tv Commission on Civil Rights Briefing on Hate Crimes - Panel 1 CSPAN May 11, 2018 12:17pm-1:01pm EDT
clinton and rob johnson talk about the white house years of first lady betty ford. sunday 2:00 p.m., they discuss the supreme court case, "hustler" magazine v. falwell. and impact on editorial cartoonists 30 years later. this weekend on the c-span networks. >> this morning the u.s. commission on civil rights heard from law enforcement officials on their experiences with hate crimes in their communities. and how local police and prosecutors are dealing with it. we're going to show you that discussion while the commission is on its lunch break. our live coverage resumes at about 1:00 eastern with a conversation on policy solutions >> christa painter, maureen rudolph. sarah sue will, wanda smith, brian walsh, michelle raimi, and shiman, for preparing and making logistical details for making
today work. i thank vice-chair good son for today's briefing and. i caution all speakers including our commissioners to refrain from speaking over each other, for ease of transcription and allow for sign language translation to my right. for any individual who might need to view the sign language translation, there are seats available in clear view. i ask every one present to silence your phones and not take flash photos to minimize health risk to persons present. after our four panels and afternoon break, we will reconvene at 5:00 p.m. for a public comment period. if you're interested in participating in the public comment period, during which each person will have up to three minutes to speak we would be honored to hear from you. in total the oral public comment period will last no longer than hour 1/2, with 30 spots allotted on first-come-first-serve basis. if you did not sign up for the first spots on line, sign up at registration desk at 3:30 p.m.
the spots will be available until filled. for any member about public like to submit materials for our review, the public record remains open until monday, june 11th, 2018. materials can be submitted by mail, u.s. civil rights office, 1331 pennsylvania avenue, northwest, sweet 1150, washington, d.c., 2000425. hate crimes at usccr .gov. during the briefing each panelists will have seven minutes to speak. after each panel presentation the commissioners will have opportunity to ask questions in al lloyded period of time. i will recognize commissioners willing to speak. i will strictly enforce the seven minutes for each statement, to avoid my cutting you off, i encourage you to stay within that time. if we did not receive your testimony today, you may assume we have read your statements so you do not need to review your
opening remarks. we have tight schedule for the day with two dozen experts speaking before us. i ask my fellow commissioners to be cognizant of number of panelists and each commissioner asking questions. be brief to ask questions and we can move quickly through the schedule and i will move things along if necessary. today's top picks are personal ones and several members will speak from personal experiences. ask the audience to be respectful to all the panelists and keep that in mind during the question and answer period. notice a system of warning lights we have set up. when the light turns from green to yellow, that means two minutes remain. when the light turns red you should conclude your statement so you risk my not cutting you off mid-sentence. the commissioners and i will do our part and keep our questions concise. we turn to our first panel of law enforcement officials, order they speak, sergeant detective, carmen curry of boston police department.
assistant chief marc garth green of seattle police department, retired police terrence cunningham, deputy executive director international association of chiefs of police. unfortunately chief will johnson of the arlington texas, police department, head of civil rights subcommittee for iacp could not be with us. grateful for mr. cunningham to step in at last minute. robert moose sy, department of just is, robbie sovae. thankthank you for sharing your experience with us. kevin ham arizona police department was scheduled to speak unfortunately was unable to be with us today. his written statement will be added to the record for the commission's consideration. sergeant curry, please begin. you want to turn your microphone on, thank you. >> good morning. i'd like to take this
opportunity to thank the commissioners for having this event and having me here today to talk about this both important issue of hate crimes. i have been working in the civil rights unit of the boston police department for 20 plus years and have had the opportunity to look at these and deal with victims personally. i think we're seeing a increase of hate crimes that are happening on a national level when i first went into the unit i was of the assumption that hate crimes would be eradicated by now. which see right now that is not happening. i want to share what i believe are some best practices. what i think is key for law enforcement agencies is to establish a hate crimes unit. the boston police established a hate crimes unit over 40 years
ago and they have had the opportunity to maintain this unit. so that is all we do there. so we look at hate crimes. we are involved with victims. and i think it's crucial that police departments, have someone who is going to look specifically at hate crimes. they're not a lot of agencies that have a unit that does that, that is dedicated specifically to deal with hate crimes. i think having a unit send as clear message to the community, to would be haters or would-be perpetrators that the issue of hate crimes is important. it is important, send as message to those internally with the police departments we see the
climate that we're lifing in today, there is increase and boldness of verbiage used by our leaders, by the media, by politicians. we see social media, facebook, snapchat, twitter, play a role in increase we're seeing today. establishing a civil rights unit with diverse set of officers focused on investigating hate crimes would play a key role in getting victims to report hate crimes. when we establish that unit we establish trust with the community. it is important to establish that trust. it is important to develop relationships in the community. it is important to have community outreach. when you have a unit or individual specifically
designated for hate crimes, they become experts. that is all they do and that is what is really important here. we need community advocacy agencies is and clergy and local and state agencies to come together. in boston, we do a lot of community outreach. we meet with a lot of people to sit at the table to talk about this issue. one of the things in community outreach, things like the holidays coming around to meet with the group. we see ramadan is coming may 15th. we go out, introduce ourselves, we're aware what is happening with the community. we're aware of the season we're in now, let them know we're aware, look around in their surroundings. and that is one of the things that i believe establishes a trust relationship, when they know that the police are going to take these crimes seriously.
victims don't come forward for many reasons. we talked about data collection. responding, documenting prosecuting hate crimes is priority. these types of crimes will not be tolerated. it must trickle down from the top. we must encourage victims to report hate crimes. there are many factors why victims don't report hate crimes. it could be contingent upon many factors. their immigration status. we tell advocates and victims that their status has no bearing on their case, nor will we look into their status. in most instances victims with illegal status will not move forward. victims will not speak english and are afraid to come forward. victims in the lgbt community in many instances they're not out. so they are going to come
forward to report these crimes. victims of color may have issues with mistrust of the police department or they may have language barriers. the community disorder unit where we work, the civil rights unit, we're a victim oriented unit. we hand hold victims, take them through the whole process. doesn't matter one crime or vandalism. if the person is selected because of who they are, we'll hold their hand and take them through the whole process. we have people who won't come forward because they lead very busy lives, and they don't want to go through the process because it is too disruptive. one of the challenges that we're seeing is college and campus incidents don't get reported to the local police department. they tend to keep those on the inside, which is a challenge for the local police departments, and it is a challenge for
reporting. i believe that, for law enforcement training is the key, because if a police officer does not know how to identify a hate crime, then it is not going to be reported. so that is where we see that there is a degrees in reporting. particularly in massachusetts, when we look at the numbers of, how many massachusetts law enforcement agencies, do not participate and reporting hate crimes i believe that they don't report them because they don't know how to identify what a hate crime is. so train something key. training is key and training with victims to understand what a hate crime is, what it isn't and what the resources are available to them. if an officer isn't documenting the incident correctly, it's not going to court. no one will be arrested. there will not be prosecution to that incident. >> thank you very much,
sergeant. we'll hear from assistant chief marc green. >> thank you very much, madam chairwoman. thank you commissioners for having me here today. i represent the seattle police department at this time. next line, police. for our bias crime unit it was staffed in 2015 as a dedicated detective, centered out of our homicide and assault units. they're dedicated for bias crimes and the investigation, data gathering and analysis of as well as our public outreach. we moved that up to two detectives this year based on the number of increases we are seeing. next slide, please. so our legal authority comes from our revised code of washington 986.080. next line. seattle munition call code, 12806.11. the seattle municipal code adds different classes to it. we add homelessness, marital status, political ideology, age or parental status at the
misdemeanor level as well. both of our statutes are severable. if we can not prove the bias elements we can go forward with the underlying crime as well. that allows us to work on both fronts at the same time. the next line please. so at the seattle police department we gather our data in coordination following the uniform crime reporting standards set by the fbi and report on nye members. nibrs. national incidents themselves or hate crimes or bias crimes. that is legal definition of the crime. next one are crimes with bias elements. generally when a crime occurs, during the commission of that crime some type of der interrogatory language is used -- derogatory. not an element of the crime, this is something we truly look at. this is the our greatest degree of our crimes in the city of seattle are bias elements, not
actually malicious harrassment crimes. we have non-criminal bias incidents, used primarily when folks are using derogatory language in criminal nature. next slide, please. one of the important things with it obviously for us is the outreach to the community. we have seen an increase in reporting oaf the last period of several years we've been keeping our data, to include a larger degree after we've had a, on political side, the national front of the "me too" movement and other movements along those lines. we're emboldened in the city of seattle and pleased that we have seen in increase reporting by witnesses, people walking down the street, observe something happening in front of them, across the street from them, feel it is not right and will call into us. so that is a great thing for us. it means the outreach is working. our folks and our city are not tolerating that type of
behavior. one of the ideas came in seattle we worked very hard on is what we call the safe place program. it started out with the lgbtq community in the specific region of our community. it is training through businesses that train their staff when people were victims of malicious harrassment or hate crimes, go into those businesses speak with the employees, employees call 911 and offer them a safe place to come and take the report. over time we spread it citywide to over 6,000 businesses in seattle. we had a great degree of success with this program and really enjoy that. move forward, please. our bias crime coordinator does community outreach. he makes frequent meeting meetings especially with the underreported communities we've identified in the city of seattle. many, variety of different communities that do not speak english and so we try to partner with the seattle office of civil
rights, having interpreters and move out to those communities as well, to really meet with them. we do a lot with cultural centers and institutions as well, to make sure the voice is getting out as well as issuing pamphlets with all types of languages to help people. next line, please. skip to the next one. one of the things we're excited about is the publication dashboards that gather our data. they are updated daily for internal phasing but however they're updated monthly for external phasing. anybody in the city of seattle or elsewhere in the nation can log on to go to our crime dashboard, take a look what is going on within their city, their geographic area, neighborhood and broken down through that. captures types of incidents, how they're broken down and the actual associated offense type of those incidents. so they can go through that. links to our outreach there and
detective sergeant said, that is probably one of the biggest things that law enforcement can do, is try to sever that mistrust built over years. a lot of it is, comes from different groups that have moved to this country where they have suffered abuse by law enforcement in their own countries. failures on those legal systems and those memories hold dear to them. they come over with that interpretation as well. and so meeting with them in their place of location and their place of safety to talk about how we do things differently here. with that, one of the things that we do is when a severe, malicious harrassment crime takes place we have a team that moves out into the community. it is composed of our bias crimes detectives, some community members and then also our u.s. state attorney, one of his deputies goes out as well. we meet with the victim. in part with the victim, but larger part is for the community. we mobilize with the community
to let them know this is not tolerated. find out what they need to restore themselves to a sense of security. for follow-up how to prevent these in the future. we use that program quite often when we need to as well. that is the biggest thing to -- with immigration status being an issue right now, we work under the premise that we do not ask. we're not concerned with immigration status at the time of reporting, or through the follow-up to insure that justice is served for those folks. as far as continued outreach, continued legislation, continued law enforcement activities as well. obviously the very first step in any types of these things is for the enforcement portion, for police to get in there, what we see is correlation of, higher crime areas we have higher bias related incidents. on average 40% of our in the city of seattle are conducted by
people sufficient iring from mental crisis or under influence of alcohol or narcotics. those are two different areas we need to address as well. >> thank you very much. we'll hear from chief cunningham >> good morning madam chairman and vice chairman timmons-goodson, and distinguished commissioners. i'm terrence cunningham. former chief of the wellesley, massachusetts police department. i served at president of iacp from 2015 to 2016. iacp is the world's largest association of law enforcement leaders and 30,000 members in over 150 countrieses. hate crimes and hate incidents are heinous acts that demand response and resolution whenever responsible of the what makes hate crimes malicious they sped far beyond the victims. they spread fear and toxicity throughout our communities.
the iacp has been discussing challenges and impact of hate crimes for close to two decade when we held the first summit on issue and developed recommendations for officer guide an response for investigation of hate crimes. since that time we develop ad model policy, concepts issue paper in conjunction with the anti-defamation league in 2016 and on investigation of hate crimes and aid to law enforcement agencies. additionally the iacp partnered recently with the lawyers committee for civil rights under law to create a advise very committee that encompasses diverse representation from law enforcement, civil rights organizations and academia. we held a series of meetings to hear perspectives from hate crime survivors, academic experts, national and grassroots advocacy leaders and law enforcement officials on barriers and best practices to combat hate. end product will be a summary report out lining critical issues detailing discussions from the advisory group, will be released between this summer and
early fall of 2018. it is very comprehensive document. that we will clearly make available to this committee. today i would like to focus on some of the challenges law enforcement faces when it comes to hate crimes. underreporting of hate crime statistics as you heard from the last two presenters. over the years one of the greatest barriers confronting overcoming hate violence has been the lack of statistical data on the occurrence and nature of these crimes. participation in the fbi's national reporting system which like the rest of the ucr, uniform crime reporting program, is voluntary. while participation has increased over the year, participation levels are seriously lacking. we know that figures, we know that the figures as reported to fbi strongly suggest a serious undercounting of hate crimes and that there is a need for more training and education on the importance and utility of hate crime reporting and data collection as tool for law enforcement preventing these crimes and safeguarding the
public. while more data needs to be reported by law enforcementment age is we need communities to report hate crime incidents. the most recent publication from the bureau of justice statistics, show 54% of violent hate crime victimizations were not reported to police during the period of 2011 and to 2015. as law enforcement we need to make sure our communities understand we want these incidents to be reported and no hate crime or any other crime is insignificant. we never want our communities to feel they shouldn't bother us. it is our job and clearly why we chose this career. we want to protect and serve. so directly to the challenges of hate crimes. investigating them, the decision of a law enforcement official, whether to classify a crime as hate crime and separate decision of a local prosecutor whether or not to bring hate crime charges can be very complicated. it is extremely difficult to determine the motives of one's heart and their intentions. law enforcement executives need to insure investigators are looking at each individual case
on it the own merits and take a proactive approach on identifying potential crimes with hate nexus. in today's world the internet provides extremists with an unprecedented ability to spread hate and recruit followers. individual races an organizations, and organized hate groups now have the power to reach global audiences of millions to communicate among like-minded individuals easily, inexpensively anonymously. the ease of send ising internet hate messages and threats across state lines can make perpetrators and victims difficult to identify and locate, and creates criminal jurisdictional issues and poses special challenges to investigators. although hate speech is offensive and hurtful, the first amendment usually protects such expressions. however when speech contains direct and credible threats against an identifiable individual, organization or institution it becomes criminal conduct. regardless of the motive of delivery, hate speech containing criminal threats is not
acceptable and it is not protected by the first amendment in order for law enforcement to be truly effective officers and agencies must have the active assistance and support from every facet of our communities, establishing and maintaining crucial relationships in order to build mutual understanding and level of trust with diverse communities require time and is an ongoing effort. to maintain and establish strong community police relations we must work towards prevention of hate crimes in our communities. in order to effectively prevent and respond to hate crimes i have a few action item recommendations i believe that the federal government, law enforcement, our communities and elected officials could take. number one, the national criminal justice commission. there is a need to establish a national criminal justice commission. this would not be just another study the establishment of such committee would set for a strategic blueprint pour criminal justice to guide
efforts to protect our communities for years to come. the last commission was created in 1965 and produced landmark changes for the criminal justice system. training. law enforcement officers need training to identify, investigate and report hate crimes. train something also needed to help understand victims language to understand what questions to ask. enhance community and police relations. positive relations between the law enforcement and community will encourage to report hate crimes and enhance reporting. provide additional incentives for states and localities to report crime data, particularly hate crimes to the fbi. specialized units, funding to create specialized hate crime units and help agencies team up to develop a multiagency task force. speak out against hate crimes. the president, members of congress, state and local elected officials all need to condemn acts of bigotry every chance they can. on behalf of the iacp i conclude
by thanking you again for the opportunity to appear before you today, and happy to answer any questions that you have. >> thank you very much, chief cunningham. we're hear from mr. moosy. >> good morning. pleasure being here. i'm a 24 year member of doj civil rights decision and delighted to be here with fellow law enforcement members an journalist. i spent the majority of my time in the civil rights division prosecuting a variety of crimes, including law enforcement misconduct, human trafficking and hate crimes. i can say with confidence that combating hate crimes is among the highest priorities for the civil rights division and this justice defendant. as you know state crimes can be prosecuted in stated or federal courts despending on each jurisdiction's laws. working with the partners and fbi prosecute hate crimes in federal courts across the
nation. we're committed to using federal prosecutions to make clear any act of bias-motivated violence is unacceptable. that the department will use our investigative and prosecutorial authority to bring perpetrators to justice. the fbi is currently investigating over 200 hate crimes nationwide. since january 2017 the department has brought hate crime charges against more than two dozen defendants and obtained 22 convictses. some examples are on april 30th, two texas defendants were sentenced to 15 and 20 years using social media dating platforms for gay men to arrange to meet victims in their homes where they brutally assaulted them. in april 18th after four-week trial, the federal jury convicted three men in kansas conspiracy to use he weapon of mass destruction and committing a hate crime. they wanted to blow up a building where somali muslim immigrants worshiped and in mosque there.
participating in a 2014 fire bombing intended to drive african-american residents inside the ramona gardens housing development out of that development. jury found a man convicted of pa hate crime using a stun device in his apartment in a complex. the defendant shout the racial slurs at victim's 7-year-old son as he road a scooter in the common area of the apartment. when his father tried to stand up for his son the defendant used the stun gun to assault him. in february 2018 a virginia man indicted for a hate crime threatening employees of the american arab institute of the in february of 2018 indicted a dual israeli citizen for hate crimes and other offenses arising from alleged threats he made to jewish communities centers across the united states, specifically in florida,
israeli embassy and anti-defamation league as well as other jewish organizations across the united states. in november 2017 the department cross designated one of our system rights prosecutors to assist in state murder trial of a iowa man who was ultimately convicted of murdering can dari johnson a transgender teenager. he faces life imprisonment. the department of justice take as broader approach to prosecuting hate crimes. attorney general sessions made hate crimes one of the pillars of his tack force under public safety. civil rights division convened a hate crimes prevention and working group, composed of fbi, u.s. attorney's office, office of community oriented policing, office of justice programs and community relations service known as crs we've been working together to figure out how the department of justice can bring our authorities and abilities and resources together to really first and foremost, assist federal and state investigators
to identify and report these crimes and how to respond to communities that have been harmed by these crimes. our local police and sheriffs officers are important partners for identifying and investigating hate crimes. their the women and men who respond to violence on the streets. they are the officials who will identify a hate crime when it happens and collect the on scene evidence and leads. these local law enforcement agencies must have the support they need to identify, investigate and report hate crimes. likewise, because there are many more state and local prosecutors than federal prosecutors, our local district attorneys must also have state laws and resources they need to prosecute state crimes in the local and state courts. important are victims themselves and community-based organizations that support victims this is especially true when it comes to reporting hate crimes to law enforcement. we're working across the department to figure out how can both law enforcement and victims better report hate crimes.
accurate data helps localities better target crime. we have to understand why 88% of police departments that participate in the uc-r, the uniform crime reporting reported they had zero hate crimes in 2016. why four law enforcement agencies in jurisdictions with more than 250,000 residents didn't even report hate crimes data to the fbi. we have to understand and address according to crime victim surveys more than half of hate crime victims do not report hate crimes when they happen. about a quarter of those who don't report say that they didn't believe the police would wan to be bothered or get involved. that the police would be inefficient or ineffective, or the police would cause trouble with victims. you have a panelist later to talk about hate crimes data. we're working hard to improve our training and outreach because we believe this will in turn improve our ability to identify and report hate crimes and investigate and prosecute them. since january 2018 our community relations service hosted five
hate crime forums in pennsylvania, maryland, texas and new york bringing 400 federal local law enforcement community leaders, federal agencies and advocates. we're picking more locales to do trainings in many could years. updated two trainings one engaged in building partnerships with muslim-americans and another one engaging building partnerships with sikh americans. these are aimed at law enforcement and community leaders and establish community relationships with those populations. our fbi has a national training initiative that reaches literally thousands of people every year to train them about hate crimes and civil rights both in law enforcement and in the community. we in the civil rights division will be hosting a training at our national advocacy center this august to bring together fbi agents and prosecutors to increase our ability to identify and prosecute hate crimes. it's a pleasure to be here. look forward to answering any
questions you have. >> thank you very much. mr. soave. >> thank you, i am deeply honored to participate in this briefing, so grateful to the commission for inviting me. what is the government's role in preventing hate crimes? i think it might be slightly more complicated question than it seems. most people agree the government the has compelling interest to preventing crime. most people agree hateful conduct is unwelcome but many actions of society deems hateful are nevertheless protected by the bill of rights. the first amendment does give us explicit right to engage in expression some people would consider hateful. while many of today's college students think hate speech should be illegal, nearly half of them courting to the cato institute supreme court is crystal clear, a thought we hate, they misquote, is perfectly is constitutional and permissible to engage in that. as most recently as 2011 in the famous westboro baptist church case the supreme court said the
snyder versus phelps case, that people shouting for the death of military servicemen and shouting horrific things at gay people, even that kind of speech was protected. obviously there is critical distinction between hate speech and hate crime. we're generally talking about hate crime in the context of being additional penalties against people who commit crimes for reasons especially hateful. i did hear one of my fellow panelists talking about derogatory language during the commission of a crime being an additional crime which i think starts to blur that distinction in ways that could impune our system libertieses or freedom of speech rights. laws recognize crimes vandalism, assault and murder if created for reasons of bigotry and bias although some might contend in philosophical sense if not legal one, that is not in some sense murder, murder, regardless of the killer's motivations we could sort of read the mind of
the killer and divine whether it was impugning some protected category. anecdotally we hear from many media outlets as someone who is in the press, pays close attention to this we hear hate crime rates increase or are always increasing. fbi reported a 5% rise in hate, indeed the fbi did report a 5% rise in hate crimes from 2015 to 2016. still that is small enough increase it could be the result of better reporting, rather than actual spike in hate. the fbi reported an increase in anti-muslim hate but that might be because the fbi, the way i understand it changed slightly how they were tracking that information from one year to the next. according to the u.s. bureau of justice statistics hate crime levels occasionally fluctuated but remained relatively stable between 2002 and 2015 as reporter who focuses specifically on education issues, schools, higher education in particular, i can say that the situation on
college campuses is very complicated. there is some data suggesting that hate crimes on campuses specifically increased high as much as 25% in the last year or two, possibly because of the divisiveness of the 2016 election, that has kind of been the theory that was put out. many are hate inspired acts of vandalism, destruction of property and intimidation. even though it can be very difficult to truly kind of grapple with these incidents and understand they are not always what they appear to be on their face because perpetrators are almost never caught in these cases. buzzfeed news, for instance, reviewed 400 things that were reported on university campuses as hate crime or a bias incident, often time, universities have a separate bias reporting system where students, professors, cannon can -- cannon mustily provide reports. these things would be deemed
perfectly legal, they would be clearly examples of free expression. in 400 cases buzz freed reviewed of generally able to verify 154 did happen but only in 5% of the cases was the perpetrator caught. unfortunately it is true that some of the incidents on college campuses turned out to be accidents or even hoaxes. two crimes reported at michigan, the university of michigan where i'm a graduate in the immediate wake of the election in november of 2016, they were discovered to be hoaxes. one involving a young muslim woman claimed a man threatened to set her on fire. another involving a young woman attacked her with safety pin because she was pro-immigrant demonstrator. police confirmed, the alleged victim admitted that both crimes had been made up. i bring these, i up these incidents not at all to suggest a large percent of hate crimes are hoaxes. that is certainly not true but
on campuses particularly, when we're sew focused on the school question these days, hard to know exactly what is going on. i've seen cases where it appeared a message of hate like, anti-immigrant hate or anti-black hate but actually the person doing it was an immigrant or a person of dollar, what they were saying this hateful message is now become acceptable in our country. they were making sort of a political demonstration. so that changes whether obviously whether it was an act of hate given who was doing it. i would urge policymakers, law enforcement and other authorities to resist media pressure to characterize the current atmosphere in the u.s. of increasing hatefulness. while we can and continue to track and prosecute criminal activity we should keep in mind our cherished first amendment rights. there are vastly fewer protections for free expression in other countries. i worry at times that we could undermine our own protections by drawing the hate crime category
too broadly. scotland recently arrested and fined a comedian on youtube for hate crime. his crime was making a video of his dog giving a nazi salute. he was trying to make his girlfriend mad what he said. he was not nazi or affiliated with any nazi organizations and arrested and fined for doing so. in liverpool, a young woman chelsea russell was reported to hate crime lyric, posting sir licks of a rap song on her page. paying tribute by a man run over by a car. it was his favorite song. the authorities never charged young man's death but arrested woman for post rap lyrics. the judge said there is no place in civil society for words like that. officials in our own country need to remain cognizant of the line between hate speech and hate crime, and prevent fatalism
and whether hate is actually growing. >> i do want to note, i think assistant speech cunningham speak for himself, i didn't hear chief green characterize what he said -- >> that is where we captured the data, in those three things. the crime doesn't fit the hate speech. >> thank you. commissioner narasaki has some questions. >> i have so many questions. i started my career working on hate crimes. violence in particular, was, murder, of vincent chen, who was viciously murdered a few days before he was to get married by a father and son who was angry about the japanese car makers in detroit. they went after him with a baseball bat, killed him, the judge slapped them on the wrist,
gave them time served because they were otherwise fine americans. i would say to commissioner heriot that there is too much double-dipping with the federal government because it is extremely difficult to get federal government to step in. there are a lot of jurisdictional hurdles. obviously the first choice is always local police. but unfortunately in this country we have a history where local police have not always been on the side of protecting minority victims. so with that, i will say, i have a lot of questions. so because we have only short amounts of time, if i cut you off it is not because i'm being rude, because i want to get to my other questions. first of all, this is short question for assistant chief green. so who helped pay for the development of the seattle data website? that sounds like it's a very important tool. >> thank thank you. it was done internally as part of our budget process. we do that.
pay someone from the city as well, external from them to add to it. mostly done internally. >> there is a role for the federal government to try to help other police departments move into that technology space? >> absolutely. i mean with the increase in technology out there, capturing that, putting that out there for folks to see, i think absolutely. where i think the biggest thing there is just as what you alluded to there earlier, ma'am, funding for some of the smaller agencies that may not have the budgetary need to be able to do, to support that. >> great, thank you. one of the reasons i'm so excited about this panel is we picked you with, staff picked you with precision because you are all at the cutting-edge of really trying to lead on prosecuting hate crimes and we want to learn from what you are doing. one of the things that we're concerned about is, there has been a lot of great work on trying to attack the
islamophobia issues in this country. we're wondering what is going on in terms of trying to get at the rising violence and hate violence against transgendered persons and people with disabilities? we have witnesses who are coming later to talk about the lack of knowledge of those communities have and difficult relationships that some of them have with law enforcement. so, any of you have some programs that are working would be great to hear about that. . . a lot it is based on outreach to that community with police officers that her are demograp, that represent that community. we spent a lot of time bring them in discussing what the issues are with them and then