPLAINT PROCESS
A. The department shall accept all complaints from any person who believes he or she has been
stopped or searched based on racial profiling, ethnic or national origin profiling. NO person shall
be discouraged, intimidated, or coerced from filing a complaint, nor discriminated against
because he or she filed such a complaint.
B. Any employee who receives an allegation of racial profiling, including the officer who
initiated the stop, shall record the person's name, address and telephone number, and forward the
complaint to the intemal affairs investigator.
C. Any employee contacted shall provide to that person the department process for filing a
complaint. All employees will report any allegation of racial profiling to their superior before the
end of their shift.
2 of 4
GO: 200-2
D. Investigation of a complaint shall be conducted in a thorough and timely manner. All
complaints will be acknowledged in writing to the initiator who will receive disposition
regarding said complaint within a reasonable period of time. The investigation shall be reduced
to writing and any reviewer's comments or conclusions shall be filed with the Chief of Police.
When applicable, findings and/or suggestions for disciplinary action, retraining, or changes in
policy shall be filed with the Chief of Police.
E. If there is a departmental video or audio recording of the events upon which a complaint of
racial profiling is based, upon commencement of an investigation by this department into the
complaint and written request of the officer made the subject of the complaint, this department
shall promptly provide a copy of the recording to that officer.
W. CORRECTIVE ACTION
A. In investigating a complaint alleging racial profiling, the internal affairs investigator shall
seek to determine if the officer who is subject of the complaint has engaged in a pattern of racial
profiling that includes multiple acts constituting racial profiling for which there is no reasonable,
credible explanation based on established police and law enforcement procedures. A single act
constituting racial profiling may not be considered a pattem of racial profiling, and shall not be
grounds for corrective action.
B. Any peace officer who is found, after investigation, to have engaged in racial profihng in
violation of this policy shall be subject to corrective action, which may include reprimand;
diversity, sensitivity or other appropriate training or counseling; paid or unpaid suspension;
termination of employment, or other appropriate action as determined by the Chief of Police.
V. PUBLIC EDUCATION
A. This department will inform the public of its policy against racial profiling and the complaint
process. Methods that may be utilized to inform the public are the news media, radio, service or
civic presentations, the Internet, as well as governing board meefmgs. Additionally, information
will be made available as appropriate in languages other than English.
VI. USE OF VIDEO AND ALrDIO EQUIPMENT
A. In order to be exempt from the compilation, analysis and reporting requirements of citation
issuance data each motor vehicle regularly used by this department to make traffic and pedestrian
stops must be equipped with a video camera and transmitter-activated equipment; and each
traffic and pedestrian stop made by an officer of this department that is capable of being recorded
by video and audio, or audio, shall be recorded.
B. This department shall retain the video and audiotapes, or the audiotape of each traffic and
pedestrian stop for at least ninety (90) days after the date of the stop. Ifa complaint is filed with
this department alleging that one of our officers has engaged in racial profiling with respect to a
traffic or pedestrian stop, this department shall reta'm the video and audiotapes, or the audiotape
of the stop until final disposition of the complaint.
C. Shift Commanders will ensure officers of this department are recording their traffic and
pedestrian stops. A recording of each officer will be reviewed at least once every ninety (90)
days. If the equipment used to record audio and/or video of traffic or pedestrian stops is
malfunctioning or otherwise not operable, the officer making the stop shall properly record and
report the information as follows:
1. the violators race or ethnicity;
3 of 4
GO: 200-2
2. whether a search was conducted;
3. was the search consensual; and
4. arrest for this cited violation or any other violation
John L Tyler, Chief of Police
4 of 4
Complaint Process: Informing the
Public and Addressing Allegations
of Racial Profiling Practices
Informing the Public on the Process of Filing a
Complaint with the Port Arthur Police Department
Educational Campaign:
In accordance to Senate Bill 1074, the Port Affitur Police Department has made
significant efforts to launch an educational campaign aimed at informing the public on
issues relevant to the complaint process. Special emphasis has been placed on informing
community members on filing a complaint relevant to racial profiling practices.
The command staff of the Port Arthur Police Department has made available, by
posting the information in the departmental web site, information on filing a complaint
against a Port Arthur police officer (included). It is believed that through these efforts,
the community was properly informed of the new policies and the complaint process
relevant to racial profiling. This confirms the Port Arthur Police Department's efforts to
ban racial profiling practices among its officers.
Internal Affairs Division
Internal Affairs Commander: Lieutenant John Leger
(409)983-8629
The Port Arthur Police Department's Internal Affairs Division is mandated to investigate
allegations of misconduct against employees of the Port Arthur Police Department. The
Internal Affairs Division has three purposes:
1) Protection of the Public- The public has the right to receive fair, efficient and impartial
law enforcement. Any misconduct by Department Personnel must first be detected, then
thoroughly investigated and finally, properly adjudicated to assure maintenance of these
qualities.
2) Protection of the Department- The Police Department is often judged and evaluated by
the conduct of it's employees. It is imperative that the whole organization not be
criticized because of the misconduct of a few. An informed public must have confidence
that its Police Department honestly and fairly investigates and adjudicates all allegations
of misconduct against its employees.
3) Protection of the Employee- Employees must be protected against false or
misinformed allegations of misconduct.
Complaints against members of the Port Arthur Police Department can be made in
person, by phone or by letter. State Law requires that complaints involving Police
Officers be sworn under oath and notarized. For that reason Internal Affairs attempts to
obtain a sworn statement fi.om persons who make complaints against police personnel.
The Internal Affairs Division can be contacted at the following address:
Port Arthur Police Department
Internal Affairs Division
P.O. Box 1089
Port Amhur, TX 77641-1089
(409)983-8629
Racial Profiling Training
Trainin~
In compliance with the Texas Racial Profiling Law, the Port Arthur Police
Department has asked that its officers adhere to ail Texas Commission on Law
Enforcement Officer Standards and Education (TCLEOSE) training and the Law
Enforcement Managemem Institute of Texas (LEMIT) requirements as mandated by law
(see training policy).
All sworn officers of the Port Arthur Police Department have completed the
TCLEOSE training and education program on racial profiling. The main outline used to
train the officers of Port Arthur can be found in the following pages.
The satisfactory completion of the racial profiling training by all sworn personnel
of the Port Arthur Police Department fulfills the training requirement as specified in the
Education Code (96.641) of the Texas Racial Profiling Law. The expectation is that the
remaining personnel will complete the racial profiling training on or before September 1,
2003
Racial Profiling
Course Number 3256
Texas Commission on Law Enforcement
September 2001
Racial Prof'ding 3256
You may wish to teach this course in conjunction with
Asset Forfeiture 3255 because of the related subject matter
and applicability of the courses. If this course is taught in
conjunction with Asset Forfeiture, you may report it under
Combined Profiling and Forfeiture 3257 te reduce dam entty.
Target Population:
Prerequisites:
Length of Course:
Material Requirements:
Abstract
This insUucax guide is designed ~o meet the educa~onal requkemem for ~ profiling established by
legislative mandate: 77R-SB1074.
Licensed law enforcement personnel in Texas
Experience as a law enforcemem officer
A sugges~ imqmctional fmc of 4 hours
Overhead pmjcetor, ehalkbourd and/or flip chatls, video tape player,
handouts, practical exercises, and demonstrations
Instructor Qualifications: Instructors should be yew knowledgeable about traffic stop procedures
and law enforcement issues
Evaluation Process and Procedures
An examination should be given. The instructor may decide upon the nam and content of the
examination. It must, however, sufficient~ demonsWate the manet/of the subject content by the
student.
Reference Materials
Reference materials are located at the end of the course. An electronic copy of fids mc-mr guide
may be downloaded from our web site at http-J/www.tcleose.state.t~us.
Racial Profiling 3256
1.0
1.1
1.1.1
C.
D.
E.
F.
RACIAL PROFILING AND THE LAW
UNIT GOAL: The student will be able to identify the legal aspects of racial profiling.
LEARNING OBJECTIVE: The student will be able to identify, the legislative
requirements placed upon peace officers and law enforcement agencies regarding
racial profiling.
Racial Profiling Requirements:
Racial profiling
Racial profiling prohibited
Law enforcement policy on racial profiling
Reports required for lxaffic and pedeslxian stops
Racial profiling education for police chiefs
Training program
Training required for intermediate certificate
Definition of "race or ethnicity" for form
CCP 3.05
CCP 2.131
CCP 2.132
CCP 2.133
CCP 2.136
Education Code 96.641
Occupations Code 1701.253
Occupations Code 1701.402
Transportation Code 543.202
Written departmental policie~
1. Definition of what constitutes racial profiling
2. Prohibition of racial profiling
3. Complaint process
4. Public education
5. Corrective action
6. Collection of Waffle-stop statistics
7. Almual roports
Not prima facie evideace
Feasibility of use of video equipment
Data does not identify officer
Copy of complaint-rotated video evidence to officer in question
Vehicle stop report
1. Physical description of detainees: gender, race or ethnicity
2. Alleged violation
3. Consent to search
4. Conwaband
5. Facts supporting probable cause
6. Anest
7. Warning or citation issued
Compilation and analysis of data
3
I.
J.
K.
1.1.2
2.0
2.1
2.1.1
Exemption fi'om reporting - audio/video equlpwent
Officer non- liability
Funding
R~luk~ U'aining in racial profiling
1. Police chiefs
2. All holders of intermediate certificates and/or two-year-old licenses as of 09/01/2001
(Iraining to be completed no later than 09/01/2003) - see legislation 77R- SB 1074
LEARNING OBJECTIVE: The student will become familiar with Supreme Court
decisions and other court decisions involving appropriate actions in traffic stops.
Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 116 S.Ct. 1769 (1996)
1. Motor vehicle search exemption
2. Traffic violation acceptable as pretext for fucther investigation
3. Selective enforcement can be challenged
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868 (1968)
1. Stop & Frisk do,blue
2. Stopping and briefly detaining a tv~rson
3. Frisk and pat down
Other cases
1. Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 98 S.Ct. 330 (1977)
2. Ma~land v. Wilson, 117 S.Ct. 882 (1997)
3. Graham v. State, 119 MdApp 444, 705 A.2d 82 (1998)
4. Pryor v. State, 122 Md.App. 671 (1997) cert. denied 352 M& 312, 721 A.2d 990
(1998)
5. Ferris v. State, 355 Md. 356, 735 A.2d 491 (1999)
6. New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (1981)
RACIAL PROFILING AND THE COMiMUNITY
UNIT GOAL: The student will be able to identify logical and social arguments against
racial profiling.
LEARNING OBJECTIVE: The student will be able to identify logical and social
arguments against racial profiling.
There are appropriate reasons for unusual traffic stops (suspicious behax4or, the officer's
intuition, MOs, etc.), but police work must stop short of cultural stereotyping and racism
Racial profiling would result in criminal mxests, but only because it would target all members of a
race randomly - the minor banefil~ would be far outweighed by the distrust and ~nger towards
law enforcemem by minorities and the public as a whole
Racial profiling is self- fulfilling bad logic: if you believed that minerilies committed more crimes,
then you might look for more minority c~h,,inal% and flnd them in dispmpo~onate l~nmhers
Inappropriate traffic stops generate suspicion and antagonism towards officers and make fulure
stops more volatile - a racially-based stop today can throw suspicion on tomorrow's legitimate
stop
By focusin~ on race, you would not only be harassing innocent citizens, but overlooking
criminals of all races and backgrotulds - it is a waste of law enforcement resources
3.0 RACIAL PROFILING VERSUS REASONABLE SUSPICION
3.1
UNIT GOAL: The student will be able to identify the elements of both inappropriate
and appropriate traffic stops.
3.1.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVE: The student will be able to identify elements of a racially-
motivated traffic stop.
B.
Most race-based complalms come lix~m vehicle strl~ often since race is used as an
inappropriate substitute for drag courier profile elemems
"DWB" - "Driving While Black" - a nickname for the public pcrcq~ion that a Black person
may be stopped solely because of their race (especially with the suspicion that they are a drag
courier), ot'am extended to other minority groups or activities as well ('Driving While Brown,"
"Flying While Black," etc.)
A typical Iraffic stop resulting from racial ptoh'ling
1. The vehicle is stopped on the basis of a minor or contrived traffic violation which is used
as a pretext for closer inspection of the vehicle, driver, and passengers
2. The driver and passengers are questioned about things that do not relate to the traffic
violation
3. The driver and passengers are ordered out of the vehicle
4. The officers visually check all obseax, able parl~ of the vehicle
5. The officers proceed on the assumption that drug courier wo~ is involved by detaining
the driver and passen4ers by the roadside
6. The driver is asked to consent to a vehicle search - if the driver refoses, the officers use
otber precedures (waiting on a canine unil, ~ah,,inal record checks, license-plate checks,
ete.), and intimidate the driver (wi/h the tineat of cle~ining him/her, obtaining a warrant,
etc.)
3.1.2 LEARNLNG OBJECTIVE: The student will be able to identify elements of a traffic
stop which would constitute reasonable suspicion of drug courier activity.
A. Dmg courier profile (adapted from a profile developed by the DEA)
5
3.1.3
B.
5.
6.
7.
Driver is nervous or anxious beyond the orrlin~a~ anxiety mad cultural communication
styles
Signs of long-t~xm driving (driver is unshaven, has empty food containers, etc.)
Vehicle is rented
Driver is a young male, 20- 35
No vls~le luggage, even though driver is Imveling
Driver was over-reckless or over-eautious ia driving and n:spondin~ m si~ala
Use of air fi~sheners
Drug courier activity indicators by themselves are usually not sufficient to justify a stop
LEARNING OBJECTIVE: The student will be able to identify elements of a traffic
stop which could constitute reasonable suspidon of criminal activity.
Thinking about the totality of ~ces in a vehicle stop
Vehicle exterior
1. Non-standard repainling (esp. on a new vehicle)
2. Signs of hidden cargo (heavy weight in tnmk, windows do not mil down, etc.)
3. Unusual license plate sugg~n~ a switch (di~y plate, bugs on back plate, etc.)
4. Unusual cimmaslunces (pulling a camper at night, ~6ds' bikes with no kids, etc.)
Pre-stop indicators
1. Not consistent with traffic flow
2. Ddwr is overly cautious, or drivefflmsseagea~ repeatedly look at police car
3. Driver begins using a car- or cell-phone when signaled ~o stop
4. Unmual pull-over behavior (ignores signals, hesitates, pulis onto new street, moves
objects in car, etc.)
Vehicle in~ior
I. Rear seat or interior panels have been opened, there are tools or spare tire, etc.
2. lacousistem items (anti-the!~ club wi~ a ~mh~l, unexpected luggage, etc.)
6
Resources
Proactive Field Sto~s Training Unit- Instructor% Guide, Maryland Police and Correctional Training
Commissions, 2001. (See Appendix A.)
Web address for legislation 77R-SB1074:
http:/Alo2.tlc.state.tx~us/tlo/77rPoilltext/SB01074Ftttm
Tables Illustrating Police Contact
Tier 1 Data
(I) Tier 1 Data
General Demo Searches
Race/Ethnicity Contacts Searches Consensual PC for Search Custody
* Searches Arrest
I lll lll
N % N % N % N % N %
Caucasian 1296 34 63 32 36 29 27 36 5 31
African 1902 50 109 55 73 59 36 49 9 56
Hispanic 423 11 17 9 9 7 8 11 1 6
A~ian 172 5 9 5 6 5 3 4 1 6
Native 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
American
Other 4 .11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ll ll ll llllg
Total 3797 100'* 198 100'* 124 100 74 100 16 100'*
* Race/Ethnicity are defined by Senate Bill 1074 as being of a "particular descent, including Caucasian,
African, Hispanic, Asian, or Native American".
**Represents rounded figure.
Tier 1 Data (Contacts)
(Percent)
(Origin)
[ · Contacts
(Freq.)
Tier I Data (Searches)
120-
100-
80
60
40-
20-
(Origin)
· Searches
[] Consent
· PC
(Percent)
Tier I Data (Arrests)
60-
50-
40
20'
10'
(Origin)
Tier I Analysis
(Department of Public Safety Data)
(II) Comparative Analysis
Comparison of Resident
and DPS Data
DPS Data Variance
Total 100'**
* Race/Ethnicity are defined by Senate Bill 1074 as being of a "particular descent, including
Caucasian, African, Hispanic, Asian, or Native American".
**In this table, Hispanies have been added to the Caucasian population.
This has been done in order to correspond with DPS data collection methods.
According to DPS, Hispanics are combined, in their data reports, with the Caucasian population.
***Represents rounded figure.
Tier 1 (Contacts and DL Holders)
60-
50-
40'
(Percent) 30-
20'
10'
_~ [~ Resident
~= / Contacts
~ II DL Holders
(Origin) L
Report on Complaints
Data on Corrective Action
The following table contains data regarding officers that have been the subject of a
complaint, during the time period of 1/1/02--12/31/02, based on allegations outlining
possible violations related to the Texas Racial Profiling Law. The final disposition of the
case is also included.
Check above if the Port Arthur Police Department has not received any complaints, on
any members of its police force, for having violated the Texas Racial Profiling Law
during the time period of 1/1/02 --- 12/31/02.
Complaints Filed for Possible Violations of S.R. 1074 (The Texas Racial Profilin8 Law)
Complaint Alleged Violation Disposition of th~ Case
No.
Additional Comments:
Analysis and Interpretation of Data
Analysis
The data presented in this report contains valuable information regarding police
contacts with the public between 1/1/02 and 12/31/02. Despite its value, the raw data
does not present much information relevant to racial profiling trends. Thus, it is felt that
further analysis of the data is warranted. As such, data was obtained through the Texas
Department of Public Safety (DPS), via a public information request. The data obtained
from DPS included the race of drivers in Port Arthur during the 2002 calendar year.
The decision to obtain DPS dat_~ was made since, according to experts, census
data presents challenges to any effort made at establishing a fair and accurate racial
profiling analysis. That is, census data contains information of all residents in a particular
community, regardless of the fact they may or may not be among the driving population.
Further, census data, when used as a baseline of comparison, presents the challenge that it
captures information related to city residents only. Thus, excluding individuals who may
have come in contact with the Port Arthur Police Department, but reside outside city
limits. This has a tendency of inflating the overall figures; thus, providing an inaccurate
representation of police contacts with the public.
Therefore, it is felt that DPS data relevant to area residents, if compared to the
individuals who have come in contact with the Port Arthur Police Department in a given
year, will offer a more accurate representation and provide further insights than other
sources including census data. Despite this, it must be noted that DPS, at this time, does
not collect information on Hispanics alone; instead, they combine Caucasians with
Hispanics into one category. This does not allow for an analysis to be conducted on
Hispanic-related contacts.
DPS-Based Comnarison
When comparing the individuals who came in contact with the Port Arthur Police
Department during 2002 with those who, according to DPS, were residents of the area
during that time and held a valid driver's license, the data produced interesting findings.
That is, the percentage of police contacts with drivers of"African" descent was higher
than the percentage of driver' s license holders who are of similar descent, and reside in
the areas surrounding Port Arthur (see charts).
The percentage of Caucasian (including Hispanic), and Native American drivers
that came in contact with the Port Arthur Police Department in 2002 was lower than the
percentage of individuals belonging to the same racial groups that, according to DPS,
held a valid driver's license and lived in surrounding areas of Port Arthur. This was also
the case for the category "other", which seemed to represent individuals of other
races/ethnicities not included in the racial/ethnic groups introduced in the Texas Racial
Profiling Law. In addition, the percentage of Asian drivers that came in contact with the
Port Arthur Police Depa~hnent was the same as the percentage of Asian drivers' license
holders in the area of Port Arthur.
With respect to searches, most of them were performed on Afi-ican American
drivers. As a point of interest, it should be noted that Afi'ican Americans also constituted
the group that came in contact the most with the police in a traffic-related incident where
a citation was issued. There were only a few police contacts made, in 2002, with
individuals of Asian descent. Further, there were no traffic-related contacts made, in
2002, with drivers of Native American descent.
The arrest data revealed that African Americans were arrested the most in a
traffic-related stop where a citation was issued. In addition, there were no arrests
reported of Native American drivers. The data further suggested that no arrests took place
of individuals belonging to the "other" category.
Summary Statement:
The academic literature seems to point out at the fact that racial profiling is a
problem that cannot be measured merely by the analysis of raw data. In other words, in
addition to raw data, racial profiling should be measured by the presence and nature of
complaints filed against police officers, attitudinal shifts in the police force, and different
levels of morale among officers. Thus, it is felt that the mere analysis on the raw data
provided by the Port Arthur Police Department is not sufficient to render judgment on
whether a racial profiling problem exists.
Despite this, if one is to draw conclusions from the DPS-based comparison, the
Port Arthur Police Depas huent does not appear to target, in its police-based contacts,
Caucasians (including Hispanics), Asians, Native Americans, and individuals belonging
to the "other" category. With respect to African American contacts, searches, and arrests,
a recommendation is being made that a study is conducted in the near future, which
would examine the 20034)4 contact data with the aim of determining the nature of police
contacts with African American drivers. It is expected that the proposed study will reveal
the nature of the contacts, searches, and arrests of AlSican American drivers; thus,
confirming or refuting the findings made in the current study.
It is clear that the Port Arthur Police Department has complied with the Texas
Racial Profiling Law (SB1074) in all of its requirements. Further, it sought the assistance
of an outside consultant to evaluate the department's annual contact data. This should be
regarded as a positive gesture; one that suggests the Port Arthur Police Department' s
'~transparency" before the community.
(IV) Summary of Findings
Summary Statement Regarding
Findings
Summary Statement
It is clear, from the information presented in this report that the Port Arthur Police
Department has complied with the Texas Racial Profiling Law (SB 1074). The police
departmem has, in compliance with SB 1074, taken the following measures:
· Clearly defined the acts or actions that constitute racial profiling
· Provided a statement indicating the prohibition of any peace officer employed by
the Port Arthur Police Departmem from engaging in racial profiling
· Implememed a process by which an individual can file a complaim regarding
racial profiling violations
· Disclosed its complain policy in order to inform the public on how to file a racial
profiling complaint
· Implemented disciplinary guidelines for officers found in violation of the Texas
Racial Profiling Law
· Collected and analyzed Tier 1 data
· Adopted a policy on standards for reviewing video and audio documemafion
· Produced an annual report on police contacts (Tier 1) and presented this report to
its local city council before March 1, 2003
Checklist and Contact Information
Checklist
(I) The following requirements were met by the Port Arthur Police Department in
accordance with Senate Bill 1074:
[] Clearly defined act of actions that constitute racial profiling
[] Statement indicating prohibition of any peace officer employed by the Port Arthur
Police Department from engaging in racial profiling
[] Implement a process by which an individual may file a complaint regarding racial
profiling violations
[] Provide public education related to the complaim process
[] Implemem disciplinary guidelines for officer found in violation of the Texas Racial
Profiling Law
[] Collect data (Tier 1) that includes information on
a) Race and ethnicity of individual detained
b) Whether a search was conducted
c) If there was a search, whether it was a consent search or a probable cause search
d) Whether a custody arrest took place
[] Produce an annual report on police contacts (Tier 1) and present this to local
governing body by March 1, 2003.
[] Adopt a policy, if video/audio equipment is installed, on standards for reviewing
video and audio documentation
(II) For additional questions regarding the information presemed in this report, please
contact:
~nnA ~n~rfleld Dr.
~rtlngto'n', ~ 76001
Disclaimer: The author of this report, Alejandro del Carmen, is not liable for any
omissions or errors committed in the acquisition, analysis, or creation of this report.
Further, Dr. del Carmen is not responsible for the inappropriate use and distribution of
information contained in this report. Further, no liability shall be incurred as a result of
any harm that may be caused to individuals and/or organizations as a result of the
information comained in this report.