Home > Our Blog > LIIA Suffolk Hate Crimes & the Police

Blog Post

LIIA Suffolk Hate Crimes & the Police

Posted January 27, 2010 by Patrick Young, Esq.

This is the third installment on preliminary recommendations from the Long Island Immigrant Alliance (LIIA) to the Suffolk Hate Crimes Task Force. It looks at how law enforcement can work to counter hate crimes.
Section II: Law Enforcement Officers
The young men who participated in the killing of Marcelo Lucero had, either as individuals or in groups, been involved in at least eight attacks dating back to December 23, 2007. In some of these prior attacks, victims had reported the crimes to authorities. In others, the victims did not report the crimes. Many victims interviewed by the Southern Poverty Law Center and the media indicated that they had not reported the crimes because of their fear of the police. The police were known to ask crime victims and witnesses about their immigration status. In addition, the police were believed by immigrants to not take seriously crimes committed against immigrants by young white people.
LIIA joins the heads of most major police departments in our belief that immigrants and the police need to work together for the safety and protection of all. Police-community cooperation helps stop hate crimes and undermines the ability of all criminals to prey upon vulnerable people afraid to report crimes. Below, we offer proactive recommendations that will improve the reporting, recording, and processing of hate crimes.
-Recommendation #12: Do Not Participate in Sweeping, Indiscriminate ICE Raids or 287(g) MOUs
County officials should refrain from participating in efforts to remove undocumented immigrants from the County except for those who have committed serious crimes. Such participation erodes the trust that encourages immigrants (both documented and undocumented) to come forward to report hate crimes committed against them. Across the United States, local law enforcement agencies and umbrella organizations have expressed deep concerns about the negative consequences of sweeping, indiscriminate ICE raids upon their relationships with immigrant communities. The participation of Suffolk County police in these raids decreases the likelihood of witnesses and victims of crime coming forward. The raids also encourage the victimization and exploitation of immigrants by signaling that they are a population without rights or value. Participation strains local police budgets and resources. Because raids are often based upon racial profiling and faulty intelligence, they often violate the civil rights and civil liberties of erroneously targeted residents. Raids have also been used unlawfully to interfere with and disrupt union organizing efforts. In the process, local law enforcement agencies have become ensnarled in expensive and protracted litigation. Because of the myriad of ways that sweeping, indiscriminate ICE raids impede effective law enforcement and jeopardize public safety, Suffolk County police should follow the lead of Nassau County police and refuse to cooperate or participate.
-Recommendation #13: Demonstrate that Hate Crime Enforcement Is a Top Priority
The Suffolk County Sheriff, District Attorney, and Police as well as other law enforcement agencies should publicly state that: (1) protecting all residents from hate crimes is a top priority; (2) that hate crimes are taken seriously by the County and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent under the law; and (3) that hate crimes undermine public order and attack the fabric of community unity. As an important part of making enforcement a top priority, the District Attorney’s office should establish a Hate Crimes Unit that investigates all alleged hate crimes taking place in the County.
-Recommendation #14: Adopt, Publicize, and Strictly Enforce a Clear Confidentiality Policy
County leadership recently added a confidentiality policy for those reporting hate crimes (Memorandum 08-282). However, this policy falls short in various respects, including: (1) it does not protect people from being asked about their birthplace, nationality, or immigration status; (2) it does not clarify in what situations people might be asked about their immigration status; (3) it mentions crime victims, but contains no mention of protecting witnesses; and (4) it contains no prohibition whatsoever on sharing information about victims or witnesses with ICE.
Accordingly, we recommend that the Suffolk Police adopt and publish, in both English and Spanish, a clear confidentiality policy protecting victims and witnesses from being asked about their place of birth, nationality, or immigration status. This policy should be distributed throughout the County. Police officers violating the policy should be subject to punishment. Appendix F provides recommended language for this policy.
-Recommendation #15: Ensure Cross-Cultural Competence in Law Enforcement
Police officers should receive training in cultural competency in order to better respond to hate crime complaints. Such training includes understanding the lack of familiarity of immigrants with the U.S. legal system, the reasons for their mistrust of the police, and their relative powerlessness within the system. Moreover, the training must assist officers in recognizing and respecting cultural differences. For instance, the training could point out how the value placed upon conflict avoidance can lead some immigrant groups to perceive as aggressive behavior what officers consider to be standard, acceptable procedure when questioning victims of crimes.
The ability to speak a second language widely used in Suffolk County should be a criterion in hiring new officers. Existing officers should be supported in learning a second language and obtaining interpreter certification Spanish-speaking officers should be on duty at all times to insure that reports of hate crimes from Latinos are not ignored due to a shortage of Spanish-speaking officers. For those languages which are less frequently used, officers can use language identification flashcards in order to help the limited English speaking individual to identify their native language.
In keeping with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, signage and literature in police precincts advising limited English proficient individuals of their rights, including the right to an interpreter, should be in multiple languages as appropriate to the local limited English proficiency communities and prominently displayed in all entrance areas (for further information, visit http://www.lep.gov/faqs/faqs.html and http://www.lep.gov/resources/tips_and_tools-9-21-04.htm#1). Appendix G lists languages spoken in Suffolk County along with the degree of English Language Proficiency among those speaking other languages. The data suggest providing signage in two or three additional languages along with English can cover the majority of the Limited English Proficiency (LEP) population in Suffolk County. Posting County signs in Spanish, Italian, and Chinese would cover almost 73% of the LEP population. Additional research should be conducted on the local precinct level to determine which languages should be included on signage in police and other County buildings.
Quoting US Department of Justice Executive Order 13166, we recommend the following:
“Telephonic interpretation is particularly useful for officers in the field, during 911 calls, or in other instances in which a range of languages could be encountered and swift response is necessary. Telephonic interpretation can be conducted utilizing a commercial telephonic interpretation service, professional interpreter, or trained bilingual staffer who cannot be available onsite (e.g., a police call at 3:00 a.m.). Commercial telephonic interpretation services are helpful where in-house language capacity is insufficient or unavailable. Telephone interpretation services are immediately available when crisis management is required in a range of languages. Such services can provide a per-minute rate in a broad range of languages.” However, we recognize that it is preferable, whenever possible, to have the interpreter available in person so that body language and facial expressions can be properly recognized. In addition, adequate translation of written documents is also essential.
-Recommendation #16: Fully Implement New Protocol for Identifying and Responding to Hate Crimes
We are pleased to see that the Suffolk County Police Department has recently adopted a protocol for identifying and responding to hate crimes based upon the policy recommended by the International Chiefs of Police. Moreover, we appreciate and commend SCPD for adopting our recommendation to state in writing that victims will not be queried about immigration status.
To ensure that the new protocol is fully and consistently implemented, the Police Commissioner should speak at each precinct about the importance of properly handling hate crimes and make it clear that precinct commanders will be responsible for compliance. The Commanding Officer in each precinct must have responsibility for monitoring hate crimes, for providing ongoing training of police officers, and for ensuring that the law is being applied consistently, uniformly, and fairly. If the intention of the offender is even suspected to be from a bigoted or hateful motivation, it should be called in immediately to the supervising hate crime oversight officer so that there is always a double checking of the interpretation and implementation of the law by the responding officer.
-Recommendation #17: Publish Hate Statistics on a Weekly Basis
In order to act effectively to eliminate hate, all County residents and employers must know the facts. Statistics on both hate crimes and hate incidents should be readily available and should be published on a weekly basis in compliance with Federal regulations on reporting hate crime. A hate incident is an act that appears to be motivated by a bias intention but does not reach the level of a hate crime, as defined by the NYS Penal Law, because the act is either not included as an underlying crime for which a hate crime charge may be brought, or because there is not enough evidence to support a bias motivation to charge the act as a hate crime. Reports should include all allegations of hate crimes and hate incidents reported even if an investigation has not been concluded. In particular, the statistics should include: (1) how many potential hate crimes and hate incidents have been reported, and how many have had such statuses ruled out; (2) how many of the hate crimes have resulted in prosecutions, and (3) what were the ultimate dispositions of all prosecuted hate crimes.
-Recommendation #18: Distribute Hate Crimes Pamphlet to All County Personnel
All county personnel including elected officials must sign and acknowledge receipt and review of a hate crimes pamphlet. The pamphlet should contain the following information:
1. A strong statement of the County’s position on hate crimes
2. Clear definitions of hate crimes and hate incidents
3. Reinforcement of mandated reporter requirements (see Recommendation #19)
4. Who to call to report an alleged hate crime or hate incident
-Recommendation #19: Create a Mandated Reporter System
All County personnel and County contractors must sign an agreement to report any allegation or cause to suspect that a hate crime or hate incident has been committed or is in the process of commission. In addition, all employees of institutions such as hospitals, medical centers, and social service agencies must be asked to sign an agreement. All reports should be filed with the County Police and then forwarded to the District Attorney’s Hate Crime Unit, the Standing Committee on Hate Crimes, and the County’s Agency for Immigrant Integration.
-Recommendation #20: Educate the Public on Hate Crimes
To mitigate the apparent perception of police indifference to hate crime, there should be an educational unit in each precinct that, in partnership with teachers and social workers, presents to the public the crucial role that hate plays in exacerbating ethnic tensions and mistrust and the necessity of reporting hate crimes and hate incidents to strengthen community safety. Just as the DARE program promoted the message about the effects of drugs on neighborhoods and the lives of its people, so too must hate crimes and hate incidents be brought openly and seriously into the schools and other institutions by police in each precinct. The Police Commissioner and Chiefs should visit every high school each semester to meet with administration and teachers as well as to join with them in speaking in a program assembly. Law enforcement should also hold forums to inform immigrants of their rights and responsibilities under the law. The Commanding Officer in each precinct must have responsibility for planning and evaluating hate crime education.
-Recommendation #21: Document Educational Efforts
Law enforcement officials can demonstrate their concern by developing a record of measurable ways that they are prioritizing education on hate crimes. There should be quarterly reports given to the County Police headquarters by each precinct Commanding Officer on specific educational activities undertaken. In addition, the County Police Commissioner should issue an annual report, detailing meetings with community leaders as well as affiliated groups such as ethnic associations, LGBT groups, NAACP, and immigrant rights advocacy organizations. The meetings should assist the Commissioner in keeping abreast of what is happening in the County and ways that law enforcement officials can strengthen community cohesion.
-Recommendation #22: Reward Officers Who Fight Hate Effectively
Promotion in the ranks should take into significant account the efficacious efforts of officers to reduce hate crime by their work in the community. Officers should be made aware of the latest findings from researchers at universities, police institutes and academies, the International Association of Chiefs of Police yearly conferences, and the U.S. Department of Justice. As seen in Brockton Massachusetts, police officers are more likely to recognize the seriousness of hate crimes when these crimes are taken seriously by the Police Commissioner, police chiefs, and precinct captains.
-Recommendation #23: Establish Valid Measures of Hate Crimes
A recent study by Sacred Heart University/WSHU Public Radio Poll found, 7% of respondents residing in Suffolk County were victims of hate crimes (Zachary R. Dowdy. 01/27/09. “Hate Crimes Worry Long Islanders” Newsday). The findings suggest that the underreporting of hate crimes and hate incidents severely limit the ability of the Suffolk County Police to reduce hate crime, to arrest perpetrators, and to reduce victims’ trauma. The Suffolk Police should partner with an institution of higher learning to establish rigorous methods for accurately assessing levels, types, locations, targets, and perpetrators of hate crimes and hate incidents. An ongoing research affiliation between police and an academic institution could receive funding support (e.g., see http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/solicitations.htm).

-Recommendation #24: Utilize Immigrant Advocacy Organizations for Monitoring and Reporting Hate Crimes
The underreporting of hate crimes against immigrants reflects a fear and distrust of law enforcement agencies. Victims of hate crimes are more likely to come forward if they can first approach advocacy organizations with proven records of defending their rights. Accordingly, we recommend that the County publicize a list of LIIA affiliates that hate crimes victims may contact for assistance in pursuing justice (see Appendix B). Once contacted, LIIA affiliates will then assist victims in reporting crimes to the proper authorities. As part of this process, the County Sheriff, Police Commissioner, and District Attorney’s Office should appoint permanent liaisons who will regularly communicate with LIIA affiliates about possible hate crimes and hate incidents that have been reported to us.

The Long Island Immigrant Alliances Preliminary Recommendations To The Suffolk Hate Crimes Task Force:
Introduction
The Role Of Elected Officials In Fostering And Fighting Hate Crimes