"Tell Tell Tell"

As everyone knows that the essence of sound political strategy is the development of a "Sister Souljah Moment" in which you pick a fight with a rapper, thus proving you're not one of those liberals, I thought I might suggest Project Pat's "Tell Tell Tell (Stop Snitchin')" as a good candidate:

As Jeremy Kahn wrote in the April Atlantic, this kind of thing is becoming a real impediment to efforts to create a safe environment for poor and working-class inner city neighborhoods:

Police and prosecutors have been contending with reluctant witnesses for decades. But according to law-enforcement experts, the problem is getting dramatically worse, and is reflected in falling arrest and conviction rates for violent crimes. In cities with populations between half a million (for example, Tucson) and a million (Detroit), the proportion of violent crimes cleared by an arrest dropped from about 45 percent in the late 1990s to less than 35 percent in 2005, according to the FBI. Conviction rates have similarly dropped. At the same time, crime has spiked. Murder rates have risen more or less steadily since 2000. Last December, the FBI voiced concern over a jump in violent crime, which in 2005 showed its biggest increase in more than a decade.

The reasons for witnesses’ reluctance appear to be changing and becoming more complex, with the police confronting a new cultural phenomenon: the spread of the gangland code of silence, or omerta, from organized crime to the population at large. Those who cooperate with the police are labeled “snitches” or “rats”—terms once applied only to jailhouse informants or criminals who turned state’s evidence, but now used for “civilian” witnesses as well. This is particularly true in the inner cities, where gangsta culture has been romanticized through rap music and other forms of entertainment, and where the motto “Stop snitching,” expounded in hip-hop lyrics and emblazoned on caps and T-shirts, has become a creed.

It's a fun song, though.

Comments

". . . a new cultural phenomenon: the spread of the gangland code of silence, or omerta, from organized crime to the population at large."

Is this really "a new cultural phenomenon" at all? I thought the Irish neighborhoods in Boston, for instance, have always been extraordinarily reticent to cooperate with any police investigation. And witness intimidation is hardly a novel tactic.

Posted by southpaw | November 26, 2007 10:56 AM

If you really want to see the "gangland code of silence, or omerta" in action take another look at the Scooter Libby case. Libby (and other government officials) lived by the code of "stop snitchin'" in order to protect the Godfather (Cheney). And Libby was rewarded for being a good soldier by not having to go to prison. It's absurd to preach openness and transperency to the poor when the powerful are protected by such a strong ethos of omerta.

Posted by Jeet Heer | November 26, 2007 11:09 AM

All this shows is the Matt does not watch The Boondocks like he should.

Posted by Rob | November 26, 2007 11:09 AM

Is this really "a new cultural phenomenon" at all?

It is new insofar as it is being pushed at the pop culture level by rap artists. In Boston, the musical references and t-shirts are accompanied with very real witness intimidation, up to and including the murder of witnesses and suspected "snitches." It's not unusual to read a Boston Herald article about the murder of young black man and see the reason he was shot was because he was suspected of being an anonymous snitch.

The gangs have a lot to do with it. Again, returning to Boston: the majority of murders committed in the city are not random street crime. Rather, they are gangland style "hits," committed for a specific purpose against pre-selected targets. Part of the "stop snitchin" phenomenon grows from the reality that people in these neighborhoods almost certainly know who is killing who, and that "justice" will be delivered on the killers in the form of retaliation. Why get the cops involved when a rival gangsta is going to take out the guilty party anyway?

Posted by owenz | November 26, 2007 11:11 AM

Well, maybe it's just me, but I find the juxtaposition of this posting and the immediately preceding one pretty amusing...

Posted by RKU | November 26, 2007 11:11 AM

the motto “Stop snitching,” expounded in hip-hop lyrics and emblazoned on caps and T-shirts, has become a creed.

Now I know what all my relatives are getting for Christmas.

Posted by JB | November 26, 2007 11:13 AM

I wonder if reluctance to cooperate in criminal cases has anything to do with the way the police and courts treat black people. Or is it all just because of the rappers?

Posted by lemuel pitkin | November 26, 2007 11:25 AM

I'm sure that the police live to make life difficult for 18-25 year old non-white males has nothing to do with it... nothing at all.

Eh, depends on the crime. I'd tell for violent crime but file sharing? Go pound sand coppers.

Heh.

Posted by MNPundit | November 26, 2007 11:29 AM

I wore a "Stop Snitching" t-shirt with Alberto Gonzales on it over the summer. I must admit I was pretty unnerved by all the compliments I got from people on the subway who said they had no idea who Alberto Gonzales was.

Posted by Dan Panorama | November 26, 2007 11:30 AM

This is an example of street culture expropriating from police culture. Cops have had their own version of "stop snitching" forever; it's called the "thin blue line", "blue code of silence" etc. Cops don't rat out other cops. So how's "stop snitching" any different? Maybe cops and DAs should STFU about "stop snitching" until they get their own shit in order.

Posted by ramster | November 26, 2007 12:15 PM

I don't see why it is incumbent on people to cooperate with and trust their police overlords. Perhaps it might be better to start with not using police to arbitrarily harass and control people in these neighborhoods? "Stop thinking and trust your betters to decide things" isn't going to be a winning slogan, no matter how much the police think they are superior.

Posted by yoyo | November 26, 2007 12:20 PM

[insert obligatory reference to The Wire, Season 4]

Posted by ethan | November 26, 2007 12:35 PM

I can't understand why anyone would embrace an ethos that says that letting violent criminals go free is a meritorious way of sticking it to The Man, when in fact it's just a way of making sure that your community will be domonated by murderous thugs. And yes it is important to distinguish oneself from "those" liberals.

Posted by David J. Balan | November 26, 2007 12:38 PM

Perhaps it might be better to start with not using police to arbitrarily harass and control people in these neighborhoods?

Agree with Balan, above: how can "stop snitching" possibly be construed as a solution to this problem?

Posted by DJ Ninja | November 26, 2007 12:44 PM

It's not so much a matter of "embracing" anything as wondering where the ultimate responsibility for the problem lies.

Posted by lemuel pitkin | November 26, 2007 1:05 PM

That's the problem with "those" liberals. Instead of trying to combat a real problem like police harassment of minorities with a real (liberal) solution like implementing laws and policies that discourage such behavior, they adopt a pose that makes them feel all cool and transgressive, does nothing at all to help the problem at hand, and contributes to the breakdown of public safety. How is that a good deal?

Posted by David J. Balan | November 26, 2007 1:26 PM

I do enjoy the middle/upper class white people trust of law enforcement in here. As someone who has worked inside the Chicago criminal justice system, let me just say that things work a bit differently on the street. Your run of the mill big city police force is all too often less concerned with actually solving crimes than with solving them on paper, which involves simply finding someone to pin them on, and making the evidence fit. Were I a member of a poor minority community, I would try to steer well clear of the police as well. Putting yourself on their radar can only cause you pain down the line.

So, David J. Balan, I hope you can see that there is a rational basis for these actions, rather than simply an irrational and self-destructive desire to stick it to The Man. "Those" liberals may just have a point.

Posted by Shochu John | November 26, 2007 1:27 PM

David,

I would love to fix the criminal justice system. In the meantime, I'm not going to condemn people for wisely distrusting it as it currently stands.

Posted by Shochu John | November 26, 2007 1:30 PM

I'll vote for whichever candidate makes clear in no uncertain terms that he isn't "down with OPP."

Posted by Sam L | November 26, 2007 1:35 PM

Omerta on the rise, gimme a break.

Fewer than 500 murders in New York city for 2007.

So what do the cops and doomsayers want? More surveillance? Waterboarding? More money goes without saying....

Posted by Horatio Parker | November 26, 2007 1:56 PM

Characteristically, the commenters have used Matt's otherwise interesting post as an excuse to bash cops. Why not? They're just working class schmos and as a frequent visitor of this cite, I know that the majority of Matt's commenters only give lip-service to caring about the working class. Of course its the cops' fault that black americans murder each other and get away with it.

This conversation should be about the absurd culture of citizens not "snitching" on drug dealers and killers in their own neighborhoods. This is not really analogous to immigrant groups that won't snitch on their own ethnic criminal element, since traditionally those groups don't turn their neighborhoods into scary, drug infested shitholes (experience has shown quite the opposite in fact). Not that this these groups are excused, but it would make more sense if these citizens who refuse to snitch were not themselves victims.

If you refuse to snitch for fear of retribution I understand. But if your claiming to honor some bullshit street code, you're a moron because you allow your own people and neighborhood to be victimized (or more likely, your a coward hiding behind a code). Omerta for members of a criminal eterprise makes sense because all of the members have a stake in the code. The only people benefiting from this BS street code are the criminals, and this campus-liberal bullshit that blames the code on cops is another example of offering excuses for behavior where we should be demanding accountability.

And for you cop bashers, please read the following:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2007/11/25/2007-11-25_after_being_shot_dying_police_officer_ga.html

Posted by laborlibert | November 26, 2007 2:21 PM

Shochu John,
Even assuming that all those problems are as bad as you say they are, how are they helped by a refusal to cooperate with the police when you actually have evidence that the person in question is quilty?

Posted by David J. Balan | November 26, 2007 2:30 PM

There isn't a rational basis for those actions. They are understandable surely, as the police have a justifiably bad reputation in many urban black communities. But I'm with David, there's just no way that this in turn can make the stop snitching movement rational.

If the basis for the fear of police is because of police brutality, what do you call shootings in the community by non-police? The police exert too much power of the state, but what do you call encouraging actions of non-state actors who wield the power to prevent people from snitching? It's ridiculous.

Of course we should do everything in our power to improve the relationship between police and minority communities, and do everything possible to prevent police brutality. But this in no way ought to be seen as a rationale to justify the Stop Snitching bullshit.

Posted by Joel W | November 26, 2007 2:51 PM

David,
They're not helped. In no way do I deny that refusal to cooperate with police hinders law enforcement. All I am saying is that cooperation is not a wise course of action from an individual point of view, and I take exception to your condemnation of those who, caught between violent gangs and possibly corrupt cops, choose to mind their own business.

Laborlibert,
If you are interested in accountability, perhaps you should put more emphasis on the need to root out the corrpution that undermines police credibility rather than simply dismissing the problem as "bashing" or "campus-liberal bullshit".

Posted by Shochu John | November 26, 2007 2:53 PM

But Shochu John, we're not talking about people who refuse to cooperate with the police out of a fear (justified or otherwise) that the police will turn around and make trouble for them. We're talking about a social trend in favor of the idea that refusal to cooperate with the police is a positive virtue, even when you have information about an actual crime.

Posted by David J. Balan | November 26, 2007 3:15 PM

In the year 2000...

We will stop using witnesses altogether, replacing their unreliable testimonies with rock solid audio-video evidence.

The transparent society, coming soon to an inner-city near you.

Posted by JA | November 26, 2007 3:17 PM

Agree with laborlibert - it is one thing if you were in the Irish gangs, Jewish Gangs, Italian mafia, or todays black thug gangs, mexican mafia, or white biker gangs and sought code imposition on all members of "Our Thing" crime network. That makes sense.
But in the past, ordinary citizens tolerated gangs and crime if they thought it was minor stuff, didn't hurt anybody too much, and the gangs were not out killing their fellow non-gang Irishers, Jews - and laid off uninvolved family members and bystanders "not in the life". The main point of those past Omerta codes was that they were reciprocal, a "negotiated" social contract between gangs and the people involved.

If you are common citizens that are preyed on by gangmembers with no reciprocity and voluntarily follow the same code allowing gangstas to get away with victimizing you and your neighborhood and friends - you are one stupid black person or one crazy black person. Because the gangstas do not follow code on fellow blacks or others in the 'hoods. They freely target non-gang blacks with robbery, rape, death.

Just when you thought the black underclass had run out of ways to screw themselves up all on their own, along comes the "no snitches" cultural movement.
Don't complain or go to authorities if I rape your daughter, mug your momma, or stick a gun in your face and rob you or kill your best friend for his sneakers - because that would make you a snitch, and a bad person.
Yeah, right. Unfortunately, many black morons believe that is a logical argument.

To be fair, many responsible blacks are saying it's nuts. Even those who have spent time in jail or in gangs who now, as ex-cons or ex-gangmembers, tell others that the "code" is OK for jail or gang members but suicidal to outside black society, if accepted without the reciprocal "respect" and rules the oldtime ethnic gangs went by through understood social contract with the populace.

Posted by Chris Ford | November 26, 2007 3:29 PM

Laborlibert,
If you are interested in accountability, perhaps you should put more emphasis on the need to root out the corrpution that undermines police credibility rather than simply dismissing the problem as "bashing" or "campus-liberal bullshit".
Posted by Shochu John

Arguing that people should accept the predation and mayhem done by thugs because they dislike cops is brainless. It's a gift-wrapped "kick me, I'm a victim in waiting" invitation.

Most of it has to do with the self-defeating oppositional culture the black underclass has set up. Cop misbehavior is exaggerated, every thug a victim of "brutality, profiling, racism", and what corruption and misbehavior exists is not rooted out because so many "black leaders" are self-promoting types that don't really care about corruption by others as long as they get their chunk of cheddar from the system.

Posted by Chris Ford | November 26, 2007 3:40 PM

David,

Virtues, vices, or other ethical guidelines are often there only to inspire rational behavior. Take kosher laws. Eating, for example, pork was once upon a time quite dangerous. It was therefore prohibited on a value level not because it had any inherent moral worth, but because of pure practicality. A similar thing could be occurring here.

In any case, my initial problem with your point is based on this line, "I can't understand why anyone would embrace an ethos that says that letting violent criminals go free is a meritorious way of sticking it to The Man," This seems to portray what may very well be a life and liberty-preserving way of thinking as a mere adolescent act of rebellion. Indeed, for people who occupy more privleged places in society, this sort of behavior would be hollow and worthy of the derision you heap upon it. For many, however, the practicalities of the street require a somewhat different ethos.

Posted by Shochu John | November 26, 2007 3:41 PM

If you watch that video, it's obvious that when they talking about snitches they mean confidential informants. People who get pinched and weasel out of their sentence by working for the cops.

There is a section where they are asking why a certain neighborhood doesn't get bothered on drug cases. Someone says people say it's because they are working for King and Murray. Those are two balitmore cops who got busted shortly after that thing was made for conspiracy drug charges. They had a confidential informant working the corner mentioned in the video. King and Murray would bust dealers, give the dope to the CI to sell, while the CI told them who he sold it to.

Posted by Ed Marshall | November 26, 2007 4:19 PM

I hope the GOP sends him a big, gold, blinged-out "Thank You" card ... and he wears it around his neck on his next video.

"The Gizzy-OP
had better thank me
for giving them ammo
for their bullshit story.
They say racism is dead
and the problem is all with us
cause we been shooting each other
since Rosa Parks got on that bus.
Now four decades later
I'm chillin on the block
makin cash telling kids
to 'let murderers walk'.
I help kill my own
just to make some cash
while racist sonsabitches
in the GOP laugh!"

Posted by r4d20 | November 26, 2007 5:11 PM

P.S. I know that was an incredibly lame rap parody.

Posted by r4d20 | November 26, 2007 5:13 PM

what matt forgot to mention is that he's only suggesting this song because sister soljah'ing "smell yo' dick" by riskay would create too many obvious problems for HRC.

Posted by groobles | November 26, 2007 8:57 PM

So on the one hand, we have gang members and on the other we have bad cops.

So the average person adopts a policy that works for both of those groups.

Sounds par for the course to me.

Chimpanzees always make the wrong decision.

As for not snitching in general, this is clearly the way to go. In the anarchist code, you deal with "direct action." You take action and you take responsibility for that action.

If you don't like gangs in your neighborhood, round up some guns and dispose of the motherfuckers. Do the "Magnificent Seven" routine and hire some mercenaries - plenty of them around these days - even black ones. Call in "El Mariachi" for the Hispanic areas.

If you don't like cops in your neighborhood, do the same. Except the problem with that is then the state sends in the National Guard and bombs your whole neighborhood like Philadelphia back in the day.

There's no solution to any of this, so stop bothering yourselves about it. If you're white and you don't live in those neighborhoods, it's not your fuckin' problem.

Just like the Iraqis have to straighten out their own crap, so do blacks, Hispanics and the rest of the minorities. A bunch of Harvard whites - and damn sure not a bunch of white cops - aren't going to fix it.

There's nothing dumber than reading people complaining about crime in black neighborhoods. If you didn't have drug laws, these morons would be stealing hubcaps and couldn't afford guns. You have no idea how stupid the average black (and Hispanic) thug actually is until you've watched them day in and day out for eight years like I have. Without drugs, these idiots couldn't find their way to the nearest hooker and couldn't pimp her if they did.

You want to get rid of serious street crime - get rid of the drug laws. It's that simple.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | November 26, 2007 11:35 PM

Ooooh, those sneaky black folks are at it again...we just want to help them keep their neighborhoods safe, but they make it soooo difficult! Why, it's so bad that it's not just the criminals anymore, it's the whole populations! Such a shame...why can't they trust us, just this once?!?

Posted by tps12 | November 27, 2007 11:17 AM