Blacks: Guilty Until Proven Innocent.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Study: black people are 7 times more likely than white people to be wrongly convicted of murder

I'd have to be a dumb, racist ape to buy your shit.

"African Americans are only 13% of the American population but a majority of innocent defendants wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated,” the researchers write. “They constitute 47% of the 1,900 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations"

In regards to murder, blacks commit over 47% of the murders, so all other things being equal, blacks are actually less likely to be wrongly convicted.

Black crimes are more random (less justified) than white crimes, making it more likely an innocent black will be accused of a crime another black. That's not a problem with whites being racist, that's a problem with dumb apes being so prone to crime.

Another point, without a doubt, blacks get wrongly exonerated more easily just by crying racism, something whites can't do. Enjoy your black privilege. Dumb, racist, violent apes...

In regards to murder, blacks commit over 47% of the murders, so all other things being equal, blacks are actually less likely to be wrongly convicted.

I tried to tell him that before........

And you are just as stupid now as you were before! The UCR shows arrests not convictions.
So you have no idea how many Blacks were convicted of those arrests. That shuts your premise down completely.

The UCR shows arrests not convictions.

Different pages show different things.
The one I provided doesn't say arrested or convicted, it says offender.

You provided expanded homicide data in table 2A which also says the offender murder rate for Blacks was 35.9% not 52.6% as you said. I told you you didn't even understand what was right in front of you, dummy.

You provided expanded homicide data in table 2A which also says the offender murder rate for Blacks was 35.9%

Why would you include offenders of unknown race in your calculation?
Perhaps those offenders were never witnessed, so no race was noted.
Maybe they were all black? Maybe you've never taken a stats course?

 

[JQPublic1]

For years I've suspected the arrestee data presented in the FBI UCR was purposely skewed against Blacks. But until now I had no way of validating my suspicions.

A year old study brings the statistical damage wrongly perpetrated upon the reputation of the black community clearly into focus. But the findings, evidently, didn't serve the needs of a biased media. Most, it seems, choose to ignore positive news coming out of the black areas. It is far more lucrative to find profit in the vested interest of keeping myths of blacks as the collective boogeyman alive.
Let the lesson begin.

Study: black people are 7 times more likely than white people to be wrongly convicted of murder

"That’s the takeaway from a study for the National Registry of Exonerations, published on Tuesday. Researchers Samuel Gross, Maurice Possley, and Klara Stephens analyzed years of exoneration data, looking at how race may influence whether someone is wrongfully convicted — and later cleared — of a crime they didn’t commit."

Did i see someone recently post they are tired of reading about or hearing about black victimhood? Well if it's real, help the blacks to address those responsible for victimizing them instead of throwing skewed statistics in the face of blacks who are not and never have been criminals.

Hang on...here comes justification for my opposition to race based criminal statistics

"African Americans are only 13% of the American population but a majority of innocent defendants wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated,” the researchers write. “They constitute 47% of the

1,900 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations (as of October 2016), and the great majority of more than 1,800 additional innocent defendants who were framed and convicted of crimes in 15 large-scale police scandals and later cleared in ‘group exonerations.’”

Who is missing the message here? Anyone? Given the above revelation, who can, if you are honest, look at race based crime statistics the same way they did prior to reading this exposé?

I'm hopeful the results of this study will help to offset some of the negative anti black stereotyping that

Has been gaining momentum everywhere in the last decade..i

Wait a minute. Are they comparing the blacks convicted to the population as a whole, or to the convicted murder population?


And what percentage of murderers are falsely convicted?

And what is the odds that a random black and white guy will be falsely convicted?


THis number, without context is meaningless.


If it is not just made up bullshit.

Can't you read or are you as myopic as your USMB buddies? The total number of people exonerated over a period of years is the number being analyzed; but, using proportional statistics and comparing each racial groups exonerations against their representation in the general populace is what all the fuss is about. But the total of exonerations is just a benchmark that may be just scratching the surface. The potential for thousands more wrongful convictions looms..

For years I've suspected the arrestee data presented in the FBI UCR was purposely skewed against Blacks. But until now I had no way of validating my suspicions.

A year old study brings the statistical damage wrongly perpetrated upon the reputation of the black community clearly into focus. But the findings, evidently, didn't serve the needs of a biased media. Most, it seems, choose to ignore positive news coming out of the black areas. It is far more lucrative to find profit in the vested interest of keeping myths of blacks as the collective boogeyman alive.
Let the lesson begin.

Study: black people are 7 times more likely than white people to be wrongly convicted of murder

"That’s the takeaway from a study for the National Registry of Exonerations, published on Tuesday. Researchers Samuel Gross, Maurice Possley, and Klara Stephens analyzed years of exoneration data, looking at how race may influence whether someone is wrongfully convicted — and later cleared — of a crime they didn’t commit."

Did i see someone recently post they are tired of reading about or hearing about black victimhood? Well if it's real, help the blacks to address those responsible for victimizing them instead of throwing skewed statistics in the face of blacks who are not and never have been criminals.

Hang on...here comes justification for my opposition to race based criminal statistics

"African Americans are only 13% of the American population but a majority of innocent defendants wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated,” the researchers write. “They constitute 47% of the

1,900 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations (as of October 2016), and the great majority of more than 1,800 additional innocent defendants who were framed and convicted of crimes in 15 large-scale police scandals and later cleared in ‘group exonerations.’”

Who is missing the message here? Anyone? Given the above revelation, who can, if you are honest, look at race based crime statistics the same way they did prior to reading this exposé?

I'm hopeful the results of this study will help to offset some of the negative anti black stereotyping that

Has been gaining momentum everywhere in the last decade..i

Study: black people are 7 times more likely than white people to be wrongly convicted of murder

If you get a chance, show how he came up with the 7 times figure.
I read the link and he doesn't show the math.

Thanks!

And why would I waste my time researching that for you? You wouldn't appreciate it.

If it takes a lot of research to find their methodology or to confirm their calculation, that tells you something.
Don't worry, I don't care if you can't back up their claim.

And I don't care that you can't disprove their claim!

The total number of people exonerated over a period of years is the number being analyzed; but, using proportional statistics and comparing each racial groups exonerations against their representation in the general populace is what all the fuss is about.

The exoneration rate compared to the general populace is irrelevant.
You have to compare it to the conviction rate.

If blacks are 60% of the convicted but 90% of the exonerated, that would hint that blacks are being railroaded.
But 7 times more likely convicted, 7 times more likely exonerated......not so much

Oh puleezze. And you claim to be a mathematician of note. HAHAHAHAH! You are a stooge that simply doesn't comprehend anything very well including math or written exchanges.
Do you see the word RATE in the my narrative that you just responded to? Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth. Then you had the audacity to tell me how irrelevant that is! Son, STOP...you are going to make me crack a rib from laughing so hard at your dumb ass!

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group. Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails. So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population. That shows that a problem exists not only with with Law enforcement but throughout the entire justice system. But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts
That's essentially the same per capita methodology thrown in the faces of Blacks regarding Criminal statistics. So what's your complaint?

That was a rhetorical question because I know what your complaint is and I am familiar with the substance of it. My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible and you can't stand it. But thats another thread. Now lets look at the info presented in the link I posted to glean clues of how the researchers may have reached their conclusions. I disagree with your 7 in 7 out hypothesis because the wrongfully convicted total is fluid. The rate could go up or down but observing that the researchers are inclined to ascribe to the possibility that thousands more wrongfully convicted are waiting for their opportunity to be freed, I concur with their views.

 

[JQPublic1]

I'd have to be a dumb, racist ape to buy your shit.

"African Americans are only 13% of the American population but a majority of innocent defendants wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated,” the researchers write. “They constitute 47% of the 1,900 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations"

In regards to murder, blacks commit over 47% of the murders, so all other things being equal, blacks are actually less likely to be wrongly convicted.

Black crimes are more random (less justified) than white crimes, making it more likely an innocent black will be accused of a crime another black. That's not a problem with whites being racist, that's a problem with dumb apes being so prone to crime.

Another point, without a doubt, blacks get wrongly exonerated more easily just by crying racism, something whites can't do. Enjoy your black privilege. Dumb, racist, violent apes...

In regards to murder, blacks commit over 47% of the murders, so all other things being equal, blacks are actually less likely to be wrongly convicted.

I tried to tell him that before........

And you are just as stupid now as you were before! The UCR shows arrests not convictions.
So you have no idea how many Blacks were convicted of those arrests. That shuts your premise down completely.

The UCR shows arrests not convictions.

Different pages show different things.
The one I provided doesn't say arrested or convicted, it says offender.

You provided expanded homicide data in table 2A which also says the offender murder rate for Blacks was 35.9% not 52.6% as you said. I told you you didn't even understand what was right in front of you, dummy.

You provided expanded homicide data in table 2A which also says the offender murder rate for Blacks was 35.9%

Why would you include offenders of unknown race in your calculation?
Perhaps those offenders were never witnessed, so no race was noted.
Maybe they were all black? Maybe you've never taken a stats course?

The trouble with your posting of table 2A is that you were citing the arrests made in table 21A. You didn't have a clue as to the disparity until I pointed it out to you!

 

[basquebromance]

blacks refuse to take responsibility for the problems in their communities, preferring instead to blame their woes on poverty & racism. obsessed with a sense of VICTIMHOOD, they refrain from the hard, introspective work of social and economic revitalisation in their neighborhoods.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

For years I've suspected the arrestee data presented in the FBI UCR was purposely skewed against Blacks. But until now I had no way of validating my suspicions.

A year old study brings the statistical damage wrongly perpetrated upon the reputation of the black community clearly into focus. But the findings, evidently, didn't serve the needs of a biased media. Most, it seems, choose to ignore positive news coming out of the black areas. It is far more lucrative to find profit in the vested interest of keeping myths of blacks as the collective boogeyman alive.
Let the lesson begin.

Study: black people are 7 times more likely than white people to be wrongly convicted of murder

"That’s the takeaway from a study for the National Registry of Exonerations, published on Tuesday. Researchers Samuel Gross, Maurice Possley, and Klara Stephens analyzed years of exoneration data, looking at how race may influence whether someone is wrongfully convicted — and later cleared — of a crime they didn’t commit."

Did i see someone recently post they are tired of reading about or hearing about black victimhood? Well if it's real, help the blacks to address those responsible for victimizing them instead of throwing skewed statistics in the face of blacks who are not and never have been criminals.

Hang on...here comes justification for my opposition to race based criminal statistics

"African Americans are only 13% of the American population but a majority of innocent defendants wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated,” the researchers write. “They constitute 47% of the

1,900 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations (as of October 2016), and the great majority of more than 1,800 additional innocent defendants who were framed and convicted of crimes in 15 large-scale police scandals and later cleared in ‘group exonerations.’”

Who is missing the message here? Anyone? Given the above revelation, who can, if you are honest, look at race based crime statistics the same way they did prior to reading this exposé?

I'm hopeful the results of this study will help to offset some of the negative anti black stereotyping that

Has been gaining momentum everywhere in the last decade..i

Wait a minute. Are they comparing the blacks convicted to the population as a whole, or to the convicted murder population?


And what percentage of murderers are falsely convicted?

And what is the odds that a random black and white guy will be falsely convicted?


THis number, without context is meaningless.


If it is not just made up bullshit.

Can't you read or are you as myopic as your USMB buddies? The total number of people exonerated over a period of years is the number being analyzed; but, using proportional statistics and comparing each racial groups exonerations against their representation in the general populace is what all the fuss is about. But the total of exonerations is just a benchmark that may be just scratching the surface. The potential for thousands more wrongful convictions looms..

Study: black people are 7 times more likely than white people to be wrongly convicted of murder

If you get a chance, show how he came up with the 7 times figure.
I read the link and he doesn't show the math.

Thanks!

And why would I waste my time researching that for you? You wouldn't appreciate it.

If it takes a lot of research to find their methodology or to confirm their calculation, that tells you something.
Don't worry, I don't care if you can't back up their claim.

And I don't care that you can't disprove their claim!

The total number of people exonerated over a period of years is the number being analyzed; but, using proportional statistics and comparing each racial groups exonerations against their representation in the general populace is what all the fuss is about.

The exoneration rate compared to the general populace is irrelevant.
You have to compare it to the conviction rate.

If blacks are 60% of the convicted but 90% of the exonerated, that would hint that blacks are being railroaded.
But 7 times more likely convicted, 7 times more likely exonerated......not so much

Oh puleezze. And you claim to be a mathematician of note. HAHAHAHAH! You are a stooge that simply doesn't comprehend anything very well including math or written exchanges.
Do you see the word RATE in the my narrative that you just responded to? Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth. Then you had the audacity to tell me how irrelevant that is! Son, STOP...you are going to make me crack a rib from laughing so hard at your dumb ass!

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group. Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails. So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population. That shows that a problem exists not only with with Law enforcement but throughout the entire justice system. But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts
That's essentially the same per capita methodology thrown in the faces of Blacks regarding Criminal statistics. So what's your complaint?

That was a rhetorical question because I know what your complaint is and I am familiar with the substance of it. My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible and you can't stand it. But thats another thread. Now lets look at the info presented in the link I posted to glean clues of how the researchers may have reached their conclusions. I disagree with your 7 in 7 out hypothesis because the wrongfully convicted total is fluid. The rate could go up or down but observing that the researchers are inclined to ascribe to the possibility that thousands more wrongfully convicted are waiting for their opportunity to be freed, I concur with their views.

And you claim to be a mathematician of note.

I did? Where?
I don't need to be a mathematician to poke holes in bad stats when I see them.

Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth.

Exoneration rates is what the author said.
If you meant exoneration number, doesn't change my point in the least.
Total population doesn't come into play, total incarcerated population does.

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group.

Yup. Half the murder exonerations were for blacks. 380/762

Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails.

Irrelevant. You're not exonerated out of the total US population, just the incarcerated population.

So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

So if one group makes up 53.5% of the total convictions but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts.

That's still bullshit math.
Let me try to give a simple example even you should understand.
Let's say there are 3000 convicted murderers.
1000 white, 1000 black and 1000 Inuit.
This year 10 white, 10 Inuit and 20 black murderers are exonerated.

The black exoneration rate is twice the white and Inuit exoneration rate.

It would be silly to say, "Whites have 5 times the population as blacks, therefore we will multiply 5 times the population by twice the exoneration rate and say blacks were 10 times more likely to be wrongfully convicted".

By that tortured "logic" the Inuit are wrongfully convicted 500 times more than whites when actually, the
same percentage of white and Inuit convicts, 1%, were innocent.

My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible

I've never made such a claim. People are not infallible. The statistics they collect are not infallible.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In regards to murder, blacks commit over 47% of the murders, so all other things being equal, blacks are actually less likely to be wrongly convicted.

I tried to tell him that before........

And you are just as stupid now as you were before! The UCR shows arrests not convictions.
So you have no idea how many Blacks were convicted of those arrests. That shuts your premise down completely.

The UCR shows arrests not convictions.

Different pages show different things.
The one I provided doesn't say arrested or convicted, it says offender.

You provided expanded homicide data in table 2A which also says the offender murder rate for Blacks was 35.9% not 52.6% as you said. I told you you didn't even understand what was right in front of you, dummy.

You provided expanded homicide data in table 2A which also says the offender murder rate for Blacks was 35.9%

Why would you include offenders of unknown race in your calculation?
Perhaps those offenders were never witnessed, so no race was noted.
Maybe they were all black? Maybe you've never taken a stats course?

The trouble with your posting of table 2A is that you were citing the arrests made in table 21A. You didn't have a clue as to the disparity until I pointed it out to you!

The trouble with your posting of table 2A is that you were citing the arrests made in table 21A.

I didn't cite table 21A at all.

You didn't have a clue as to the disparity until I pointed it out to you!

Any disparity you see has no relevance to the points I made about Table 2A.

 

[JQPublic1]

blacks refuse to take responsibility for the problems in their communities, preferring instead to blame their woes on poverty & racism. obsessed with a sense of VICTIMHOOD, they refrain from the hard, introspective work of social and economic revitalisation in their neighborhoods.

You are woefully misinformed. You hear a few interviews of whining Blacks in the streets set up and paid by white social strategists and you drink the kool-aid.

 

[JQPublic1]

For years I've suspected the arrestee data presented in the FBI UCR was purposely skewed against Blacks. But until now I had no way of validating my suspicions.

A year old study brings the statistical damage wrongly perpetrated upon the reputation of the black community clearly into focus. But the findings, evidently, didn't serve the needs of a biased media. Most, it seems, choose to ignore positive news coming out of the black areas. It is far more lucrative to find profit in the vested interest of keeping myths of blacks as the collective boogeyman alive.
Let the lesson begin.

Study: black people are 7 times more likely than white people to be wrongly convicted of murder

"That’s the takeaway from a study for the National Registry of Exonerations, published on Tuesday. Researchers Samuel Gross, Maurice Possley, and Klara Stephens analyzed years of exoneration data, looking at how race may influence whether someone is wrongfully convicted — and later cleared — of a crime they didn’t commit."

Did i see someone recently post they are tired of reading about or hearing about black victimhood? Well if it's real, help the blacks to address those responsible for victimizing them instead of throwing skewed statistics in the face of blacks who are not and never have been criminals.

Hang on...here comes justification for my opposition to race based criminal statistics

"African Americans are only 13% of the American population but a majority of innocent defendants wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated,” the researchers write. “They constitute 47% of the

1,900 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations (as of October 2016), and the great majority of more than 1,800 additional innocent defendants who were framed and convicted of crimes in 15 large-scale police scandals and later cleared in ‘group exonerations.’”

Who is missing the message here? Anyone? Given the above revelation, who can, if you are honest, look at race based crime statistics the same way they did prior to reading this exposé?

I'm hopeful the results of this study will help to offset some of the negative anti black stereotyping that

Has been gaining momentum everywhere in the last decade..i

Wait a minute. Are they comparing the blacks convicted to the population as a whole, or to the convicted murder population?


And what percentage of murderers are falsely convicted?

And what is the odds that a random black and white guy will be falsely convicted?


THis number, without context is meaningless.


If it is not just made up bullshit.

Can't you read or are you as myopic as your USMB buddies? The total number of people exonerated over a period of years is the number being analyzed; but, using proportional statistics and comparing each racial groups exonerations against their representation in the general populace is what all the fuss is about. But the total of exonerations is just a benchmark that may be just scratching the surface. The potential for thousands more wrongful convictions looms..

And why would I waste my time researching that for you? You wouldn't appreciate it.

If it takes a lot of research to find their methodology or to confirm their calculation, that tells you something.
Don't worry, I don't care if you can't back up their claim.

And I don't care that you can't disprove their claim!

The total number of people exonerated over a period of years is the number being analyzed; but, using proportional statistics and comparing each racial groups exonerations against their representation in the general populace is what all the fuss is about.

The exoneration rate compared to the general populace is irrelevant.
You have to compare it to the conviction rate.

If blacks are 60% of the convicted but 90% of the exonerated, that would hint that blacks are being railroaded.
But 7 times more likely convicted, 7 times more likely exonerated......not so much

Oh puleezze. And you claim to be a mathematician of note. HAHAHAHAH! You are a stooge that simply doesn't comprehend anything very well including math or written exchanges.
Do you see the word RATE in the my narrative that you just responded to? Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth. Then you had the audacity to tell me how irrelevant that is! Son, STOP...you are going to make me crack a rib from laughing so hard at your dumb ass!

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group. Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails. So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population. That shows that a problem exists not only with with Law enforcement but throughout the entire justice system. But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts
That's essentially the same per capita methodology thrown in the faces of Blacks regarding Criminal statistics. So what's your complaint?

That was a rhetorical question because I know what your complaint is and I am familiar with the substance of it. My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible and you can't stand it. But thats another thread. Now lets look at the info presented in the link I posted to glean clues of how the researchers may have reached their conclusions. I disagree with your 7 in 7 out hypothesis because the wrongfully convicted total is fluid. The rate could go up or down but observing that the researchers are inclined to ascribe to the possibility that thousands more wrongfully convicted are waiting for their opportunity to be freed, I concur with their views.

And you claim to be a mathematician of note.

I did? Where?
I don't need to be a mathematician to poke holes in bad stats when I see them.

Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth.

Exoneration rates is what the author said.
If you meant exoneration number, doesn't change my point in the least.
Total population doesn't come into play, total incarcerated population does.

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group.

Yup. Half the murder exonerations were for blacks. 380/762

Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails.

Irrelevant. You're not exonerated out of the total US population, just the incarcerated population.

So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

So if one group makes up 53.5% of the total convictions but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts.

That's still bullshit math.
Let me try to give a simple example even you should understand.
Let's say there are 3000 convicted murderers.
1000 white, 1000 black and 1000 Inuit.
This year 10 white, 10 Inuit and 20 black murderers are exonerated.

The black exoneration rate is twice the white and Inuit exoneration rate.

It would be silly to say, "Whites have 5 times the population as blacks, therefore we will multiply 5 times the population by twice the exoneration rate and say blacks were 10 times more likely to be wrongfully convicted".

By that tortured "logic" the Inuit are wrongfully convicted 500 times more than whites when actually, the
same percentage of white and Inuit convicts, 1%, were innocent.

My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible

I've never made such a claim. People are not infallible. The statistics they collect are not infallible.

I guess we have to agree to disagree.. You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article, But your clumsy rebuttals are getting sillier every time you post. I can't afford to waste more time with you..good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors to objective people who may venture here.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wait a minute. Are they comparing the blacks convicted to the population as a whole, or to the convicted murder population?


And what percentage of murderers are falsely convicted?

And what is the odds that a random black and white guy will be falsely convicted?


THis number, without context is meaningless.


If it is not just made up bullshit.

Can't you read or are you as myopic as your USMB buddies? The total number of people exonerated over a period of years is the number being analyzed; but, using proportional statistics and comparing each racial groups exonerations against their representation in the general populace is what all the fuss is about. But the total of exonerations is just a benchmark that may be just scratching the surface. The potential for thousands more wrongful convictions looms..

If it takes a lot of research to find their methodology or to confirm their calculation, that tells you something.
Don't worry, I don't care if you can't back up their claim.

And I don't care that you can't disprove their claim!

The total number of people exonerated over a period of years is the number being analyzed; but, using proportional statistics and comparing each racial groups exonerations against their representation in the general populace is what all the fuss is about.

The exoneration rate compared to the general populace is irrelevant.
You have to compare it to the conviction rate.

If blacks are 60% of the convicted but 90% of the exonerated, that would hint that blacks are being railroaded.
But 7 times more likely convicted, 7 times more likely exonerated......not so much

Oh puleezze. And you claim to be a mathematician of note. HAHAHAHAH! You are a stooge that simply doesn't comprehend anything very well including math or written exchanges.
Do you see the word RATE in the my narrative that you just responded to? Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth. Then you had the audacity to tell me how irrelevant that is! Son, STOP...you are going to make me crack a rib from laughing so hard at your dumb ass!

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group. Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails. So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population. That shows that a problem exists not only with with Law enforcement but throughout the entire justice system. But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts
That's essentially the same per capita methodology thrown in the faces of Blacks regarding Criminal statistics. So what's your complaint?

That was a rhetorical question because I know what your complaint is and I am familiar with the substance of it. My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible and you can't stand it. But thats another thread. Now lets look at the info presented in the link I posted to glean clues of how the researchers may have reached their conclusions. I disagree with your 7 in 7 out hypothesis because the wrongfully convicted total is fluid. The rate could go up or down but observing that the researchers are inclined to ascribe to the possibility that thousands more wrongfully convicted are waiting for their opportunity to be freed, I concur with their views.

And you claim to be a mathematician of note.

I did? Where?
I don't need to be a mathematician to poke holes in bad stats when I see them.

Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth.

Exoneration rates is what the author said.
If you meant exoneration number, doesn't change my point in the least.
Total population doesn't come into play, total incarcerated population does.

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group.

Yup. Half the murder exonerations were for blacks. 380/762

Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails.

Irrelevant. You're not exonerated out of the total US population, just the incarcerated population.

So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

So if one group makes up 53.5% of the total convictions but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts.

That's still bullshit math.
Let me try to give a simple example even you should understand.
Let's say there are 3000 convicted murderers.
1000 white, 1000 black and 1000 Inuit.
This year 10 white, 10 Inuit and 20 black murderers are exonerated.

The black exoneration rate is twice the white and Inuit exoneration rate.

It would be silly to say, "Whites have 5 times the population as blacks, therefore we will multiply 5 times the population by twice the exoneration rate and say blacks were 10 times more likely to be wrongfully convicted".

By that tortured "logic" the Inuit are wrongfully convicted 500 times more than whites when actually, the
same percentage of white and Inuit convicts, 1%, were innocent.

My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible

I've never made such a claim. People are not infallible. The statistics they collect are not infallible.

I guess we have to agree to disagree.. You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article, But your clumsy rebuttals are getting sillier every time you post. I can't afford to waste more time with you..good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors to objective people who may venture here.

You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article,

Based on their "logic", that's a good bet.

good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors

A former reporter and 2 lawyers. Neither profession known for their infallibility.

 

[Rambunctious]

Blacks: Guilty Until Proven Innocent.

Is that a proposal?

 

[JQPublic1]

Can't you read or are you as myopic as your USMB buddies? The total number of people exonerated over a period of years is the number being analyzed; but, using proportional statistics and comparing each racial groups exonerations against their representation in the general populace is what all the fuss is about. But the total of exonerations is just a benchmark that may be just scratching the surface. The potential for thousands more wrongful convictions looms..
And I don't care that you can't disprove their claim!

The total number of people exonerated over a period of years is the number being analyzed; but, using proportional statistics and comparing each racial groups exonerations against their representation in the general populace is what all the fuss is about.

The exoneration rate compared to the general populace is irrelevant.
You have to compare it to the conviction rate.

If blacks are 60% of the convicted but 90% of the exonerated, that would hint that blacks are being railroaded.
But 7 times more likely convicted, 7 times more likely exonerated......not so much

Oh puleezze. And you claim to be a mathematician of note. HAHAHAHAH! You are a stooge that simply doesn't comprehend anything very well including math or written exchanges.
Do you see the word RATE in the my narrative that you just responded to? Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth. Then you had the audacity to tell me how irrelevant that is! Son, STOP...you are going to make me crack a rib from laughing so hard at your dumb ass!

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group. Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails. So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population. That shows that a problem exists not only with with Law enforcement but throughout the entire justice system. But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts
That's essentially the same per capita methodology thrown in the faces of Blacks regarding Criminal statistics. So what's your complaint?

That was a rhetorical question because I know what your complaint is and I am familiar with the substance of it. My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible and you can't stand it. But thats another thread. Now lets look at the info presented in the link I posted to glean clues of how the researchers may have reached their conclusions. I disagree with your 7 in 7 out hypothesis because the wrongfully convicted total is fluid. The rate could go up or down but observing that the researchers are inclined to ascribe to the possibility that thousands more wrongfully convicted are waiting for their opportunity to be freed, I concur with their views.

And you claim to be a mathematician of note.

I did? Where?
I don't need to be a mathematician to poke holes in bad stats when I see them.

Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth.

Exoneration rates is what the author said.
If you meant exoneration number, doesn't change my point in the least.
Total population doesn't come into play, total incarcerated population does.

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group.

Yup. Half the murder exonerations were for blacks. 380/762

Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails.

Irrelevant. You're not exonerated out of the total US population, just the incarcerated population.

So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

So if one group makes up 53.5% of the total convictions but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts.

That's still bullshit math.
Let me try to give a simple example even you should understand.
Let's say there are 3000 convicted murderers.
1000 white, 1000 black and 1000 Inuit.
This year 10 white, 10 Inuit and 20 black murderers are exonerated.

The black exoneration rate is twice the white and Inuit exoneration rate.

It would be silly to say, "Whites have 5 times the population as blacks, therefore we will multiply 5 times the population by twice the exoneration rate and say blacks were 10 times more likely to be wrongfully convicted".

By that tortured "logic" the Inuit are wrongfully convicted 500 times more than whites when actually, the
same percentage of white and Inuit convicts, 1%, were innocent.

My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible

I've never made such a claim. People are not infallible. The statistics they collect are not infallible.

I guess we have to agree to disagree.. You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article, But your clumsy rebuttals are getting sillier every time you post. I can't afford to waste more time with you..good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors to objective people who may venture here.

You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article,

Based on their "logic", that's a good bet.

good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors

A former reporter and 2 lawyers. Neither profession known for their infallibility.

But a RWNJ like you knows the topic they wrote about better than they do...HAR DE HAR HAR...go to sleep....youre daydreaming again.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The total number of people exonerated over a period of years is the number being analyzed; but, using proportional statistics and comparing each racial groups exonerations against their representation in the general populace is what all the fuss is about.

The exoneration rate compared to the general populace is irrelevant.
You have to compare it to the conviction rate.

If blacks are 60% of the convicted but 90% of the exonerated, that would hint that blacks are being railroaded.
But 7 times more likely convicted, 7 times more likely exonerated......not so much

Oh puleezze. And you claim to be a mathematician of note. HAHAHAHAH! You are a stooge that simply doesn't comprehend anything very well including math or written exchanges.
Do you see the word RATE in the my narrative that you just responded to? Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth. Then you had the audacity to tell me how irrelevant that is! Son, STOP...you are going to make me crack a rib from laughing so hard at your dumb ass!

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group. Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails. So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population. That shows that a problem exists not only with with Law enforcement but throughout the entire justice system. But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts
That's essentially the same per capita methodology thrown in the faces of Blacks regarding Criminal statistics. So what's your complaint?

That was a rhetorical question because I know what your complaint is and I am familiar with the substance of it. My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible and you can't stand it. But thats another thread. Now lets look at the info presented in the link I posted to glean clues of how the researchers may have reached their conclusions. I disagree with your 7 in 7 out hypothesis because the wrongfully convicted total is fluid. The rate could go up or down but observing that the researchers are inclined to ascribe to the possibility that thousands more wrongfully convicted are waiting for their opportunity to be freed, I concur with their views.

And you claim to be a mathematician of note.

I did? Where?
I don't need to be a mathematician to poke holes in bad stats when I see them.

Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth.

Exoneration rates is what the author said.
If you meant exoneration number, doesn't change my point in the least.
Total population doesn't come into play, total incarcerated population does.

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group.

Yup. Half the murder exonerations were for blacks. 380/762

Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails.

Irrelevant. You're not exonerated out of the total US population, just the incarcerated population.

So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

So if one group makes up 53.5% of the total convictions but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts.

That's still bullshit math.
Let me try to give a simple example even you should understand.
Let's say there are 3000 convicted murderers.
1000 white, 1000 black and 1000 Inuit.
This year 10 white, 10 Inuit and 20 black murderers are exonerated.

The black exoneration rate is twice the white and Inuit exoneration rate.

It would be silly to say, "Whites have 5 times the population as blacks, therefore we will multiply 5 times the population by twice the exoneration rate and say blacks were 10 times more likely to be wrongfully convicted".

By that tortured "logic" the Inuit are wrongfully convicted 500 times more than whites when actually, the
same percentage of white and Inuit convicts, 1%, were innocent.

My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible

I've never made such a claim. People are not infallible. The statistics they collect are not infallible.

I guess we have to agree to disagree.. You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article, But your clumsy rebuttals are getting sillier every time you post. I can't afford to waste more time with you..good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors to objective people who may venture here.

You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article,

Based on their "logic", that's a good bet.

good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors

A former reporter and 2 lawyers. Neither profession known for their infallibility.

But a RWNJ like you knows the topic they wrote about better than they do...HAR DE HAR HAR...go to sleep....youre daydreaming again.

Don't need to be a lawyer to check their math......or your math.

 

[JQPublic1]

And you are just as stupid now as you were before! The UCR shows arrests not convictions.
So you have no idea how many Blacks were convicted of those arrests. That shuts your premise down completely.

The UCR shows arrests not convictions.

Different pages show different things.
The one I provided doesn't say arrested or convicted, it says offender.

You provided expanded homicide data in table 2A which also says the offender murder rate for Blacks was 35.9% not 52.6% as you said. I told you you didn't even understand what was right in front of you, dummy.

You provided expanded homicide data in table 2A which also says the offender murder rate for Blacks was 35.9%

Why would you include offenders of unknown race in your calculation?
Perhaps those offenders were never witnessed, so no race was noted.
Maybe they were all black? Maybe you've never taken a stats course?

The trouble with your posting of table 2A is that you were citing the arrests made in table 21A. You didn't have a clue as to the disparity until I pointed it out to you!

The trouble with your posting of table 2A is that you were citing the arrests made in table 21A.

I didn't cite table 21A at all.

You didn't have a clue as to the disparity until I pointed it out to you!

Any disparity you see has no relevance to the points I made about Table 2A.

Look you fuggin moron. You posted table 2A but quoted the .racial distribution from table 21A. Table 2 does not indicate that blacks were responsible for over 50% of murders. You got that data from table 21A . too bad for you that I caught your mix up and highlighted your unparalleled stupidity. But you didn't stop there. Even after I uncovered your mistake you double down down on stupidity by denying it. Fellow..dont make me go back and get a screenshot of that post accompanied by the erroneous narrative . if you keep being a disingenuous lying jerk I'll do it.

 

[JQPublic1]

Oh puleezze. And you claim to be a mathematician of note. HAHAHAHAH! You are a stooge that simply doesn't comprehend anything very well including math or written exchanges.
Do you see the word RATE in the my narrative that you just responded to? Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth. Then you had the audacity to tell me how irrelevant that is! Son, STOP...you are going to make me crack a rib from laughing so hard at your dumb ass!

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group. Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails. So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population. That shows that a problem exists not only with with Law enforcement but throughout the entire justice system. But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts
That's essentially the same per capita methodology thrown in the faces of Blacks regarding Criminal statistics. So what's your complaint?

That was a rhetorical question because I know what your complaint is and I am familiar with the substance of it. My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible and you can't stand it. But thats another thread. Now lets look at the info presented in the link I posted to glean clues of how the researchers may have reached their conclusions. I disagree with your 7 in 7 out hypothesis because the wrongfully convicted total is fluid. The rate could go up or down but observing that the researchers are inclined to ascribe to the possibility that thousands more wrongfully convicted are waiting for their opportunity to be freed, I concur with their views.

And you claim to be a mathematician of note.

I did? Where?
I don't need to be a mathematician to poke holes in bad stats when I see them.

Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth.

Exoneration rates is what the author said.
If you meant exoneration number, doesn't change my point in the least.
Total population doesn't come into play, total incarcerated population does.

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group.

Yup. Half the murder exonerations were for blacks. 380/762

Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails.

Irrelevant. You're not exonerated out of the total US population, just the incarcerated population.

So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

So if one group makes up 53.5% of the total convictions but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts.

That's still bullshit math.
Let me try to give a simple example even you should understand.
Let's say there are 3000 convicted murderers.
1000 white, 1000 black and 1000 Inuit.
This year 10 white, 10 Inuit and 20 black murderers are exonerated.

The black exoneration rate is twice the white and Inuit exoneration rate.

It would be silly to say, "Whites have 5 times the population as blacks, therefore we will multiply 5 times the population by twice the exoneration rate and say blacks were 10 times more likely to be wrongfully convicted".

By that tortured "logic" the Inuit are wrongfully convicted 500 times more than whites when actually, the
same percentage of white and Inuit convicts, 1%, were innocent.

My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible

I've never made such a claim. People are not infallible. The statistics they collect are not infallible.

I guess we have to agree to disagree.. You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article, But your clumsy rebuttals are getting sillier every time you post. I can't afford to waste more time with you..good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors to objective people who may venture here.

You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article,

Based on their "logic", that's a good bet.

good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors

A former reporter and 2 lawyers. Neither profession known for their infallibility.

But a RWNJ like you knows the topic they wrote about better than they do...HAR DE HAR HAR...go to sleep....youre daydreaming again.

Don't need to be a lawyer to check their math......or your math.

No but you might consider consulting an elementary school teacher just after your visit to a shrink..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The UCR shows arrests not convictions.

Different pages show different things.
The one I provided doesn't say arrested or convicted, it says offender.

You provided expanded homicide data in table 2A which also says the offender murder rate for Blacks was 35.9% not 52.6% as you said. I told you you didn't even understand what was right in front of you, dummy.

You provided expanded homicide data in table 2A which also says the offender murder rate for Blacks was 35.9%

Why would you include offenders of unknown race in your calculation?
Perhaps those offenders were never witnessed, so no race was noted.
Maybe they were all black? Maybe you've never taken a stats course?

The trouble with your posting of table 2A is that you were citing the arrests made in table 21A. You didn't have a clue as to the disparity until I pointed it out to you!

The trouble with your posting of table 2A is that you were citing the arrests made in table 21A.

I didn't cite table 21A at all.

You didn't have a clue as to the disparity until I pointed it out to you!

Any disparity you see has no relevance to the points I made about Table 2A.

Look you fuggin moron. You posted table 2A but quoted the .racial distribution from table 21A. Table 2 does not indicate that blacks were responsible for over 50% of murders. You got that data from table 21A . too bad for you that I caught your mix up and highlighted your unparalleled stupidity. But you didn't stop there. Even after I uncovered your mistake you double down down on stupidity by denying it. Fellow..dont make me go back and get a screenshot of that post accompanied by the erroneous narrative . if you keep being a disingenuous lying jerk I'll do it.

Nope. Not a single time in your silly thread did I post any info from 21A.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And you claim to be a mathematician of note.

I did? Where?
I don't need to be a mathematician to poke holes in bad stats when I see them.

Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth.

Exoneration rates is what the author said.
If you meant exoneration number, doesn't change my point in the least.
Total population doesn't come into play, total incarcerated population does.

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group.

Yup. Half the murder exonerations were for blacks. 380/762

Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails.

Irrelevant. You're not exonerated out of the total US population, just the incarcerated population.

So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

So if one group makes up 53.5% of the total convictions but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts.

That's still bullshit math.
Let me try to give a simple example even you should understand.
Let's say there are 3000 convicted murderers.
1000 white, 1000 black and 1000 Inuit.
This year 10 white, 10 Inuit and 20 black murderers are exonerated.

The black exoneration rate is twice the white and Inuit exoneration rate.

It would be silly to say, "Whites have 5 times the population as blacks, therefore we will multiply 5 times the population by twice the exoneration rate and say blacks were 10 times more likely to be wrongfully convicted".

By that tortured "logic" the Inuit are wrongfully convicted 500 times more than whites when actually, the
same percentage of white and Inuit convicts, 1%, were innocent.

My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible

I've never made such a claim. People are not infallible. The statistics they collect are not infallible.

I guess we have to agree to disagree.. You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article, But your clumsy rebuttals are getting sillier every time you post. I can't afford to waste more time with you..good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors to objective people who may venture here.

You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article,

Based on their "logic", that's a good bet.

good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors

A former reporter and 2 lawyers. Neither profession known for their infallibility.

But a RWNJ like you knows the topic they wrote about better than they do...HAR DE HAR HAR...go to sleep....youre daydreaming again.

Don't need to be a lawyer to check their math......or your math.

No but you might consider consulting an elementary school teacher just after your visit to a shrink..

DERP!

 

[BulletProof]

Whatever the statistics about blacks and crime, can we at least agree that black is ugly?

 

[IM2]

Most cops are realists. If they look at blacks differently it's because they often ARE different than any other segment of America. Hell, there are blacks that will admit this. If America and its LE were systemically racist, as some claim, they/we would be going after Asians. But, of course, we/they are not.

No there are no blacks who will admit that we are different. Why whites think they knw more about being black than we do is really a irritating thing, The you whites get all upset when you get told you know nothing about being back and are unqualified to speak on it when that is the truth. And really you should stop the racist use pf Asians as examples that racism doesn't exist.

 

[IM2]

Oh puleezze. And you claim to be a mathematician of note. HAHAHAHAH! You are a stooge that simply doesn't comprehend anything very well including math or written exchanges.
Do you see the word RATE in the my narrative that you just responded to? Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth. Then you had the audacity to tell me how irrelevant that is! Son, STOP...you are going to make me crack a rib from laughing so hard at your dumb ass!

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group. Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails. So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population. That shows that a problem exists not only with with Law enforcement but throughout the entire justice system. But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts
That's essentially the same per capita methodology thrown in the faces of Blacks regarding Criminal statistics. So what's your complaint?

That was a rhetorical question because I know what your complaint is and I am familiar with the substance of it. My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible and you can't stand it. But thats another thread. Now lets look at the info presented in the link I posted to glean clues of how the researchers may have reached their conclusions. I disagree with your 7 in 7 out hypothesis because the wrongfully convicted total is fluid. The rate could go up or down but observing that the researchers are inclined to ascribe to the possibility that thousands more wrongfully convicted are waiting for their opportunity to be freed, I concur with their views.

And you claim to be a mathematician of note.

I did? Where?
I don't need to be a mathematician to poke holes in bad stats when I see them.

Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth.

Exoneration rates is what the author said.
If you meant exoneration number, doesn't change my point in the least.
Total population doesn't come into play, total incarcerated population does.

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group.

Yup. Half the murder exonerations were for blacks. 380/762

Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails.

Irrelevant. You're not exonerated out of the total US population, just the incarcerated population.

So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

So if one group makes up 53.5% of the total convictions but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts.

That's still bullshit math.
Let me try to give a simple example even you should understand.
Let's say there are 3000 convicted murderers.
1000 white, 1000 black and 1000 Inuit.
This year 10 white, 10 Inuit and 20 black murderers are exonerated.

The black exoneration rate is twice the white and Inuit exoneration rate.

It would be silly to say, "Whites have 5 times the population as blacks, therefore we will multiply 5 times the population by twice the exoneration rate and say blacks were 10 times more likely to be wrongfully convicted".

By that tortured "logic" the Inuit are wrongfully convicted 500 times more than whites when actually, the
same percentage of white and Inuit convicts, 1%, were innocent.

My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible

I've never made such a claim. People are not infallible. The statistics they collect are not infallible.

I guess we have to agree to disagree.. You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article, But your clumsy rebuttals are getting sillier every time you post. I can't afford to waste more time with you..good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors to objective people who may venture here.

You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article,

Based on their "logic", that's a good bet.

good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors

A former reporter and 2 lawyers. Neither profession known for their infallibility.

But a RWNJ like you knows the topic they wrote about better than they do...HAR DE HAR HAR...go to sleep....youre daydreaming again.

Don't need to be a lawyer to check their math......or your math.

Maybe you check your own math because it's seriously deficient.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And you claim to be a mathematician of note.

I did? Where?
I don't need to be a mathematician to poke holes in bad stats when I see them.

Its not there but you went off on a tirade about me comparing exoneration rates to populations and so on and so forth.

Exoneration rates is what the author said.
If you meant exoneration number, doesn't change my point in the least.
Total population doesn't come into play, total incarcerated population does.

But to arrive at the exoneration rate in the first place you have to take the number of exonerations for each group and divide that by the total number of exonerations to get a percentage for each group.

Yup. Half the murder exonerations were for blacks. 380/762

Then you; take the percentage of the respective groups as represented by their US population and compare that to the percentage of the total exonerations their group entails.

Irrelevant. You're not exonerated out of the total US population, just the incarcerated population.

So if one group makes up 47% of the total exonerations but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being wrongfully convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

So if one group makes up 53.5% of the total convictions but is only 13 % of the general population, that means that group is being convicted proportionally around 4 times the percentage of their population.

But a comparison to the White exoneration rate revealed that Blacks were 7 times more likely to be wrongfully CONVICTED of murder than their White counterparts.

That's still bullshit math.
Let me try to give a simple example even you should understand.
Let's say there are 3000 convicted murderers.
1000 white, 1000 black and 1000 Inuit.
This year 10 white, 10 Inuit and 20 black murderers are exonerated.

The black exoneration rate is twice the white and Inuit exoneration rate.

It would be silly to say, "Whites have 5 times the population as blacks, therefore we will multiply 5 times the population by twice the exoneration rate and say blacks were 10 times more likely to be wrongfully convicted".

By that tortured "logic" the Inuit are wrongfully convicted 500 times more than whites when actually, the
same percentage of white and Inuit convicts, 1%, were innocent.

My data is picking away at the formerly ironclad notion that race based crime statistics are infallible

I've never made such a claim. People are not infallible. The statistics they collect are not infallible.

I guess we have to agree to disagree.. You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article, But your clumsy rebuttals are getting sillier every time you post. I can't afford to waste more time with you..good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors to objective people who may venture here.

You think you are smarter that the scholars who wrote that article,

Based on their "logic", that's a good bet.

good luck on selling your lay rebuttal of professional authors

A former reporter and 2 lawyers. Neither profession known for their infallibility.

But a RWNJ like you knows the topic they wrote about better than they do...HAR DE HAR HAR...go to sleep....youre daydreaming again.

Don't need to be a lawyer to check their math......or your math.

Maybe you check your own math because it's seriously deficient.

Says the guy who thinks rates don't matter.