U.S. Department of Justice

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Criminal Justice Information Services Division

Summary Reporting System

National Incident-Based Reporting System

Training Guide

for

Hate Crime

 Data Collection

Uniform Crime Reporting

 1996
Contents

Purpose And Scope....................................................................................................................................... 4

The Nature Of Hate Crime ........................................................................................................................... 4

Procedures For Reporting To The Fbis Ucr Program ........................................................................................ 5

Use Of The Enclosed Training Modules .......................................................................................................... 6

Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 7

Learning Module One: ................................................................................................................................. 8

The Social Psychology Of Prejudice ........................................................................................................... 8

Module Description: ................................................................................................................................ 8

Course Objectives: .................................................................................................................................. 8

General Course Outline: ......................................................................................................................... 8

Extended Course Outline: ........................................................................................................................ 9

Prejudice: How It Affects The Way We Think And The Way We Act ............................................................. 9

What Is Prejudice? ............................................................................................................. .................... 10

How Does Prejudice Come About? ......................................................................................................... 10

How Is Prejudice Related To Stereotype?.................................................................................................. 10

How Are Prejudice And Discrimination Related? ...................................................................................... 11

What Are The Social Sources Of Prejudice? ............................................................................................. 11

Principle 1: Unequal Status Breeds Prejudice ................................................................................... 11

Principle 2: Social Definition Of Who You Are.................................................................................. 11

How Is Prejudice Maintained? ................................................................................................................ 12

What Are The Emotional Bases Of Prejudice? .......................................................................................... 12

What Are The Cognitive Sources Of Prejudice?........................................................................................ 13

Generalization: A Shorthand Way Of Thinking ....................................................................................... 13

What Are The Cognitive Consequences Of Stereotypes? .......................................................................... 14

What Can We Say Then In Summing Up? ............................................................................................ ... 14

Suggested Readings ................................................................................................................................... 16

LEARNING MODULE TWO: ........................................................................................................................ 17

Bias-Motivated Crimes  Definitions & Procedures

Module Description: .............................................................................................................................. 17

Course Objectives: ................................................................................................................................ 17

Caveat: ................................................................................................................................................ 17

Definitions: ........................................................................................................................................... 17

Supplementary Offense Definitions:........................................................................................................ 19

Procedures: ........................................................................................................................................... 19
LEARNING MODULE THREE: ...................................................................................................................... 24

Case Study Exercises of Possible Bias-Related Crimes

Module Description: .............................................................................................................................. 24

Course Objectives: ................................................................................................................................ 24

Rules For The Exercise Session: ............................................................................................................... 24

Exercise Cases: ..................................................................................................................................... 24

APPENDIX A .............................................................................................................................................. 27

Organizations Offering Information Concerning Anti-Bias Education

APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................................................... 36

LEGISLATION

APPENDIX C............................................................................................................................................... 40

QUARTERLY HATE CRIME REPORT

HATE CRIME INCIDENT REPORT

APPENDIX D............................................................................................................................................... 44

Regional Offices Of The Community Relations Service, Department Of Justice
4

TRAINING GUIDE FOR HATE CRIME DATA COLLECTION

Purpose and Scope

The material in this training guide is intended to assist law enforcement agencies in

the task of establishing a hate crime training program for their personnel. It provides suggested

model reporting procedures, as well as training aids for sensitizing street officers to the hate crime

problem. Further training material can be obtained from the organizations listed in Appendix A,

captioned Organizations Offering Information Concerning Anti-Bias Education. Assistance in these

matters may also be requested from the nearest regional office of the Community Relations Service

(CRS) of the Department of Justice (DOJ). (See Appendix D for list of regional CRS/DOJ offices.)

The FBIs Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program is grateful to all who have assisted in gathering the enclosed materials. A special note of thanks is given to the New York City

Police Department, the Boston Police Department, and the Baltimore County Police Department for

their guidance, suggestions, and assistance in matters that relate specifically to law enforcement

concerns.

Gratitude is also expressed to the DOJ Civil Rights Division, Criminal Section, and to

CRS for their assistance and resources.

The Nature of Hate Crime

Ronald Dworkin, Ph.D., in his work entitled Taking Rights Seriously, stated that justice as fairness rests on the assumption of a natural right of all men and women to equality of

concern and respect, a right they possess not by virtue of birth or characteristics or merit or excellence, but simply as human beings. Dr. Dworkins words reflect the Constitutional protections

which are guaranteed to all Americans. And yet, there are those who are victimized, sometimes

subtly and other times very overtly, for no reason other than the color of their skin, the religion they

profess, the heritage of their parents, the disability they possess, or their sexual orientation. It is

most unsettling to the victims because there is nothing they can do to alter the situation, nor is there

anything that they should be expected to change. Not only is the individual who is personally

touched by these offenses victimized, but the entire class of individuals residing in the community is

affected.

For these reasons, law enforcement officers must be particularly skillful in responding in such a way that the trauma of the victim and the community is not exacerbated by a lack of

sensitivity in the law enforcement response. Like rape victims, victims of hate crimes suffer possible

serious and long-lasting traumatic stress which could be increased by an inappropriate law enforcement response.

Federal Hate Crime Legislation

In response to a growing concern about such crimes, the President, on April 23,

1990, signed into law the Hate Crime Statistics Act of 1990 (hereafter Act; see Appendix B). The
5

Act requires the Attorney General to establish guidelines and collect, as part of the UCR Program,

data about crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation,

or ethnicity, including where appropriate the crimes of murder, non-negligent manslaughter; forcible rape; aggravated assault, simple assault, intimidation; arson; and destruction, damage or

vandalism of property. Hate crime data collection was required by the Act to begin in calendar year

1990 and continue for 4 succeeding years. Responsibilities of the Attorney General under the Act were

delegated to the Director of the FBI. The FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program was assigned

the task of developing the procedures for and managing the implementations of the collection of hate

crime data. Although the Act mandated data collection for 5 years, the FBI considers the collection of

hate crime statistics to be a permanent addition to the UCR Program. In September 1994, the Violent

Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act amended the Hate Crime Statistics Act to add disabilities, both

physical and mental, as factors that could be considered a basis for hate crimes.

Procedures for Reporting to the FBIs UCR Program

The FBIs UCR Program had followed the progress of this legislation closely for several years, anticipating the possibility that the FBI would be given the task of collecting and publishing such data. Discussions were held with representatives of state and local law enforcement agencies which had already embarked on hate crime data collection programs. Contacts were also

made with private organizations which had expressed interest in seeing a national hate crime

statistical program established, e.g., the National Institute Against Prejudice & Violence, the AntiDefamation League of Bnai Brith, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

(NAACP).

Sampling Approach

As a result of such contacts, the UCR Program considered two alternative approaches

to collecting hate crime data. One approach would be to conduct, on a sampling basis, a nationwide, in-depth analysis of suspected bias-motivated incidents. This approach would require approximately 800 participating law enforcement agencies to identify and track cases suspected of

involving bias motivation through the investigatory and prosecutory processes, and then report

comprehensive data about the offenses that were determined to have been motivated by hatred.

Under this approach, considerable resource commitment would be required on the

part of each participating agency. Considering the fiscal constraints currently being experienced at

all levels of government, the participating agencies would most likely need substantial federal

funding not only to implement their reporting systems, but to support their ongoing operation. It

has been projected that the federal funds required would be quite extensive, perhaps exceeding

$12 million annually.

Another major drawback to the sampling approach is that it would not provide statistically significant breakdowns of local, state, or regional data, despite the valid and important

national picture it would present of hate crime. In discussions with Congressional staff members

and representatives of groups pursuing hate crime legislation, the UCR Program staff proposed the

sampling approach as the one which would achieve the most valid national assessment of hate

crime activity. However, the sampling approach proposal was negatively received because of its

cost and its inability to generate meaningful geographical breakdowns of hate crime data.
6

Adopted Approach

The other approach considered for collecting hate crime data, and the one which

was adopted, incorporates hate crime data into the already established nationwide UCR Program.

This approach is particularly attractive because it does not require major resource commitments on

the part of the individual agencies, and it provides statistically significant geographical data breakdowns.

Another reason this approach was attractive is the fact that the FBI is in the process of

upgrading the UCR Program from a tally system, known as the Summary Reporting System

(SRS), to a unit-record system, known as the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS).

NIBRS collects much more comprehensive data on the victims, offenders, and the circumstances of

crime. It only requires the addition of a single new data element to NIBRS to provide the capability

for flagging criminal incidents as bias motivated.

Agencies not yet participating in NIBRS and those participating but not ready

to implement the data element submit their data on Quarterly Hate Crime Reports. A sample of the

Quarterly Report is enclosed as Appendix C. The form requires the entry of a limited amount of

information, i.e., the incident number, type of offense, type of bias motivation, type of victim, location type, number of offenders, and the offenders race. The Quarterly Report is submitted in

addition to the regular reporting forms.

See the publication Hate Crime Data Collection Guidelines for additional information regarding the procedures to be used in reporting hate crime data to the national UCR Program.

Use of the Enclosed Training Modules

Three learning modules are included in this training guide for use in instruction

of law enforcement personnel on hate crime matters. The modules are in no way exhaustive or

exclusive of either what can be taught or the way the material should be taught. Rather, they are

intended merely as a suggested approach to such instruction. In order to obtain the most benefit

from the materials, an agency should tailor them to meet its unique needs. The reader may also be

interested in the model training programs produced by the International Association of Chiefs of

Police (IACP) and the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE). This

training information is available by contacting these organizations directly.

Learning Module One

Learning Module One: The Social Psychology of Prejudice is directed at the very

heart of bias-related criminal behavior, namely, motivation. As an introduction to the social psychology of prejudice, it directs the student to look at the relationship of bias to stereotypical beliefs,

prejudicial attitudes, and discriminatory behavior. It encourages the student to examine some of the

major psychological motivations underlying prejudice as well as various social contexts which

encourage or impede particular behaviors. The purpose of this module is twofold. First, it gives

the student some understanding of how and why prejudice develops. Second, it increases the

sensitivity of the student to the impact of hate crimes on the victim and the community.
7

Learning Module Two

Learning Module Two: Bias-Motivated CrimesDefinitions & Procedures provides definitions of terms law enforcement officers need to know in dealing with hate crime. Also

included is a suggested law enforcement model hate crime reporting system that can be adapted

for use in large, medium, or small law enforcement agencies.

The most important aspect of the model concerns the two-tier reviewing process.

The purpose of the two-tier procedure is to ensure that suspected bias-motivated incidents undergo

two levels of review within the reporting agency. Under the model system, the officer who responds

to the incident is responsible for determining whether there is any indication that the offender was

motivated by bias. If so, the responding officer should designate the incident as a Suspected Bias

Crime and pass it on for review by a second officer (or unit) possessing greater expertise in hate

crime matters. This latter officer or unit has the responsibility for making the final decision as to

whether the incident constitutes a hate crime. It is only after the incident has undergone the second

review and is determined to be a hate crime that it is ready to be reported as such to the national

UCR Program.

Learning Module Three

Learning Module Three: Case Study Exercises of Possible Bias-Related Crimes

gives the student officer the opportunity to apply his/her newly gained knowledge of hate crime

matters to hypothetical cases. The student is to read each case scenario and (1) classify the type of

offense(s) involved in the incident; (2) classify the incident as either an Unbiased Incident or a

Suspected Bias Incident; and (3) provide reasons for his/her decisions.

Conclusion

The enactment of federal legislation requiring the collection and publication of nationwide hate crime statistics underscores the emphasis now being placed on hate crime. National

statistics will result in greater awareness and understanding of the true dimensions of the problem

nationwide; and that, in turn, will result in further benefits. Those charged with the enforcement of

the law will be better able to quantify their resource needs and do a better job of directing available

resources to the areas where they will have the most effectiveness. Likewise, community service

organizations and groups will be better able to respond to the needs of the victims.

As hate crime offenders are brought to justice and victims regain their sense of

personal safety and respect, justice will be served because it can then be truly said that the rights of

individuals under the Constitution will be theirs not by virtue of birth or characteristics or merit or

excellence, but simply as human beings.
8

LEARNING MODULE ONE:

The Social Psychology of Prejudice

MODULE DESCRIPTION:

An introduction to the social dynamics of prejudice with an emphasis on its relationship to stereotypical beliefs, prejudicial attitudes, and discriminatory behavior.

COURSE OBJECTIVES:

* The student will be able to define and describe the following terms: prejudice,

 stereotype, discrimination, racism, sexism, ingroup, outgroup, conformity,

 institutional supports, social categorization.

* The student will be able to understand the distinction between institutional

 prejudice and personal prejudice.

* The student will be able to understand and explain ways in which stereotypes can

 influence memory for and perceptions of events.

* The student will be familiar with common stereotypes of specific minority groups

 and will be able to differentiate those stereotypes from accurate descriptions of

 the minority groups.

* The student will be able to identify the principal psychological motivations

 underlying prejudice.

GENERAL COURSE OUTLINE:

1. The Social Dynamics of Prejudice

A. Prejudice: How It Affects the Way We Think and the Way We Act

B. What Is Prejudice?

Term Defined

C. How Does Prejudice Come About?

 The ABCs of Attitude

1. Affect

2. Behavior

3. Cognition
9

D. How Is Prejudice Related to Stereotype?

E. How Are Prejudice and Discrimination Related?

From Thoughts to Action

F. What Are the Social Sources of Prejudice?

1. Principle 1: Unequal Status Breeds Prejudice

2. Principle 2: Social Definition of Who You Are

G. How Is Prejudice Maintained?

H. What Are the Emotional Bases of Prejudice?

Frustration and Aggression: The Scapegoat Theory

I. What Are the Cognitive Sources of Prejudice?

1. Cognitive Shorthand

2. Ingroup and Outgroup Applied to Cognitive Processes

3. Generalization

J. What Are the Cognitive Consequences of Stereotypes?

1. Interpretation of Events

2. Memories of Events

K. Summation and Conclusions

EXTENDED COURSE OUTLINE:

PREJUDICE: HOW IT AFFECTS THE WAY WE THINK AND THE WAY WE ACT

Consider within the following scenarios how prejudice and discrimination affect the

thoughts, feelings, and behavior of the individuals involved:

Several members of a gay student university organization publicized that the motto

for a particular day on the university campus would be: If you are gay, wear blue jeans today. On

that particular day, many individuals who usually wore jeans dressed in trousers, skirts, or slacks.

The point made by the gay student association: that attitudes toward gays are such that many would

rather give up their customary manner of dressing rather than be taken for being gay or being aligned

with the gay group.
10

Mary and Jim had been dating for several weeks. They had many similar interests

and enjoyed sharing as much time as possible with one another. Wanting to develop a stronger

bond between them, they began sharing more about themselves. During one such encounter, Mary

confided to Jim that she was currently under a doctor's care for severe depression. Although Jim

said nothing to Mary, he was quite shocked at this revelation. While Jim knew little to nothing about

depression, he was sure Mary would never be a normal person. He decided to reevaluate their

relationship. Subsequently, Mary stopped hearing from Jim. She was unable to reach him and her

calls were never answered.

Following the conclusion of World War II, a Canadian social scientist simultaneously

mailed to 100 Ontario resorts copies of two letters requesting reservations for the same date. One

letter was signed Mr. Lockwood, a name that does not denote ethnicity, and the other was signed Mr.

Greenberg, a name frequently considered by many to be ethnically Jewish. Ninety-three percent of

the resorts offered accommodations to Mr. Lockwood, and only 36 percent offered accommodations to Mr. Greenberg.

WHAT IS PREJUDICE?

Prejudice is defined as an unreasonable and unjustifiable negative attitude toward a

group and its individual members. Prejudice involves prejudgment. It biases one against an individual or group based solely on membership in a particular group.

HOW DOES PREJUDICE COME ABOUT?

Prejudice is an attitude. An attitude comes about as a result of a combination of feelings,

behaviors, and beliefs--what is referred to as the ABC of attitudes:

A Affect (feelings)

B Behavioral tendency (inclination to act)

C Cognition (beliefs)

Prejudice is evident in all three examples above. In the second example, because Mary revealed a

mental disability, Jim changed his feeling (A) toward her. By deciding not to date her anymore, he

behaved (B) in a discriminatory manner, believing (C) her incapable of leading any kind of normal life.

HOW IS PREJUDICE RELATED TO STEREOTYPE?

The beliefs out of which prejudicial feelings grow are called stereotypes. To stereotype is to generalize. It is a shorthand way of thinking. It simplifies the way one processes information or material. For example, the following are stereotypes: Italians are members of the Mafia;

Professors are absent- minded; Deeply religious people are very conservative and lack innovative

thinking; Heavy people are jolly; People on welfare are lazy; Blondes are more fun.

The problem with stereotypes is that they are frequently inaccurate and are

overgeneralized. For example, I am told that I am going to be introduced to Pat who is completing

a program in nursing. When Pat comes into the room, I am surprised to see a young man who is

named Patrick. My stereotype of nurse includes female--not male. Although many nurses are, in

fact, female, not all are.
11

HOW ARE PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION RELATED?

While prejudice is an attitude, discrimination is a behavior. Generally, discriminatory behavior is the result of a prejudicial attitude. However, this is not always the case. Ones

behavior is, in large measure, a product of ones beliefs. Individuals generally act consistently with

their inner values and convictions. However, there are other more external motivating factors which

also influence an individual's behavior. Some of these external factors result from particular societal

influences distinct from ones own beliefs. In other words, just as not every prejudicial attitude or

belief results in a hostile action, not every discriminatory practice is the result of personal prejudice.

There are examples of racism and sexism that result not so much from an active, hostile personal

prejudice as from specific institutional practices that discriminate. These exist even where there is no

actual intent on the part of a specific person to discriminate against a group. Consider the law

enforcement agency that has as part of its physical requirements, a minimum and maximum height

requirement: no less than 5' 10", no more than 6' 3". If these height requirements were not

specifically related to the normal, everyday demands of the job, but intended to exclude certain

nationalities as well as women, they would be discriminatory: racist and sexist. Even if this discrimination was not intended, the allegation of discrimination could be made. And so racism could be

defined in two ways: It is the individuals prejudicial attitude and discriminatory behavior toward

people of a given race, or it is an institutional practice, even if not motivated by prejudice, that

subordinates people of a given race. Likewise sexism can be viewed in the same fashion. It can be

either the individuals prejudicial attitude and discriminatory behavior toward people of a given sex, or

an institutional practice, even if not motivated by prejudice, that subordinates people of a given sex.

WHAT ARE THE SOCIAL SOURCES OF PREJUDICE?

There are several interrelated factors within the social environment which help to

explain how prejudice is produced and maintained. Let us look at two of these principles.

PRINCIPLE 1: UNEQUAL STATUS BREEDS PREJUDICE

Approximately 30 years ago, sociologist Helen Mayer Hacker noted how stereotypes

of blacks and women were a major factor in the social oppression of these groups. Her research

determined that blacks as well as women were seen as being inferior in intelligence, emotionally

primitive, and contented with their subordinate role in society and relationships. Blacks were regarded as inferior to whites and women were seen as the weaker of the two sexes. Unequal status

as a group results in unequal treatment as an individual.

PRINCIPLE 2: SOCIAL DEFINITION OF WHO YOU ARE

How one is defined within a social settingones race, religion, sex, academic majorsuggests both who you are, as well as who you are not. The wall that encircles us and keeps

us in, also excludes them and keeps them out. And so, just being placed within a particular

social group may promote what is called an ingroup bias. Ingroup is defined as a group of people

who share a sense of belonging within the group and a feeling of common identity within that

group. Outgroup then is defined as a group that is perceived by one as distinctively different from
12

or apart from ones ingroup. If, on a regular basis, ones contacts include only members from ones

own ingroup, the ingroup bias becomes reinforced. The result of this continued and exclusive

contact with ones ingroup tends to intensify the loyalty to the particular ingroup as well as to

distance one from members of perceived outgroups. The stereotypes that one once had concerning

particular outgroups are now intensified and exaggerated.

One begins to perceive oneself as qualitatively different from members of these

outgroups. From this perception of feeling different comes patterns of actions and thoughts

which further separate one from members of the outgroups.

HOW IS PREJUDICE MAINTAINED?

Once one has developed a prejudicial stance, particularly if it is reinforced by social

structure, the prejudice is maintained, in large measure, by its own social inertia. If prejudice has

become accepted within the society, many people will conform to the commonly accepted social

position. This has been, for example, one way in which the shameful social acceptance of slavery

has been explained. The actions of such people are not motivated so much by their need to hate

and harm, but are motivated by their need to be accepted within society. There is a message of

hope in this, however. If a good deal of this social prejudice is not deeply ingrained in ones

personality, as new norms develop and change, prejudice can indeed diminish.

WHAT ARE THE EMOTIONAL BASES OF PREJUDICE?

Since prejudice is not easily dismissed by a logical approach, researchers have looked

for an emotional basis to prejudice. None of the following explanations completely answer how

and why prejudice develops. However, they give some insight into some of the dynamics that seem

to perpetuate prejudicial attitudes. The first one to examine is frustration and aggression: The

scapegoat theory. When the cause of ones frustration is too difficult (for both emotional and

intellectual reasons) to deal with, one often redirects the resultant hostility outward. This phenomenon, called displaced aggression, may have been, for example, part of the motivation which led to

the lynchings of some black people in the South. During that time in U.S. history, there was a

tendency for more lynchings to occur when the cotton price was exceptionally low and economic

frustration was exceptionally high.

Targets for ones personal or societys collective displacement of anger vary. After

World War I when Germany experienced economic chaos, Jews were treated as the source of

Germanys problems. The result was that the Germans persecuted the Jews. Throughout various

periods in European and American history, frustrations and anxieties were taken out on witches. In

more recent times, some have attacked the Asian population. The explanation for doing so is that

the Asians are responsible for current economic hard times. As interesting and compelling as this

theory may be, the scapegoat theory of prejudice remains incomplete. It does not answer all questions concerning bias and prejudice. For example, it does not explain why only particular groups are

regarded as scapegoats within society and others are not. Aggression is not always displaced.

When able, individuals prefer to retaliate against the perceived source of their frustration, rather

than some displaced or symbolic object.
13

WHAT ARE THE COGNITIVE SOURCES OF PREJUDICE?

Recent research concerning cognitive psychology has suggested that social conditioning is not the only reason bias and prejudice exist. Nor do they exist only because they serve

some emotional function, such as displacing and projecting ones hostilities on others. They also

exist as by-products of the normal thinking processes. Stereotypes are not always the result of

consciously evil intentions. Sometimes they result from an attempt to simplify the complex information or complex material one is exposed to in the external world. It is a way of developing, in a

sense, a cognitive shorthand approach to the complexities in the world. One way, of course, to

simplify complex issues is to develop categories in which one can organize the information by

clustering objects into various groups. Once these categories are developed, one can both more

easily think about them and recall information about them. To the degree that the individuals within

a particular group are alike, one then predicts some of their individual behaviors. For example,

behavioral and personality profiles are developed from typical behaviors of drug runners or

hijackers which enable law enforcement officers potentially to detect these individuals in a crowd.

Such are the positive aspects of generalization, categorization, or stereotyping. However, there are also

negative aspects to such kinds of cognitive shorthand or categorization and stereotyping. One can

generalize too much and make erroneous statements about an entire group from the behaviors of a

few. An individual can fit part of a particular profilebut not actually be the target of the operation.

GENERALIZATION: A SHORTHAND WAY OF THINKING

When individuals are asked to picture in their minds certain objects, for example,

apples, chairs, pencils, an interesting phenomenon occurs. When those objects are mentioned,

there is a tendency to generalize a particular object within a group as being more like other similar

objects in the group than they actually are. So for example, when the word apples is mentioned,

most people would think of many similar applesall of these apples looking very much alike:

large, red, well-shaped apples. When the word chairs is mentioned, most people would think of

very similar kinds of chairsa specific kind of chairrather than different kinds of chairs. When the

word pencils is mentioned, most people would think of all yellow pencils or all blue pencils or all

lead pencils. So it is when people are assigned to groups: police officer, criminal, student. When

these groups are mentioned, one tends to exaggerate what the objects have in common with each

other within the group as well as to exaggerate the dissimilarities that exist among the objects

outside the group. Simply by dividing individuals into groups, one can create a sense that members

of a group, who are different from ones own group, are all alike. In social psychology, it is also a

well-established principle that people tend to get along with and like individuals who are perceived

to be like themselves and tend to mistrust and dislike individuals they perceive to be dissimilar. This

could provide a basis for one of the principles already discussed, namely, ingroup bias.

What is interesting about ingroup and outgroup psychology is that people tend to

see greater similarity among individuals in the outgroup than they do of individuals within the

ingroup. In other words, one thinks of people who belong to the category outgroup as very similar

to one another; and yet within ones own ingroup, one recognizes greater variety and differences

among the members. Members of any group other than ones own are perceived as less diverse

from each other and much more similar to one another than the members of ones own group.

When students are shown faces of a few white and a few black individuals and then asked to pick

these individuals out of a photographic lineup, they tend to recognize more accurately the faces of

their own racial group. People outside their own ingroup tend to appear more similar to one

another within that particular group.
14

WHAT ARE THE COGNITIVE CONSEQUENCES OF STEREOTYPES?

It has already been mentioned that prejudice is prejudgment, and it is known from

experience that prejudgment is part of everyday experience. What are the consequences of this

inevitability? Prejudgments direct ones interpretations of events that occur within society. They also

affect memories of what one recalls to have taken place. First, let us look at how stereotyping directs

interpretations.

It is difficult to change an opinion which one develops concerning another individual. If, for example, one has an opinion concerning another individual, no matter what the other

person does, his or her action is frequently interpreted within the framework of the individuals

opinion (or stereotype) of him or her. For example, if someone categorized another person as

generally unfriendly, perhaps even an attempt at genuine friendliness by that person would be

misinterpreted as either superficial cordiality or as having some exterior motive attached to the apparent friendly gestures. Whenever a member of a particular group behaves as one expects him or her to

behave, belief concerning that person and that group is confirmed. However, when a member of a

group behaves in a way which is inconsistent with what is considered to be appropriate behavior for

that group, the behavior may be explained away as due to special circumstances. The behavior

may be misinterpreted. In this case, it would leave the prior belief intact.

Not only do prejudgments or stereotypes affect the way one interprets the world, and

in fact, the way one interprets ones own behavior, but prejudgments or stereotypes also affect the

way which one recalls incidents in ones own memory.

Having placed a person in a stereotyped group, when one recalls information about

that person or about that group, one tends to frame what is recalled as being consistent with ones

bias or prejudice regarding that group or that individual within that group. Stereotypes bias judgments

of individuals. The positive aspect of all this is that once one allows oneself to get to know a person

as distinct from a group, the stereotypes seem to have minimal impact on the way one both perceives the person as well as interacts with that person. Fortunately, what an individual is able to do

on a one-to-one situation is to place the stereotypes aside and to evaluate the person as a distinct

individual. A particularly effective means of breaking down stereotypes, prejudices, and biases is to

interact with an individual of a particular group on a one-to-one basis, thus shattering the kinds of

stereotypical beliefs that may have been held about members of a particular outgroup.

WHAT CAN WE SAY THEN IN SUMMING UP?

Prejudice is comprised of various aspects. It consists of an intermingling of

social, emotional, and cognitive ingredients. David Myers has shown in his work Social Psychology

that in some way society itself is a breeding ground for prejudices. Once they are created, society

maintains these prejudices in a variety of ways. For example, groups within society that enjoy high

economic standingand hence, equally high social standingwill often justify their social superiority with a variety of prejudicial beliefs. They may, perhaps, believe that a caste system within society

is natures way of separating the good seed from the bad seed. Other social groupings create

ingroup biases also. Special conditions required for acceptance into an ingroup can create a

sense of us against them. These special conditions include race, religion, disability, ethnicity,

regional origin, or educational background, to name only a few. Once these separations and
15

distinctions are created, social inertia becomes sufficient to maintain them. Institutional supports,

such as the media, can maintain and encourage these attitudes as well.

Researchers have looked also at the emotional aspects of prejudice. When one is

unable to attain a certain status within societyor to attain particular goods which others are perceived to possessfrustration results. This frustration can develop into anger and hostility which is

then directed toward a group which is perceived to be responsible for ones inability to achieve the

position or goods sought. This phenomenon is referred to as the Scapegoat Theory.

Another explanation given for the development of prejudice is an inferiority complex. Specifically, this refers to the individual who, because of an inability to deal with feelings of

personal inadequacy, develops a sense of superiority toward others. As a result, anyone who is different

from the group is less than adequateas seen through the eyes of the members of the ingroup.

Another perspective on prejudice has been offered by the cognitive psychologists. Stereotypes, from the cognitive psychological perspective, come about naturally through the normal mental processes in which a person engages. It is one of the ways by which the mind breaks down and

synthesizes complex material into smaller units or categories. In other words, stereotyping is a kind

of mental shorthand.

By developing this mental shorthand and placing people and objects into categories,

the mind tends to organize perceived similarities into the same group. This mental inclination to

categorize is also the reason why anyone who stands out from a group is seen as very distinctive and

unlike members of the ingroup. Hence, anyone perceived to be unlike ourselves becomes very

noticeable.

Because the mind tends to filter ones experiences through established stereotypes,

one tends to confirm existing beliefs. This occurs even where there is little actual evidence in the

environment to support the conclusions the individual eventually draws. Consequently, stereotypes

are difficult to alter or remove. However, all is not lost; stereotypes and biases can be changed to

some degree. The best method to change existing stereotypes about groups of people is to get to

know particular individuals within that outgroup. Stereotypes are at their highest level of resistance to change when judging a personally unknown individual as well as judging groups of personally unknown people. Consequently, the best instrument to attack a stereotype is personal

contact and personal knowledge of an individual member of a perceived outgroup. However, it

would be simplistic to suggest that personal contact alone will eradicate all prejudice from every

individual. Because prejudice results from so many factors, there is no simple remedy. However, as

Myers suggests, if, for example, unequal status breeds prejudice, then one should seek to create

cooperative equal-status relationships; if discriminatory behavior breeds prejudice, then one should

mandate nondiscriminiation. If some social institutions support prejudice, then pull out those supports. If the outgroups seem more unlike ones group than they actually are, make efforts to

personalize their members.

Although prejudice does exist and, to some degree, will always exist, one can and

should minimize the negative effects of prejudice and bias.

The author relied most heavily in Learning Module One on the material of Dr. David

G. Myers as found in Chapter 12 of his work, Social Psychology, (2nd edition), New York: McGraw

Hill, 1987. Examples, content material, and quotations are taken from this reference.
16

Suggested Readings

Aboud, F. E. (1988). Children and predjudice Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.

Allport, G. W. (1979). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. (Particular attention

should be paid to chapters 1, 2, 13, 16, 22.)

Berk, R. A. (1990). Thinking about hate-motivated crimes. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5 (3),

334-349.

Brown, R. (1986). Social psychology. New York: Free Press.

(Particular attention should be paid to Chapter 15: Ethnocentrism and hostility and Chapter

16: Stereotypes.)

Ehrlich, H. J. (1973). The social psychology of prejudice. New York: Wiley.

Eiser, J. R. (1986). Social psychology: Attitudes, cognition and social behavior. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Forgas, J. P. (1981). Social cognition: Perspectives on everyday understanding. New York:

Academic Press.

Frederickson, G. M., & Knobel, D. T. (1982). A history of discrimination. In T. F. Pettigrew, et al.,

Prejudice: Selections from the Harvard encyclopedia of American ethnic groups (pp. 30-87).

Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Milner, D. (1975). Children and race. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books.

Myers, D. G. (1987). Social psychology (2nd edition). New York: McGraw Hill. (Particular attention

should be paid to Chapter 12: Prejudice: Disliking others.)

Taylor, D. (1984). Race prejudice, discrimination, and racism. In A. S. Kahn (Ed.). Social psychol

ogy. Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown.
17

LEARNING MODULE TWO:

Bias-Motivated Crimes  Definitions & Procedures

MODULE DESCRIPTION:

Provides: (1) a suggested model approach to reporting hate crimes; (2) definitions of hate

crime terminology; and (3) criteria for determining whether a hate crime has occurred.

COURSE OBJECTIVES:

* The student will be able to define: Bias/Hate Crime; Ethnicity/National Origin Bias; Hate

 Group; Racial Bias; Disability Bias; Sexual-Orientation Bias; Bisexual; Gay; Heterosexual;

 Homosexual; Lesbian; Religious Bias; Responding Officer; and Second Level Judgment

 Officer/Unit.

* The student will be able to explain the two-tier process for reporting hate crimes.

* The student will be able to list the types of criteria used to make a determination of whether

 a crime was bias motivated.

CAVEAT:

The training material presented herein represents a composite of suggested procedures from law enforcement officers and administrators who have already established hatecrime reporting systems within their departments. Since the material is designed for use in

training new as well as experienced officers, some of it is basic and some portrays what an experienced officer normally does.

DEFINITIONS:

Bias - A preformed negative opinion or attitude toward a group of persons based on

their race, religion, disability, ethnicity/national origin, or sexual orientation.

Bias Crime - A criminal offense committed against a person or property which is

motivated, in whole or in part, by the offenders bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnicity/

national origin, or sexual-orientation. Also known as Hate Crime.

[Note: Even if the offender was mistaken in his/her perception that the victim was a

member of the group he or she was acting against, the offense is still a bias crime

because the offender was motivated, in whole or in part, by bias against the group.]

Bisexual - [adjective] Of or relating to persons who experience sexual attraction

toward, and responsiveness to, both males and females; [noun] a bisexual person.
18

Disability Bias - A preformed negative opinion or attitude toward a group of persons

based on their physical or mental impairments/challenges, whether such disability is temporary or

permanent, congenital or acquired by heredity, accident, injury, advanced age, or illness.

Disabled - [adjective] Of or relating to persons who have physical or mental impairments/challenges, whether temporary or permanent, due to conditions that are congenital or acquired

by heredity, accident, injury, advanced age, or illness; [noun] a disabled person.

Ethnicity/National Origin Bias - A preformed negative opinion or attitude toward a

group of persons of the same race or national origin who share common or similar traits, languages, customs, and traditions, e.g., Arabs, Hispanics, etc.

Gay - [adjective] Of or relating to males who experience a sexual attraction toward,

and responsiveness to, other males; [noun] a homosexual male.

Hate Crime - Same as Bias Crime.

Hate Group - An organization whose primary purpose is to promote animosity,

hostility, and malice against persons belonging to a(n) race, religion, disability, ethnicity/national origin,

or sexual-orientation which differs from that of the members of the organization, e.g., the Ku Klux

Klan, American Nazi Party, etc.

Heterosexual - [adjective] Of or relating to persons who experience a sexual attraction toward, and responsiveness to, members of the opposite sex; [noun] a heterosexual person.

Homosexual - [adjective] Of or relating to persons who experience a sexual attraction toward, and responsiveness to, members of their own sex; [noun] a homosexual person.

Lesbian - [adjective] Of or relating to females who experience a sexual attraction

toward, and responsiveness to, other females; [noun] a homosexual female.

National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) - A unit-record reporting system

which is being implemented to replace the traditional UCR Summary Reporting System (SRS). NIBRS

provides for expanded collection and reporting of offenses, arrests, and their circumstances.

Racial Bias - A preformed negative opinion or attitude toward a group of persons

who possess common physical characteristics, e.g., color of skin; eyes and/or hair; facial features;

etc., genetically transmitted by descent and heredity which distinguish them as a distinct division of humankind, e.g., Asians, blacks, whites, etc.

Religious Bias - A preformed negative opinion or attitude toward a group of persons

who share the same religious beliefs regarding the origin and purpose of the universe and the

existence or nonexistence of a supreme being, e.g., Catholics, Jews, Protestants, atheists, etc.

Responding Officer - The first law enforcement officer on the scene of an alleged bias

incident. This officer may have witnessed the incident take place, may have been called to the scene by

the victim or a witness, or may have received the assignment from a superior officer or dispatcher. This

officer is responsible for determining whether a Suspected Bias Incident has occurred.
19

Second Level Judgment Officer/Unit - The officer or unit within the law enforcement

department who has received in-depth training in bias-related incidents and is tasked with making

the final determination whether a hate crime has occurred.

Sexual-Orientation Bias - A preformed negative opinion or attitude toward a group

of persons based on their sexual attraction toward, and responsiveness to, members of their own

sex or members of the opposite sex, e.g., gays, lesbians, heterosexuals, etc.

Summary Reporting System (SRS) - The traditional tally system which has been used

since 1930 to collect UCR data.

SUPPLEMENTARY OFFENSE DEFINITIONS:

Agencies which do not submit their hate crime data through the National IncidentBased Reporting System (NIBRS), i.e., those who submit Quarterly Hate Crime Reports to the FBI,

should use the following definitions for reporting hate crime data on Simple Assault, Intimidation,

and Destruction/Damage/Vandalism of Property:

Simple Assault - An unlawful physical attack by one person upon another where

neither the offender displays a weapon, nor the victim suffers obvious severe or aggravated bodily

injury involving apparent broken bones, loss of teeth, possible internal injury, severe laceration, or

loss of consciousness.

Intimidation - To unlawfully place another person in reasonable fear of bodily harm

through the use of threatening words and/or other conduct, but without displaying a weapon or

subjecting the victim to actual physical attack.

Destruction/Damage/Vandalism of Property - To willfully or maliciously destroy, damage, deface, or otherwise injure real or personal property without the consent of the owner or the

person having custody or control of it.

[Note: This offense does not include destruction or damage to property caused by

the crime of Arson.]

PROCEDURES:

The following is a suggested two-tier procedure for handling hate crime collection

within an agency. It includes:

(1) the officer on the scene of an alleged bias crime making an initial determination

that bias motivation is suspected; and

(2) a second officer or unit with more expertise in bias crime matters making the

final determination of whether a hate crime has actually occurred.
20

Two-Tier Decisionmaking Process

The FBIs UCR Program examined hate crime collection procedures and forms currently in use at various law enforcement agencies across the country. It found that most law enforcement agencies which collect hate crime data employ a two-tier decisionmaking process. The first

level is the law enforcement officer who initially responds to the alleged hate crime incident, i.e., the

Responding Officer (or First Level Judgment Officer). It is the responsibility of the Responding

Officer to determine whether there is any indication that the offender was motivated by bias. If there

is, he/she is to designate it as a Suspected Bias Incident and forward the case file to a Second

Level Judgment Officer/Unit. In smaller agencies this is usually a person specially trained in hate

crime matters, while in larger agencies it may be a special unit.

It is the task of the Second Level Judgment Officer/Unit to review carefully the facts of

the incident and make the final determination of whether a hate crime has actually occurred. If so,

the incident is to be reported to the national UCR Program as a bias-motivated crime.

Responding Officers Responsibilities

Law enforcements response to an alleged hate crime begins no differently than to

any other crime. The Responding Officer must quickly evaluate what has happened and take any

necessary action to stabilize the situation. After that has been done, there are two unique areas of

concern which should be recognized by an officer responding to an alleged hate crime: (1) sensitivity to the needs of the victim; and (2) the elements of a bias crime.

First, the Responding Officer should be sensitive to the effects of a bias crime on the

victim. A victim of any crime may feel isolated from others, fearful that the occurrence will happen

again, and angry that he/she has become a victim. However, there is a deeper level of isolation,

fear, and anger that the victim of hate crime feels. This individual has been chosen from the rest of

the population to be victimized for no other reason than his/her race, religion, disability, ethnicity/

national origin, or sexual orientation. There is nothing this person can do; indeed, there is nothing

he/she ought to do to change his/her race, religion, disability, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. And

yet, it is because of these very innate qualities that he/she was victimized. This type of personal

experience can result, many times, in a feeling of loss of control over ones life. By recognizing these

dynamics, the Responding Officer can address the special needs of the victim, thereby placing him/

her at some ease and thereby making it easier to elicit from him/her necessary information concerning

the alleged offense. Another task of the Responding Officer is to determine whether additional resources are needed on the scene, such as community affairs/relations representatives, mental/

physical health professionals, and/or the clergy. At a minimum, the victim should be referred to

appropriate social and legal services.

Second, the Responding Officer must be knowledgeable of the elements of a biasrelated crime. As set forth in this document, a bias crime is a criminal offense committed against a

person or property which is motivated by the offenders bias against the victims race, religion,

disability, ethnicity or national origin, or sexual orientation. At the level of the Responding Officer, if

there is any indication that the offender was motivated by bias, the incident should be classified as

a Suspected Bias Incident.
21

The types of factors to be considered by the Reporting Officer in making a determination of whether the incident is a Suspected Bias Incident are:

* Is the motivation of the alleged offender known?

* Was the incident known to have been motivated by racial, religious, disability, ethnic, or

sexual- orientation bias?

* Does the victim perceive the action of the offender to have been motivated by bias?

* Is there no clear other motivation for the incident?

* Were any racial, religious, disability, ethnic, or sexual-orientation bias remarks made by

the offender?

* Were there any offensive symbols, words, or acts which are known to represent a hate

group or other evidence of bias against the victims group?

* Did the incident occur on a holiday or other day of significance to the victims or

offenders group?

* What do the demographics of the area tell you about the incident?

If these or other factors indicate that the offender may have been motivated by bias,

the incident should be classified as a Suspected Bias Incident and sent on to the Second Level

Judgment Officer/Unit for review. While the mere utterance of a racial epithet by the offender does

not provide sufficient basis to report a crime as a Suspected Bias Incident, it, combined with other

factors indicating bias, could do so. For the purpose of first-level bias crime reporting, the old

adage of when in doubt, check it out should be followedi.e., questionable cases should be

referred to the Second Level Judgment Officer/Unit for resolution.

Second Level Judgment Officers/Units Responsibilities

The second tier in the decisionmaking process is where the final decision is made regarding whether an offense was bias motivated. Therefore, the people who make final decisions

must be specially trained to the point of being experts on bias matters. The Responding Officer

had merely to determine whether there was any indication that the offense was motivated by bias.

On the other hand, the Second Judgment Officer/Unit must carefully sift through the facts using

more stringent criteria to determine whether the incident was, in fact, a hate crime.

The second level of review can be a specially trained officer, investigator, supervisor,

or specially established hate crime unit. This does not mean that every agency must establish a

Special Hate Crime Unit. Given the fiscal constraints prevalent throughout most of the law enforcement community, such a proposition would be an unreasonable requirement. However, what

is suggested is that somewhere in the agencys already established crime reporting review process,

someone should be specifically tasked with the responsibility of reviewing Suspected Bias Incidents

and making the final decision as to the existence or nonexistence of bias motivation.
22

During the second review, the Second Level Judgment Officer/Unit should have time

to consider carefully the findings of the Responding Officer and perhaps even conduct interviews of

the victims and witnesses if necessary. For an incident to be reported as a hate crime, sufficient

objective facts must be present to lead a reasonable and prudent person to conclude that the

offenders actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by bias. While no single fact may be conclusive, positive answers to the types of questions listed below are supportive of a finding of biased

motivation. But an important distinction should be made. The mere fact that the offender is biased

against the victims race, religion, disability, ethnic/national origin, and/or sexual orientation does

not mean that a hate crime was involved. Rather, the offenders criminal act must have been

motivated, in whole or in part, by his/her bias.

The Second Level Judgment Officer/Unit should seek answers to the following types

of questions before making the final determination of whether an incident was motivated by bias:

* Is the victim a member of a target racial, religious, disability, ethnic/national origin, or

sexual-orientation group?

* Were the offender and the victim of different race, religion, ethnicity/national origin, or

sexual-orientation? For example, the victim was black and the offenders were white.

* Would the incident have taken place if the victim and offender were of the same race,

religion, disability, ethnicity/national origin, or sexual orientation?

* Were biased oral comments, written statements, or gestures made by the offender which indicate his/her bias? For example, the offender shouted a racial epithet at the victim.

* Were bias-related drawings, markings, symbols, or graffiti left at the crime scene? For

example, a swastika was painted on the door of a synagogue.

* Were certain objects, items, or things which indicate bias used, e.g., the offenders wore

white sheets with hoods covering their faces, a burning cross was left in front of the victims

residence?

* Is the victim a member of a racial, religious, disability, ethnic/national origin, or sexual-

 orientation group which is overwhelmingly outnumbered by other residents in the neighborhood where the victim lives and the incident took place? This factor loses significance with

the passage of time, i.e., it is most significant when the victim first moved into the neighborhood

and becomes less significant as time passes without incident.

* Was the victim visiting a neighborhood where previous hate crimes were committed against

other members of his/her racial, religious, disability, ethnic/national origin, or sexual-orientation group and where tensions remained high against his/her group?

* Have several incidents occurred in the same locality, at or about the same time, and were

the victims all of the same race, religion, disability, ethnic/national origin, or sexualorientation?
23

* Does a substantial portion of the community where the crime occurred perceive that the

incident was motivated by bias?

* Was the victim engaged in activities promoting his/her race, religion, disability, ethnicity/

national origin, or sexual orientation? For example, the victim is a member of the

NAACP, participates in gay rights demonstrations, etc.

* Did the incident coincide with a holiday relating to, or a date of particular significance

 to, a race, religion, disability, ethnic/national origin, or sexual-orientation, e.g., Martin

Luther King Day, Rosh Hashanah?

* Was the offender previously involved in a similar hate crime or is he/she a member of a

hate group?

* Were there indications that a hate group was involved? For example, a hate group

claimed responsibility for the crime or was active in the neighborhood.

* Does a historically established animosity exist between the victims and offenders groups?

* Is this incident similar to other known and documented cases of bias, particularly in

this area? Does it fit a similar modus operandi to these other incidents?

* Has this victim been previously involved in similar situations?

* Are there other explanations for the incident, such as a childish prank, unrelated vandalism, etc.?

* Did the offender have some understanding of the impact his/her actions would have on the

victim?

The Second Level Judgment Officer/Unit should respond to the scenes of large

bias incidents, such as race riots, demonstrations, etc. When doing so, a determination should be

made whether additional resources should be called to the scene, such as police tactical units,

community affairs/relations representatives, mental/physical health professionals, and/or the clergy.

It is important to note that only after the Second Level Judgment Officer/Unit has

made a decision that the crime was bias motivated should it be reported to the FBIs UCR Program.
24

LEARNING MODULE THREE:

Case Study Exercises of Possible Bias-Related Crimes

MODULE DESCRIPTION:

Provides the student officer with hypothetical case scenarios to practice his/her knowledge gained from Learning Modules One and Two.

COURSE OBJECTIVES:

The student will be able to evaluate a hypothetical case and

* classify the offenses involved in the incident;

* classify the incident as either an Unbiased Incident or

a Suspected Bias Incident; and

* give the reasons for his/her decision.

RULES FOR THE EXERCISE SESSION:

The student officer is to read the hypothetical cases and (1) classify the offense(s) involved in each incident; (2) classify the fact situations as either an Unbiased Incident or a Suspected Bias Incident; and (3) give reasons for his/her bias classification decisions.

EXERCISE CASES:

Exercise (1): At 7:30 a.m., Wednesday, August 3, Officers Groves and Miller received

a radio call to respond to Morning Resting Place, a Jewish cemetery. The radio call informed the

officers that they would be met by Mr. Sherin, the head groundskeeper, who reported that overnight

thieves entered the cemetery. Arriving on the scene, the officers were told that copper gutters had

been stolen from the main building during the night.

Crime Classification: [Larceny/Theft]

Bias Classification: [Unbiased Incident]

Reasons: [There were no obvious signs of a bias incident. Generally, theft is not a

bias-motivated offense, except where religious articles are singled out for stealing.]
25

Exercise (2): Deputy Sheriff Medaris received a radio call to go to an apartment and

interview an individual complaining of threats made over the telephone. Upon arriving at the

apartment, the complainant, a white male, informed Deputy Medaris that he is gay and that over

the last two weeks he has received repeated telephone calls from a person who stated that the

complainant had been seen going into gay bars, and therefore, he would have to be beat up.

Crime Classification: [Intimidation]

Bias Classification: [Suspected Bias Incident]

Reasons: [Threats were made to harm the victim physically because of his sexual

orientation.]

Exercise (3): As Officer McManus was walking his beat, his attention was drawn to

two individuals who were engaged in a shouting match. As the officer approached, he overheard

the two men, one white and the other black, shouting obscenities at each other. The argument

concerned a parking space to which each believed he was entitled. As the argument continued, a

racial epithet was shouted by one of the men. At this point, Officer McManus arrived at the scene

and quieted the men. What appeared to have happened was that one of the drivers had gotten to

the parking space first but did not use his turn signal to indicate he was waiting to pull into the

parking space. The second driver, coming upon what appeared to be an unoccupied parking

space, proceeded to maneuver his car around the first drivers car and into the space. The argument then began.

Crime Classification: [None]

Bias Classification: [Unbiased Incident]

Reasons: [The argument only involved the issue of which driver deserved to get

the parking space. One of the questions one should ask in investigating alleged

bias incidents is: Would the incident have taken place if both the victim and offender were of the same race, religion, ethnic origin, or sexual orientation? If the

answer is Yes, it is an Unbiased Incident.]

Exercise (4): While driving by in his police car, Officer Magaro noticed an individual,

who later identified himself as Mr. Maunu attempting to scrub some painted words and markings off

his car, which was parked outside the apartment building where he lives. Officer Magaro asked Mr.

Maunu what happened to his car. Mr. Maunu explained that he had moved into the neighborhood

three weeks ago and unknown persons had repeatedly painted his car and the door of his apartment with anti-black symbols and slogans. Mr. Maunu said he did not understand why this was

happening to him because he is not black and he had immigrated to the United States from India.
26

Crime Classification: [Destruction/Damage/Vandalism of Property]

Bias Classification: [Suspected Bias Incident]

Reasons: [Although Mr. Maunu is not black, it is the perception of the offenders that

he is a member of a minority against which they are biased. Even when offenders

erroneously target the victims, their offenses are still suspected bias incidents because the offenders are motivated by bias.]

Exercise (5): During the midnight tour, Deputy Sheriff Hennessey was patrolling

his assigned watch area. Shining his cruiser light on various business establishments, he

noticed one building had been spray painted. The graffiti included racial epithets used against

Asians and threats against the owners of a Chinese restaurant which is located in the building. The

Deputy knows the Chinese owners are the only Asians in that business district. No other buildings were spray painted.

Crime Classification: [Destruction/Damage/Vandalism of Property]

Bias Classification: [Suspected Bias Incident]

Reasons: [The offenders apparently were motivated by their bias against Asians.

This is evidenced by their use of Asian epithets and the fact that no other business in

the area was spray painted.]

Exercise (6): At 11 p.m. Officers Riley and Florence responded to the scene of a

reported house arson. Their investigation revealed that the target of the arson was a group home

for persons with psychiatric disabilities who were in transition back into the community. Apparently, neighbors had expressed many concerns about the group home and were angry that the

house was located in their community. Shortly before the fire was reported, a witness heard a white

male state, I'll get rid of those 'crazies.' I'll burn them out.

Crime Classification: [Arson]

Bias Classification: [Anti-Mental Disability]

Reasons: [The suspect apparently committed the crime of arson primarily because

of his bias against persons with psychiatric disabilities. The witness heard a statement that supports the bias motivation finding.]
27

APPENDIX A

Organizations Offering Information

Concerning Anti-Bias Education
28

American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee

Suite 500

4201 Connecticut Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C. 20008

202/244-2990

202/244-3196 (fax)

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) is a service organization that

is non-sectarian and non-partisan and is committed to defending the rights and promoting the

heritage of Arab-Americans. ADC offers advocacy in cases of defamation, legal action in cases

of discrimination and counseling in matters of immigration. ADC has published a series of reports

on anti-Arab hate crimes.

American Citizens for Justice, Inc.

Suite 121

19111 W. Ten Mile Road

Southfield, MI 48075

810/352-1020

810/398-7859 (fax)

The American Citizens for Justice, Inc. is an organization which seeks to eradicate racism, harassment, and discrimination against Asian Pacific Americans and other minority and ethnic groups through legal consultation, monitoring anti-Asian violence, advocacy, community education, and the Vincent Chin Justice scholarship.

Appendix A

Organizations Offering Information

Concerning Anti-Bias Education

The descriptions following the below-listed organizations were written by the respective groups. Each group was requested to furnish the FBI with a statement that would clearly and

accurately describe its mission and the type of resources it could extend to both law enforcement in

particular and to the community in general.
29

American Jewish Committee

Suite 1201

1156 15th Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20005

202/785-4200

202/785-4115 (fax)

The American Jewish Committee (AJC) is an organization which was created to protect the rights of Jews the world over and to combat bigotry and anti-Semitism. The AJC has

published Skinheads: Who They Are & What to Do When They Come to Town and Bigotry on Campus: A Planned Response.

American Psychological Association

750 First Street, NE

Washington, D.C. 20002-4242

202/336-6062

202/336-6063 (fax)

The American Psychological Association is the Nation's largest organization of psychologists in both academic and service delivery settings. Psychologists are an important source of

information about the biases which motivate hate crimes. Assistance and services to individuals

suffering the adverse mental health consequences of prejudice and hate-motivated violence are

also offered by psychologists. Skilled psychologists also conduct law enforcement training focusing

on understanding the causes and effects of hate-related criminal behavior.

Anti-Defamation League

823 United Nations Plaza

New York, NY 10017

212/490-2525

212/867-0779 (fax)

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is a human relations organization with thirtyone regional offices across the country. ADL is dedicated to promoting intergroup cooperation and

interfaith understanding. Over the past decade, ADL has become a leading resource in crafting

responses to hate violence, including model hate crime legislation, a 17-minute hate crime training

video, a handbook of existing hate crime policies and procedures at both large and small police

departments, and a general human relations training program for law enforcement designed to

examine the impact of discrimination, while promoting better cultural awareness and increased

appreciation for diversity.
30

Asian Pacific American Legal Center

 of Southern California

Suite 302

1010 South Flower Street

Los Angeles, CA 90015-1428

213/748-2022

213/748-0679 (fax)

The Asian Pacific American Legal Center (APALC) is working with the city of Los

Angeles to improve its response to crimes of hate violence. Through the Los Angeles City Human

Relations Commission, APALC has participated in the implementation of the Hate Violence Monitoring Order of the Los Angeles Police Department. The program will streamline the tracking of

hate violence and will train officers who will be assigned to investigate and properly follow up on

hate violence cases.

Cambodian Network Council

713 D Street, SE

Washington, D. C. 20003

202/546-9144

202/546-9147 (fax)

The Cambodian Network Council was organized to serve and educate refugees on

their rights in America. Educational programs, refugee funding, and community empowerment are

its basic functions. Some of the Councils affiliates address hate crimes.

Catholic League

1011 First Avenue

New York, New York 10022

212/371-3191

212/371-3394 (fax)

The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights defends the right of Catholics--lay

and clergy alike-- to participate in American public life without defamation or discrimination. Motivated by the letter and spirit of the First Amendment, the Catholic League works to safeguard both

the religious rights and the free speech rights of Catholics.

Center for Democratic Renewal

P.O. Box 50469

Atlanta, GA 30302

404/221-0025

The Center for Democratic Renewal (CDR) is a national clearinghouse of information

on the white supremacist movement. CDR provides training to law enforcement agencies, schools,

churches, and community organizations. Over 40 publications are available, including the resource manual, When Hate Groups Come to Town, and the bimonthly newsletter, The Monitor.
31

Committee Against Anti-Asian Violence

191 East 3rd Street

New York, NY 10009

212/473-6485

The Committee Against Anti-Asian Violence (CAAAV) was founded in 1986 to organize Asian communities in the New York City area to combat racist violence and police brutality.

Through community education and organizing efforts, CAAAV strives to develop leadership

within the Asian communities to speak out and effect change in public policies, the police department, and the criminal justice system.

Japanese American Citizens League

1765 Sutter Street

San Francisco, CA 94115

415/921-5225

415/931-4671 (fax)

The Japanese American Citizens League (JACL) is a national non-profit, educational,

human and civil rights organization representing Americans of Japanese ancestry. JACL is headquartered in San Francisco and has 113 chapters, 5 regional offices, and an advocacy office in Washington, D.C. JACL monitors incidents of anti-Asian violence, provides assistance in specific cases,

offers a handbook on responding to anti-Asian violence, and participates in seminars on hate

crimes.

Justice Research and Statistics Association

Suite 445

444 N. Capitol Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20001

202/624-8560

202/624-5269

The Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA), formerly the Criminal

Justice Statistics Association, is a national non-profit organization for state Statistical Analysis Center directors and other justice system professionals who use or conduct research to support public

policy development. JRSA provides a clearinghouse of information on criminal justice issues and

projects being carried out in the states, including hate crimes; training in the latest computer technology for records management, data analysis, and forecasting criminal justice populations; and

reports on the latest research being conducted by local, state, and federal agencies.
32

Klanwatch

Southern Poverty Law Center

400 Washington Avenue

Montgomery, AL 36104

334/264-0286

334/264-8891 (fax)

Klanwatch, a project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, monitors hate crimes and

hate groups throughout the Nation. Klanwatch publishes The Intelligence Report, a bimonthly review of hate crimes and activities of white supremacist groups for law enforcement agencies, and

provide seminars for community organizations.

Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission

Room 1184

320 West Temple

Los Angeles, CA 90012

213/974-7611

213/687-4251 (fax)

The Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission is one of the oldest and

largest Human Relations Commissions. The Commission addresses hate crimes by responding

directly to them; disseminating information to law enforcement agencies, the media, communitybased and governmental organizations; supporting efforts on hate crime reporting; and helping to

produce a Hate Crime Victims Rights video. Hate crimes are surveyed in Los Angeles County

schools and hate crime statistics are gathered and combined into a yearly report to the Board of

Supervisors.

Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund

Suite 410

1518 K Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20005

202/628-4074

202/393-4206 (fax)

The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) is a national

civil rights organization founded in 1968 to promote and protect civil rights, and specifically, to

conduct litigation and advocacy work on behalf of Hispanic Americans. MALDEF primarily focuses

on Hispanic immigration issues. Its national headquarters is located in Los Angeles; regional

offices are in San Francisco, San Diego, Chicago, and Washington, D.C.
33

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

4805 Mount Hope Drive

Baltimore, MD 21215

410/358-8900

410/764-7357 (fax)

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) was formed

in 1909 in New York City. The Association has grown to over 2,200 chapters nationwide, including

branches in Germany and Japan, and has over 500,000 members. The principal objective of the

NAACP is to ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of minority group

citizens among the citizens of the United States. The NAACP is committed to achievement through

non-violence and relies upon the press, the petition, the ballot, and the courts.

National Conference of Christians and Jews

71 Fifth Avenue

New York, NY 10003

212/807-8440

212/727-0166 (fax)

The National Conference of Christians and Jews (NCCJ) was founded in 1927 to

combat racism and religious bigotry, to improve communications between different American communities, and to build bridges of mutual respect. NCCJ uses a combination of methods to achieve

its goals including: education, leadership, professional intervention with trained human relations

specialists, group meetings, and group dialogues.

National Gay & Lesbian Task Force

2320 17th St, NW

Washington, D.C. 20009-2702

202/332-6483

202/332-0207 (fax)

The National Gay & Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) is a civil rights organization dedicated to building a movement to promote freedom and full equality for all lesbians and gay men. Its

Anti-Violence Project was initiated in 1982 to promote an appropriate official response to anti-gay

violence, improve the treatment of lesbians and gay men by the criminal justice system, and assist

local communities in organizing against prejudice and violence. NGLTF reports annually on antigay/lesbian violence, victimization, and defamation.
34

National Immigration Forum

Suite 220

220 I Street, NE

Washington, D.C. 20002

202/544-0004

202/544-1905 (fax)

The Forum is a membership organization which focuses on immigration policy

and coordinates appeals to the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Membership includes

ethnic groups, labor unions, state and local governmental agencies, and local coalitions. The

Forum recently created a Task Force on Race and Ethnic Relations.

National Urban League

Suite 600

1111 14th Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20005

202/898-1604

The National Urban League is a non-profit, non-partisan community-based organization headquartered in New York City with 113 affiliates in 34 states and the District of Columbia. Its Research Department, located in Washington, D.C., conducted a study entitled Interracial

Violence and Community Conflict: A Study in Symbolic and Competitive Racism. The main objective of this study was to analyze the interrelationships between socio-economic and demographic

characteristics and the incidence of interracial violence and conflict.

New York City Gay & Lesbian Anti-Violence Project

647 Hudson Street

New York, NY 10014

212/807-0197

The New York City Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project (AVP), a crime victim assistance agency founded in 1980, is the Citys primary resource for lesbian and gay survivors of

domestic violence, sexual assault, bias assault, and other forms of criminal victimization. In 1990,

AVP became the first organization in the country to specifically respond with a full range of

services to HIV/AIDS-related violence. All services are free and confidential.
35

Organization of Chinese Americans

Suite 707

1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C. 20036

202/223-5500

202/296-0540 (fax)

The Organization of Chinese Americans (OCA) is a national non-profit, non-partisan civic organization advocating for the welfare of Chinese Americans. OCA has an internal

task force on anti-Asian violence. It monitors court cases and is involved with specific cases by

acting as legal counsel and providing financial resources. OCA materials include a quarterly newsletter, which offers updates on cases, and a new major publication on hate crimes.

People for the American Way

Suite 400

2000 M Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20036

202/467-4999

202/293-2672 (fax)

People for the American Way (People For) is a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to the defense of constitutional liberties. Through its work on hate crimes, censorship and civil rights, People For works to combat intolerance in America. Publications include Hate

in the Ivory Tower, a report on hate crimes and incidents on college campuses, and Democracys

Next Generation II, a report on youth attitudes on race.

Police Executive Research Forum

Suite 930

1120 Connecticut Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C. 20036

202/466-7820

202/466-7826 (fax)

The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) is a national association of progressive

police executives from large- and medium-sized jurisdictions dedicated to improving police services. PERF has been a leading law enforcement advocate of hate crime data collection since 1987,

when it became one of the first national police associations to endorse the Hate Crime Statistics Act.

In an effort to help promote understanding and reduce tensions between persons of different races,

religions, ethnicities, and sexual orientations, PERF offers a cultural differences training curriculum

for law enforcement officials.
36

APPENDIX B

LEGISLATION
37

PUBLIC LAW 101-275 - APR 23, 1990

104 STAT. 140

Hate Crime

Statistics Act

28 USC 534 note.

Apr. 23, 1990

[H.R. 1048]

Research and

development

Appropriation

authorization.

28 USC 534 note.

Public Law 101-275

101st Congress

An Act

To provide for the acquisition and publication of data about crimes that manifest

 prejudice based on certain group characteristics.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That (a) this Act may

be cited as the Hate Crime Statistics Act.

(b)(1) Under the authority of section 534 of title 28, United States

Code, the Attorney General shall acquire data, for the calendar year 1990

and each of the succeeding 4 calendar years, about crimes that manifest

evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity,

including where appropriate the crimes of murder, non-negligent manslaughter; forcible rape; aggravated assault , simple assault, intimidation; arson; and destruction, damage or vandalism of property.

(2) The Attorney General shall establish guidelines for the collection of such data including the necessary evidence and criteria that must

be present for a finding of manifest prejudice and procedures for carrying out the purposes of this section.

(3) Nothing in this section creates a cause of action or a right to

bring an action, including an action based on discrimination due to sexual

orientation. As used in this section, the term sexual orientation means consensual homosexuality or heterosexuality. This subsection does not limit any

existing cause of action or right to bring an action, including any action

under the Administrative Procedure Act or the All Writs Act.

(4) Data acquired under this section shall be used only for research

or statistical purposes and may not contain any information that may

reveal the identity of an individual victim of a crime.

(5) The Attorney General shall publish an annual summary of the

data acquired under this section.

(c) There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be

necessary to carry out the provisions of this section through fiscal year

1994.

SEC. 2. (a) Congress finds that 
38

PUBLIC LAW 101-275  APR. 23, 1990

104 STAT 141

(1) the American family life is the foundation of American Society,

(2) Federal policy should encourage the well-being, financial security,

and health of the American family,

(3) schools should not de-emphasize the critical value of American family

life.

 (b) Nothing in this Act shall be construed, nor shall any funds appropriated

to carry out the purpose of the Act be used, to promote or encourage homosexuality.

 Approved April 23, 1990.
39

PUBLIC LAW 103-322  SEPT. 13, 1994

108 STAT. 2131

Subsection (b)(1) of the first section of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C.

534 note) is amended by inserting disability, after religion,.

Approved September 13, 1994.

PUBLIC LAW 104-155  JULY 3, 1996

Subsection (b)(1) of the first section of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C.

534 note) is amended by striking for the calendar year 1990 and each succeeding 4 calendar years, and by inserting for each calendar year.

Approved July 3, 1996.
40

APPENDIX C

QUARTERLY HATE CRIME REPORT

HATE CRIME INCIDENT REPORT
City County State

Name of Agency Name of Identifier

Name of Preparer Title

Quarter and Year of Report: January-March April-June

July-September October-December

Year

Total number of incidents reported in this quarter

If there were no hate crimes in this quarter, check this box.

Month Day Year

QUARTERLY HATE CRIME REPORT

Offenses Known to Law Enforcement

Summary Page

This report is authorized by Title 28, Section 534, U.S. Code, and the Hate Crime Statistics Act of

1990. Your cooperation in using this form to report hate crimes known to your department will assist the

FBI in compiling comprehensive and accurate data regarding incidence and prevalence of Hate Crime

throughout the Nation. Please submit this report on a quarterly basis, by the 15th day after the close of the

quarter, to Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Attention:

Uniform Crime Reports/Module E-3, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, WV 26306.

Month Day Year

Month Day Year

Month Day Year

NOTE: Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to average .17 hours per response, including the time

for reviewing. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information

including suggestions for reducing this burden to, Federal Bureau of Investigation, CJIS, ATTN: Uniform Crime

Reports, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, WV 26306; and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,

OMB Number 1110-0015, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, D.C. 20503.

Form Approved

OMB No. 1110-0015

Approved through 5/3/97

Month Day Year

Deletion of incident(s) previously reported [Applicable only for deletion of entire incident(s)].

Incident Number Date of the Incident
UCR Code # of victims

#6

UCR Code # of victims

#3

UCR Code # of victims

#2

UCR Offense

UCR Code # of victims

#1

Incident No. Page of of Same Incident

HATE CRIME INCIDENT REPORT

Initial Adjustment ORI Date of Incident / /

UCR Code # of victims

#5

UCR Code # of victims

#4

Offense Code

01 Murder 07 Motor Vehicle Theft

02 Forcible Rape 08 Arson

03 Robbery 09 Simple Assault

04 Aggravated Assault 10 Intimidation

05 Burglary 11 Destruction/Damage/

06 Larceny-Theft Vandalism

Location (Check one for Offense #1)

01 o Air/ Bus / Train Terminal 14 o Hotel /Motel / etc.

02 o Bank / Savings and Loan 15 o Jail / Prison

03 o Bar / Night Club 16 o Lake / Waterway

04 o Church / Synagogue / Temple 17 o Liquor Store

05 o Commercial / Office Building 18 o Parking Lot / Garage

06 o Construction Site 19 o Rental Storage Facility

07 o Convenience Store 20 o Residence / Home

08 o Department / Discount Store 21 o Restaurant

09 o Drug Store / Dr.'s Office / Hospital 22 o School / College

10 o Field / Woods 23 o Service / Gas Station

11 o Government / Public Building 24 o Specialty Store (TV, Fur, etc.)

12 o Grocery / Supermarket 25 o Other / Unknown

13 o Highway / Road / Alley / Street

Enter Location

Code if Different

from Offense #1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

Religious

21 Anti-Jewish

22 Anti-Catholic

23 Anti-Protestant

24 Anti-Islamic (Moslem)

25 Anti-Other Religion

26 Anti-Atheism/Agnosticism

Sexual

41 Anti-Male Homosexual

42 Anti-Female Homosexual (Lesbian)

43 Anti-Homosexual (Gay & Lesbian)

44 Anti-Heterosexual

45 Anti-Bisexual

Number of Offenders (Use "00" for "Unknown)

Suspected Offender's Race as a Group (Check one)

1 o White 3 o American Indian / Alaskan Native 5 o Multi-Racial Group

2 o Black 4 o Asian / Pacific Islander 6 o Unknown

Offense Offense Offense Offense Offense Offense

Code Code Code Code Code Code

#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6

1. Individual* o o o o oo

2. Business o o o o oo

3. Financial Institution o o o o oo

4. Government o o o o oo

*Indicate the total number of individual victims involved in the incident.

Offense Offense Offense Offense Offense Offense

Code Code Code Code Code Code

#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6

1. Religious Organization o o o o oo

2. Society o o o o oo

3. Other o o o o oo

4. Unknown o o o o oo

-

-

-

-

-

-

Victim Type:

Victim Type: For each offense code listed above, check all applicable victim types

Bias Motivation (Check one for Offense #1)

Racial

11 Anti-White

12 Anti-Black

13 Anti-American Indian/

 Alaskan Native

14 Anti-Asian/Pacific

 Islander

15 Anti-Multi-Racial Group

Ethnicity/National Origin

32 Anti-Hispanic

33 Anti - Other Ethnicity/

 National Origin

 Specify _____________

Disability

51 Anti-Physical Disability

52 Anti-Mental Disability

Enter Bias Motivation

Code if Different

from Offense #1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING QUARTERLY

HATE CRIME AND HATE CRIME INCIDENT REPORT

SUMMARY PAGE

1. At the end of each calendar quarter, a single Summary Page, along with an individual Incident

Report for each hate-motivated incident identified during the quarter (if any), should be jointly

submitted. If none occurred, submit only the Summary Page.

2. The Summary Page should be used to identify your agency, to state the number of hate-related

incidents being reported for the calendar quarter, and to delete any incidents previously reported

which were determined during the reporting period not to be hate related.

HATE CRIME INCIDENT REPORT

3. The Incident Report should be used to report initially a hate-related incident or to adjust

information in a previously reported incident.

4. Provide an identifying incident number which preferably will be your "case" or "file" number.

5. Provide codes for all offenses within the incident determined to be hate related and the number

of victims for each such offense. In multiple offense incidents, report only those offenses

determined to be hate related. Should more than six offenses be involved in one incident, use

additional Incident Reports and make appropriate entries in the page o of o" portion of the form.

6. Provide the most appropriate location for each hate-related offense.

7. Provide the nature of the hate/bias motivation for each hate-related offense

8. Provide the victim type for each offense identified within the hate-related incident.

9. Where the victim type is an "individual," indicate the total number of individual victims (persons)

involved in the incident irrespective of the number of offenses in which they were involved.

10. Proved the number of offenders, if known, or report that such is unknown.

11. Provide the suspected offender's race, if known. If there was more than one offender, provide the

race of the group as a whole.

12. Include on separate paper any additional comments/information you feel will add clarity to the

report. (optional)

GENERAL

This report is separate from and in addition to the routine Summary UCR submission and the

Hierarchy Rule does not apply. Also, in the Summary UCR system, the offenses of Intimidation and

Destruction/Damage/Vandalism of Property are reported only when arrests occur. On this form, all are to

be reported when they have been determined to have occurred and are bias-motivated, regardless of

whether arrests have taken place. Refer to the Hate Crime Reporting Guidelines for additional

information, clarification, and explanation.
44

APPENDIX D

REGIONAL OFFICES OF THE

COMMUNITY RELATIONS SERVICE

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
45

REGIONAL OFFICES OF THE

COMMUNITY RELATIONS SERVICE

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Region I (New England)

Regional Director

Room 1820

99 Summer Street

Boston, MA 02110

(617)424-5715

(617)424-5715 (fax)

Region II (Northeast)

Regional Director

Room 3402

26 Federal Plaza

New York, NY 10278

(212)264-0700

(212)264-2143 (fax)

Region III (Mid-Atlantic)

Regional Director

Room 309

2nd and Chestnut Streets

Philadelphia, PA 19106

(215)597-2344

(215)597-9148 (fax)

Region IV (Southeast)

Regional Director

Room 900

75 Piedmont Avenue, NE

Atlanta, GA 30303

(404)331-6883

(404)331-4471 (fax)

Region V (Midwest)

Regional Director

Suite 420

55 West Monroe Street

Chicago, IL 60603

(312)353-4391

(312)353-4390 (fax)

Region VI (Southwest)

Regional Director

Suite 250

1420 West Mockingbird

Dallas, TX 75247

(214)655-8175

(214)655-8184 (fax)

Region VII (Central)

Regional Director

Room 2411

911 Walnut Street

Kansas City, MO 64104

(816)374-6522

(816)374-6530 (fax)

Region VIII (Rocky Mountain)

Regional Director

Room 650

1244 Speer Boulevard

Denver, CO 80204

(303)844-2973

(303)844-2907 (fax)

Region IX (Western)

Regional Director

Room 1040

211 Main Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

(415)744-6565

(415)744-6590 (fax)

Region X (Northwest)

Regional Director

Room 1898

915 Second Avenue

Seattle, WA 98174

(206)220-6700

(206)220-6706 (fax)
46

FIELD OFFICES

Community Relations Service

Room 424

51 Southwest First Avenue.

Miami, FL 33130

(305)536-5206

(305)536-7363 (fax)

Community Relations Service

Room 12617

515 Rusk Avenue

Houston, TX 77002

(713)229-2861

(713)229-4862 (fax)

Community Relations Service

Room 608

U.S. Courthouse

213 West Lafayette Boulevard

Detroit, MI 48226

(313)226-4010

(313)226-2568 (fax)

Headquarters

Community Relations Service

Suite 330

5550 Friendship Boulevard

Chevy Chase, MD 20815

(301)492-5995

(301)492-5984 (fax)