The LAPD and the lesbian and gay community, p. 146 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 146 of 284 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
Loading content ...
•
reported one gay-related murder in 1989, none was recorded in
either city in 1990. See appendix A for a complete breakdown of
incidents in each city by year and category of victimization.
Method for Classifying Incidents
The following criteria, particularly when combined, were used by
local victim service agencies in identifying whether an incident
was motivated by anti-gay bias: (1) The perpetrators used
language or symbols that indicated anti-gay or AIDS-related bias
(use of the terms "dyke" or "fag" or painting of a swastika); (2)
objects or items were used that indicate bias (e.g., a burning
cross in front of a victim's residence); (3) the incident
occurred in a setting where there is a history of anti-gay
incidents; (4) the victim was engaged in activities promoting
lesbian and gay equality or a response to AIDS; (5) the incident
coincided with a gay holiday (such as gay and lesbian pride day);
(6) there was evidence of hate group activity; (7) there was
evidence that the perpetrator was previously involved in anti-gay
crimes or is a member of a hate group; (8) the victim and/or the
larger community perceived that the incident was motivated by
anti-gay bias; (9) there was an absence of other apparent
motives; and (10) there was evidence of intense rage (e.g.,
severe beating or mutilation). Unlike police, some groups
classified robberies as anti-gay if they occurred in gay-
identified areas and appeared to be motivated by the perception
that the victim was an "easy mark," unable to fight back or
unwilling to risk exposure by reporting to the police.
Police Data
In 1990, 265 anti-gay crimes were documented by police in Boston,
Chicago, Los Angeles, Minneapolis/St. Paul, New York and San
Francisco. New York City recorded the highest number of anti-gay
crimes (102), followed by San Francisco (97), Boston
(39). Chicago (10), Minneapolis/St. Paul (9), and Los Angeles
(8).«
'Although anti-gay crimes documented by local law
enforcement showed a substantial increase in 1990, police figures
are considerably lower than those gathered by gay and lesbian
victim service agencies. Local agencies give several reasons for
this discrepancy, including a reluctance on the part of victims
to report because they feared exposure and revictimization by
police and others, or because it was not considered serious
enough to bring to the attention of law enforcement. In some
cases, episodes of harassment reported by victims did not fit the
legal definition of a crime or occurred outside city limits and
therefore were not counted by police. Local groups also
maintain that police frequently failed to properly identify,
classify and investigate reported anti-gay crimes because of
8
Object Description
| Title | The LAPD and the lesbian and gay community, 1991-05-01 |
| Description | Public session, 1991 May 1: Material from organizations, 2.1: Report - "The LAPD and the lesbian and gay community - written testimony submitted to the special Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department" by Jon W. Davidson, senior staff counsel and attorney for lesbian and gay rights ACLU foundation of Southern California, 1991 May 1. PART OF A SERIES: Materials in the series fall into one of several categories related to the Independent Commission's work product: (1) Commission meeting materials, which include meeting agendas, work plans, memoranda, and articles about police misconduct that were circulated and reviewed during the Commission's internal meetings; (2) public correspondence, which includes citizen complaints against the LAPD in the form of written testimony, articles, and an audio cassette tape, as well as letters drafted by citizens in support of the LAPD; (3) summaries of interviews held with LAPD officers regarding Departmental procedures and relations; (4) public meeting materials, which include transcripts, supplementary documents, and witness statements that were reviewed at the Commission's public meetings; (5) press releases related to the formation and work product of the Commission; and (6) miscellaneous materials reviewed by the Commission during its study, including LAPD personnel and training manuals, a memorandum of understanding, and messages from the LAPD's Mobile Digital Terminal (MDT) system. |
| Coverage date | 1991-05-01 |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California |
| Date created | 1991-05-01 |
| Type | texts |
| Format | 284 p. |
| Format (aat) | reports |
| Format (imt) | application/pdf |
| Language | English |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Part of collection | Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department, 1991 |
| Series | Independent Commission File List |
| File | Public Sessions |
| Box and folder | box 25, folder 1-2 |
| Provenance | The collection was given to the University of Southern California on July 31, 1991. |
| Rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ All requests for permission to publish or quote from manuscripts must be submitted in writing to the Manuscripts Librarian. Permission for publication is given on behalf of Special Collections as the owner of the physical items and is not intended to include or imply permission of the copyright holder, which must also be obtained. |
| Physical access | Contact: Special Collections, Doheny Memorial Library, Libraries, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0189; specol@dots.usc.edu |
| Repository name | USC Libraries Special Collections |
| Repository address | Doheny Memorial Library, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0189 |
| Repository email | specol@dots.usc.edu |
| Filename | indep-box25-01_02 |
Description
| Title | The LAPD and the lesbian and gay community, p. 146 |
| Format (imt) | image/tiff |
| Physical access | Contact: Special Collections, Doheny Memorial Library, Libraries, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0189; specol@dots.usc.edu |
| Full text | • reported one gay-related murder in 1989, none was recorded in either city in 1990. See appendix A for a complete breakdown of incidents in each city by year and category of victimization. Method for Classifying Incidents The following criteria, particularly when combined, were used by local victim service agencies in identifying whether an incident was motivated by anti-gay bias: (1) The perpetrators used language or symbols that indicated anti-gay or AIDS-related bias (use of the terms "dyke" or "fag" or painting of a swastika); (2) objects or items were used that indicate bias (e.g., a burning cross in front of a victim's residence); (3) the incident occurred in a setting where there is a history of anti-gay incidents; (4) the victim was engaged in activities promoting lesbian and gay equality or a response to AIDS; (5) the incident coincided with a gay holiday (such as gay and lesbian pride day); (6) there was evidence of hate group activity; (7) there was evidence that the perpetrator was previously involved in anti-gay crimes or is a member of a hate group; (8) the victim and/or the larger community perceived that the incident was motivated by anti-gay bias; (9) there was an absence of other apparent motives; and (10) there was evidence of intense rage (e.g., severe beating or mutilation). Unlike police, some groups classified robberies as anti-gay if they occurred in gay- identified areas and appeared to be motivated by the perception that the victim was an "easy mark," unable to fight back or unwilling to risk exposure by reporting to the police. Police Data In 1990, 265 anti-gay crimes were documented by police in Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Minneapolis/St. Paul, New York and San Francisco. New York City recorded the highest number of anti-gay crimes (102), followed by San Francisco (97), Boston (39). Chicago (10), Minneapolis/St. Paul (9), and Los Angeles (8).« 'Although anti-gay crimes documented by local law enforcement showed a substantial increase in 1990, police figures are considerably lower than those gathered by gay and lesbian victim service agencies. Local agencies give several reasons for this discrepancy, including a reluctance on the part of victims to report because they feared exposure and revictimization by police and others, or because it was not considered serious enough to bring to the attention of law enforcement. In some cases, episodes of harassment reported by victims did not fit the legal definition of a crime or occurred outside city limits and therefore were not counted by police. Local groups also maintain that police frequently failed to properly identify, classify and investigate reported anti-gay crimes because of 8 |
| Filename | indep-box25-01_02~146.tif |
| Archival file | Volume82/indep-box25-01_02~146.tif |
