I want to do research on how much false data has factored into the laws that our government has written, trial outcomes, and the overall cultural view of black people and crime. I’m doing this research because I want to learn more about the why behind these decisions in our history. This is important because it will help readers understand how implicit racism leads us to assume a conclusion without any real data to back up this assumption, and how implicit racism is still found in us today.
I’m very interested in page 6 of Hinton’s introduction where she talks about how an increase in the reporting of crimes made it look like crimes were rising when they weren’t, and then this lead to wrong laws being written, all based on false data. I also think the FBI’s role here is very interesting (could this be my more specific topic, the FBI’s role in collecting data for the War on Crime?). I also want to talk about the McMillan case in Just Mercy where he’s literally convicted based on no evidence. I don’t fully understand how all of this factors into the public’s view of mass incarceration and I want to learn more about that. I also know I need to find more sources connected to my specific topic.
Works cited:
Forman, James. “Hein Online.” “Racial Critiques of Mass Incarceration: Beyond the New Jim Crow.,” Apr. 2012, heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/nylr87&id=2154&men_tab=srchresults. Accessed 22 July 2020.
Hinton, Elizabeth. From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime, The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Harvard University Press, 2016.
Stevenson, Bryan. Just Mercy. Penguin Random House LLC. , 2014.
This topic is motivated by genuine curiosity and care, which gives it power. Initially, the focus is overwhelmingly broad: “how much false data has factored into the laws.” But then you narrow it to the statistics about reporting of crimes and to a specific argument by Hinton, which helps narrow. I’m even more relieved when you get to McMillian case in Just Mercy. I wonder if you can narrow your focus from “false data” more generally to deliberately falsified evidence. I just listened to a harrowing episode of This American Life about parole hearings, where a man sentenced to life in prison insisted that he was framed with false evidence: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/844/transcript. This is an example of a case study that reveals just how difficult it is to get the facts about even a single crime. I think your topic would benefit from a focus either on false data in the larger statistical sense OR falsified evidence. I’m not sure whether you can ever determine how much either or both contribute to racial injustice, but you can decide whether to take a macro or micro approach to narrowing your topic.
Hey Kaitlyn!
I know from our chat during Monday’s class that you were struggling to find data on the FBI, and it’s great to see that you’ve been thinking about alternative ways to tackle your topic!
The McMillan conviction based on zero evidence could be a really interesting starting point for your discussion. After reading Dr. Churchill’s comment just now, I think “deliberately falsified evidence” could work really well, and would have a similar feel to it as “investigating the FBI”. If you are really curious on how data shapes the decision-making process and racial justice, however, my guess would be that the statistical approach could provide you with more evidence.
I loved reading your topic proposal, and I think you are asking yourself incredibly genuine and motivated questions.