Revisiting Louisiana Drug Interdiction: Drug Profiling in the Louisiana Justice System

Abstract

Drug profiling by the Louisiana State Police Criminal Patrol Unit (LSP-CPU) and the deputies of the St Martin Parish Sheriff's Office (SMSO) has been through in-depth analyses by Ruiz (2000) and colleagues (Bowling, Ruiz, & Staub, 2008; Ruiz & Woessner, 2006). Ruiz's essential findings support allegations of demographic profiling in traffic arrests on Louisiana's Interstate-10. Also, Ruiz suggested that the most plausible explanation was attributed to the war on drugs specified by Louisiana's asset forfeiture procedure. Assuming that a similar pattern would exist in the St. Martin Parish justice system, the present study examines the court dispositions that were followed by drug interdiction in Bowling et al. (2008), Ruiz (2000) and Ruiz and Woessner (2006). This study also endeavours to discover more evidence regarding the relationship between the asset forfeiture policy and drug interdiction by the Louisiana justice system. The drug arrest records from 1988 to 1994 that were prepared by the SMSO and the LSP-CPU officers and collected by Ruiz were analysed, focusing on court dispositions.

Investigating Discriminative Bail Setting: Multivariate Analysis on Louisiana Drug Interdiction

“…NOTE 1. For additional research on racial profiling in St. Martin Parish, see Bowling, Ruiz, & Reynolds, 2008;Ruiz & Lee, 2009;Ruiz & Woessner, 2006;Ruiz, 2000. …”

“…In regard to racial inequalities in the criminal justice system, researchers have concentrated primarily on sentencing (Albonetti, 2002;Hagan, 1974;Johnson, 2003;Kautt & Spohn, 2002;Kleck, 1981;Peterson & Hagan, 1984;Ruiz & Lee, 2009;Spohn, 2000;Spohn & DeLone, 2000;Spohn & Holleran, 2000;Tonry, 1995;Zatz, 1987). However, a review of the literature demonstrated that few studies have focused on judicial decision making in regard to race and bail (Albonetti, 1989;Frazier, Bock, & Henretta, 1980;Goldkamp & Gottfredson, 1979;Mann, 1993;Nagel, 1983;National Minority Advisory Council on Criminal Justice, 1982;Turner, Secret, & Johnson, 2003).…”

“…More recently, Ruiz and Lee (2009) analyzed these data and found that "White drug arrestees residing outside Louisiana were most likely to receive non-incarceration sentences. Simultaneously, Hispanic drug arrestees residing outside Louisiana were most likely to be sentenced to incarceration" (p. 246).…”

“…Oriental and Middle Eastern defendants accounted for only 5 and 4 cases, respectively, while Blacks accounted for 93 cases. Unlike a previous study with the same database that used only Hispanics (Ruiz & Lee, 2009), the current study classified both Hispanics and non-Hispanic minorities as a single category of non-White. This procedure was done because the cases of non-Hispanic minorities accounted for more than 50% of the total bail-set cases for each minority group.…”

Cross-Nation Comparison of the Intolerance to Police Misconduct: Findings from a Thai Police Cadet Survey

“…(2005) defines police misconduct as a concept covering 'a heterogeneous set of behaviors, from sleeping on duty, being on duty, being late for work, and using excessive force, to denying the 5th Amendment right to silence, testilying, forging documents, and accepting bribes' (p. 547). Researchers have empirically examined a wide range of issues including demographic profiling (Ruiz & Lee, 2009), corruption (Punch, 2009) and extra-legal factors in police arrests (Lee, Zhang, & Hoover, 2013), among others, to scrutinise the prevalence of misconduct. These studies share the common notion that the sheer amount of contact between citizens and the police, as well as their authority to enforce the law, renders the police a representative public figure.…”