Black drivers tooling along the scenic roads of Vermont were more likely to be stopped by the state police and more likely to be searched, according to the Associated Press. But black drivers were less likely to have contraband found on them.
The percentage of stops of whites that resulted in searches was 1.1; the percentage involving black drivers was 5.1. Contraband was found 80 percent of the time in searches of whites and 68.5 percent of the time in searches of blacks.
Ninety-four percent of Vermont residents were white, according to the 2010 Census.
AP reports that those findings, courtesy of Boston’s Institute on Race and Justice at Northeastern University, came from data collected between July 2010 and December 2015. The data was collected by state troopers and presented to state police senior command staff, other employees and residents in Vermont earlier this week.
Most media outlets have reported this information from AP verbatim, including this part:
State Police director Col. Matthew Birmingham said the cause of the disparity appeared to be unintentional on the part of troopers making the stops.
"Implicit human bias is a very complicated thing to understand, and changing human behavior is a complicated thing to understand," Birmingham said.
Where did State Police director Col. Matthew Birmingham say it was unintentional? Is that in a reporter’s notes somewhere? Because it did not make it into the story that AP disseminated. Is the AP assuming that State Police director Col. Matthew Birmingham said or meant that?
Proving “intention” is always a convenient “Get Out of White Supremacy Free” card precisely because it is hard–damn near impossible–to prove. Impact however, is more obvious, is tangible, and is harder to simply blow off. Perhaps a new standard is needed?
Scratch that; “perhaps” makes it seem as if there is any doubt.