PX0674

8/9/2019 PX0674

1/59

PX0674PX0674

8/9/2019 PX0674

2/59

Edmund G. Brown Jr., Attorney GeneralCalifornia Department of Justice

Division of California Justice Information ServicesBureau of Criminal Information and AnalysisCRIMINAL JUSTICE STATISTICS CENTER

Hate

Crimeti-National Origin, Anti-Religion, Anti-Sexual Orientation, Anti-Physical/Menta

ity, Anti-Race/Ethnicity, Anti-white, Anti-black, Anti-Hispanic, Anti-American Iskan Native, Anti-Asian/Pacifc Islander, Anti-multiple races/group, Anti-other ethional origin, Anti-Jewish, Anti-Catholic, Anti-Protestant, Anti-Islamic (Muslim)er religion, Anti-other religion, Anti-multiple religious, group, Anti-atheism/agti-male homosexual (gay), Anti-female homosexual, Anti-homosexual, Anti-hxual, Anti-bisexual, Anti-physical disability, Anti-mental disability, Anti-male,male, Anti-transgender, Anti-National Origin, Anti-Religion, Anti-Sexual Orienti-Physical/Mental Disability, Anti-Race/Ethnicity, Anti-white, Anti-black, Anti-Histi-American Indian/Alaskan Native, Anti-Asian/Pacifc Islander, Anti-multiple

up, Anti-other ethnicity/national origin, Anti-Jewish, Anti-Catholic, Anti-Proteti-Islamic (Muslim), Anti-other religion, Anti-other religion, Anti-multiple relup, Anti-atheism/agnostic, Anti-male homosexual (gay), Anti-female homosti-homosexual, Anti-heterosexual, Anti-bisexual, Anti-physical disability, Anti-mability, Anti-male, Anti-female, Anti-transgender, Anti-National Origin, Anti-Reti-Sexual Orientation, Anti-Physical/Mental Disability, Anti-Race/Ethnicity, Anti-ti-black, Anti-Hispanic, Anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native, Anti-Asian/ander, Anti-multiple races/group, Anti-other ethnicity/national origin, Anti-Jti-Catholic, Anti-Protestant, Anti-Islamic (Muslim), Anti-other religion, Anti

gion, Anti-multiple religious, group, Anti-atheism/agnostic, Anti-male homoy), Anti-female homosexual, Anti-homosexual, Anti-heterosexual, Anti-bisexuaysical disability, Anti-mental disability, Anti-male, Anti-female, Anti-transgendetional Origin, Anti-Religion, Anti-Sexual Orientation, Anti-Physical/Mental Dis

In

CalIfornIa

2006

8/9/2019 PX0674

3/59

Edmund G. Brown Jr., Attorney GeneralCalifornia Department of Justice

Division of California Justice Information ServicesBureau of Criminal Information and AnalysisCRIMINAL JUSTICE STATISTICS CENTER

An electronic version of this report and other reports are available on the California Attorney Generals website:

http://ag.ca.gov

8/9/2019 PX0674

4/59

ti-National Origin, Anti-Religion, Anti-Sexual Orientation, Anti-Physical/Mentaity, Anti-Race/Ethnicity, Anti-white, Anti-black, Anti-Hispanic, Anti-American I

skan Native, Anti-Asian/Pacifc Islander, Anti-multiple races/group, Anti-other ethional origin, Anti-Jewish, Anti-Catholic, Anti-Protestant, Anti-Islamic (Muslim)er religion, Anti-other religion, Anti-multiple religious, group, Anti-atheism/agti-male homosexual (gay), Anti-female homosexual, Anti-homosexual, Anti-hxual, Anti-bisexual, Anti-physical disability, Anti-mental disability, Anti-male,male, Anti-transgender, Anti-National Origin, Anti-Religion, Anti-Sexual Orienti-Physical/Mental Disability, Anti-Race/Ethnicity, Anti-white, Anti-black, Anti-Histi-American Indian/Alaskan Native, Anti-Asian/Pacifc Islander, Anti-multiple up, Anti-other ethnicity/national origin, Anti-Jewish, Anti-Catholic, Anti-Prote

ti-Islamic (Muslim), Anti-other religion, Anti-other religion, Anti-multiple relup, Anti-atheism/agnostic, Anti-male homosexual (gay), Anti-female homosti-homosexual, Anti-heterosexual, Anti-bisexual, Anti-physical disability, Anti-mability, Anti-male, Anti-female, Anti-transgender, Anti-National Origin, Anti-Reti-Sexual Orientation, Anti-Physical/Mental Disability, Anti-Race/Ethnicity, Anti-ti-black, Anti-Hispanic, Anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native, Anti-Asian/ander, Anti-multiple races/group, Anti-other ethnicity/national origin, Anti-Jti-Catholic, Anti-Protestant, Anti-Islamic (Muslim), Anti-other religion, Antigion, Anti-multiple religious, group, Anti-atheism/agnostic, Anti-male homo

y), Anti-female homosexual, Anti-homosexual, Anti-heterosexual, Anti-bisexuaysical disability, Anti-mental disability, Anti-male, Anti-female, Anti-transgendetional Origin, Anti-Religion, Anti-Sexual Orientation, Anti-Physical/Mental Disti-Race/Ethnicity, Anti-white, Anti-black, Anti-Hispanic, Anti-American Indian/A

Hate

Crime

2006

In

CalIfornIa

8/9/2019 PX0674

5/59

ii HATE CRIME IN CALIFORNIA, 2006

HATE CRI ME I N CALI FORNI A, 200 6

The role of the Criminal Justice Statistics Center is to:

Collect, analyze, and report statistical data which provide valid measures of crime

and the criminal justice process.

Examine these data on an ongoing basis to better describe crime and the criminal

justice system.

Promote the responsible presentation and use of crime statistics.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICEEdmund G. Brown Jr., Attorney General

DIVISION OF CALIFORNIA JUSTICE INFORMATION SERVICESGary Cooper, Director

BUREAU OF CRIMINAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSISJulie Basco, Acting Bureau ChiefGeorgia Fong, Assistant Bureau Chief

HATE CRIME IN CALIFORNIA, 2006Laura Towse, Principal AnalystTad Davis, Graphics/Design

8/9/2019 PX0674

6/59

CONTENTS 1

Introduction .............................................................. 2Highlights ................................................................. 3

Crime Data, 2006

Overview ............................................................. 6

Bias Motivation .................................................... 9

Race/Ethnicity/National Origin ............................ 9

Type of Crime ...................................................... 10

Violent Crime ....................................................... 10

Property Crime .................................................... 10

Location ............................................................... 11Type of Victim ...................................................... 11

Prosecutorial Data, 2006

Hate Crime Prosecution Dispositions, 2006 ........ 14

Total Cases Referred .......................................... 15

Total Cases Filed for Prosecution ....................... 15

Total Dispositions ................................................ 16

Hate Crime Convictions ...................................... 16

Trend DataEvents, Offenses, Victims, and Known

Suspects, 19972006 ..................................... 18

Bias Motivation Categories, 20012006 ............. 20

Selected Bias Motivation Offenses, 20012006 ... 21

Type of Crime, 20012006 .................................. 22

Violent Crime, 20012006 ................................... 23

Property Crime, 20012006 ................................ 24

Location of Crime, 20012006 ............................ 25

List of tABLEs

Hate Crime, 2006

Table N1 Summary of Total Events, Offenses,Victims, and Known Suspects ........... 8

Table 1 Events, Offenses, Victims, and

Known Suspects by Bias Motivation .. 28

Table 2 Offenses by Type of Crime ................. 29Table 3 Events, Offenses, Victims, and

Known Suspects by Location.............. 30

Table 4 Victim Type by Bias Motivation ........... 31

Table 5 Victim Type by Location ...................... 32

Table 6 Events, Offenses, Victims, andKnown Suspects by County andJurisdiction ........................................... 33

Table 7A Summary of Cases Referred by Law

Enforcement Agencies and Type ofFilings ................................................... 39

Table 7B Summary of Hate Crime Dispositions 39

Table 8 Cases Referred by Law EnforcementAgencies and Type of Filings ............. 40

Table 9 Hate Crime Case Dispositions ............ 42

Hate Crime, 19972006Table N2 Events, Offenses, Victims, and Known

Suspects .............................................. 19

Table 10 Hate Crime Case Complaints Filedand Total Convictions .......................... 43

Table 11 Events by Bias Motivation................... 44

Table 12 Offenses by Bias Motivation ............... 45

Table 13 Offenses by Type of Crime ................. 46

Table 14 Offenses by Location........................... 47

Appendices

1 Background ........................................................ 50

2 California Penal Code Section 13023 .............. 51

3 Data Characteristics and KnownLimitations ...................................................... 52

4 Methodology ...................................................... 54

5 Criminal Justice Glossary ................................. 55

CONTENTS

8/9/2019 PX0674

7/59


2 HATE CRIME IN CALIFORNIA, 2006

INTRODUCTION

In 1986, the California Department of Justice (DOJ) rstrecognized the importance of hate crime statistics inCalifornia in a report submitted to the legislature, in

response to Senate Bill 2080 (Watson), which providedrecommendations for preliminary steps to establish a

statewide hate crime database (Appendix 1). CaliforniaPenal Code section 13023 (Appendix 2) requires the

Attorney General to submit an annual report to the Leg-islature regarding crimes motivated by the victims race,ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national

origin, or physical or mental disability as reported by lawenforcement agencies.

The Attorney Generals Hate Crime Reporting Programwas implemented in September 1994. Data collectionbegan in the fall of 1994 after an orientation and trainingperiod was provided by the DOJ. Agencies were

requested to identify and submit all reports of hate crimesoccurring on or after July 1 to December 31, 1994 to the

DOJ. In 1995, California District Attorneys began to reporthate crime prosecutorial information to the DOJ, including

total cases referred, hate crime case lings, criminal case

lings, hate crime convictions and other convictions. In1995, the DOJ published its rst report.

As dened in California Penal Code section 422.55,

hate crimemeans a criminal act committed, in whole or

in part, because of one or more of the following actualor perceived characteristics of the victim: 1) disability,

2) gender, 3) nationality, 4) race or ethnicity, 5) religion,6) sexual orientation, 7) association with a person orgroup with one or more of these actual or perceived

characteristics. Law enforcement agency crime reportsand a web-enabled data collection system are used to

submit hate crime data to the DOJ. Each crime report

includes information about, but is not limited to, biasmotivation, type of crime, location of crime, number ofvictims, and the number of known suspects.

All police agencies and district attorney offices inCalifornia, in cooperation with the DOJ, have developed

local data collection programs and submitted the hatecrime statistics for this 2006 edition of Hate Crime in

California.

8/9/2019 PX0674

8/59


HIGHLIGHTS 3

HIGHLIGHTS

in 2006:

Hae crme even decreased 6.5 percent from

1,397 in 2005 to 1,306 in 2006.

Hae crme ene increased 0.7 percentfrom 1,691 in 2005 to 1,702 in 2006.

the number vcm of reported hate crimes

decreased 1.8 percent from 1,640 in 2005 to1,611 in 2006.

the number knwn upec of reported

hate crimes increased 1.4 percent from 1,589 in2005 to 1,612 in 2006.

in 2006:

A al 363 hae crme cae were reerred precur: From the 334 cases led

by District Attorney and City Attorney ofces for

prosecution, 272 were led as hate crimes

and 62 were led as non-bias motivated

crimes. For the 249 cases with a dispositionavailable for this report, 140 were hate crime

convictions, 78 were other convictions, and 31were not convicted.

*Anti-other ethnicity/national origin includes Arab or MiddleEastern bias motivated hate crimes.

CRIME DATA

in 2006:

seual r enan hate crime eventsdecreased 3.5 percent from 255 in 2005 to 246

in 2006.

An-whe hate crime events decreased 16.9percent from 77 in 2005 to 64 in 2006.

An-black hate crime events decreased 11.8percent from 490 in 2005 to 432 in 2006.

An-her ehncy/nanal rgn* hate

crime events increased 5.6 percent from 89 in2005 to 94 in 2006.

Race/ehnc y/nanal rg n hate crimeoffenses have consistently been the largest

bias motivation category of hate crimes since1997, accounting for at least 60 percent of all

hate crime offenses. Within this category, anti-blackhate crimes continue to be the largest

bias motivation accounting for at least 26

percent of these offenses every year since1997.

seual r enan hate crime offenses

have consistently been the second largestbias motivation category of hate crimes since

1997, accounting for at least 18 percent of allhate crime offenses. Within this category, anti-

male homosexual (gay) hate crimes continue tobe the largest bias motivation accounting for atleast 11 percent of these offenses every year

since 1997.

Relgn hate crime offenses have consistently

been the third largest bias motivation categoryof hate crimes since 1997, accounting for atleast 12 percent of all hate crime offenses.

Within this category, anti-Jewish hate crimescontinue to be the largest bias motivation

accounting for at least 7 percent of theseoffenses every year since 1997.

BIAS MOTIVATION

TYPE OF CRIME

PROSECUTORIAL DATA

TREND DATA

in 2006:

Vlen crme offenses decreased 4.7 percentfrom 1,096 in 2005 to 1,044 in 2006.

Prpery crme offenses increased 10.6

percent from 595 in 2005 to 658 in 2006.

8/9/2019 PX0674

9/59

C r I M E

DaTa

Hate

Crime

8/9/2019 PX0674

10/59


Source: Tables 1, 8, 9, and 10.Note: Percentages may not add to 100.0 because of rounding.

HAtE CRiME iN CALifoRNiA, 2006overvew

fgure 1

HAtE CRiMEEVENts

1,306

100.0%

An-

Race/Ehncy/Nanal org n

84464.6%

An-Relgn

20515.7%

An-seual

orenan

24618.8%

An-Dably

30.2%

An-Gender

8

0.6%


8/9/2019 PX0674

11/59

CRI ME DATA

CRIME DATA 7

HAtE CRiME oVERViEW

in 2006:

There were 1,306 hate crime eventsreported by law enforcement agencies.

The most prominent bias motivation wasanti-race/ethnicity/national origin (64.6percent), followed by anti-sexual orientation(18.8 percent), anti-religion (15.7 percent),and anti-disability and gender (0.8 percent).

There were 363 hate crime cases referredby law enforcement agencies toprosecutors. Of the number referred toprosecutors, 272 cases were led for hatecrime prosecution.

There were 140 hate crime convictions.

Crmnal Cae

flng

33492.0%

Cae

Rejeced

298.0%

Hae Crme

Cae WhDp n

249

91.5%

NCnvced

3112.4%

Hae CrmeCnvcn

14056.2%

oherCnvcn

7831.3%

Hae CrmeEven

Reerred

Precur

363100.0%

Notes:Relating the number of hate crimes reported bylaw enforcement agencies to the number of hate crimesprosecuted by district attorneys and city attorneys is notpossible. First, crimes often occur in different reportingyears than their subsequent prosecutions. Second, thenumber of crimes reported by law enforcement is higherthan those warranting prosecutorial action.Cases may be rejected by County District Attorneysand City Attorneys ofces for prosecution for various

reasons (e.g., insufcient evidence, witness not available,

defendant not available, etc.).

Hae Crme

Cae flng

27281.4%

Cae N

fled aHae Crme

6218.6%

Hae CrmeCae Pendng

Dpn

238.5%

8/9/2019 PX0674

12/59


WHEN DOES A CRIME BECOMEA HATE CRIME?

A crime becomes a hate crime when the criminal offenses

committed against persons, property, or society are moti-vated, in whole or part, by the offenders bias against race,religion, disability, sexual-orientation, gender, ethnicity/na-

tional origin, or association with a person or group withone or more of these actual or perceived characteristics.

Hate crimes are not separate distinct crimes but rathertraditional offenses motivated by the offenders bias.

This section of the 2006 Hate Crimereport will describe the details of these hate crime events, including information

on bias motivation, type of crime, location of the crime, and type of victim (Data characteristics and known limitationsare provided in Appendix 3).


WHAT IS A HATE CRIMEEVENT?

A hate crime event may include the occurrence of one or

more criminal offenses, committed against one or morevictims, by one or more suspects/perpetrators. Also,victims can have more than one offense committed

against them. In 2006 there were 1,306 total hate crimeevents, which included 1,702 offenses, 1,611 victims, and

1,612 known suspects (as shown in Table N-1 below).

Table N-1HATE CRIMES, 2006

Summary of Total Events, Offenses, Victims,

and Known Suspects

Total

Total events 1,306

Total offenses 1,702

Total victims 1,611

Total known suspects 1,612

8/9/2019 PX0674

13/59

CRI ME DATA

CRIME DATA 9

Anti-black

Anti-otherethnicity/nationalorigin*

Anti-Hispanic

Anti-white

Anti-multipleraces,group

Anti-American

Indian/AlaskanNative

51.2%

18.1%

11.1%

7.6%6.2% 5.3%

0.5%

Anti-Asian/PacificIslander

in 2006, 1,306 hate crime events were reported. Thesubtotals are as follows:

type Number Percenage

Race/ethnicity/ 844 64.6national origin

Sexual 246 18.8orientation

Religion 205 15.7

Gender 8 0.6

Disability 3 0.2

in 2006, 844 race/ethnicity/national origin hate crimeevents were reported. The subtotals are as follows:


Anti-black 432 51.2

Anti-Hispanic 153 18.1

Anti-other ethnicity/ 94 11.1

national origin*

Anti-white 64 7.6

Anti-Asian/Pacic Islander 52 6.2

Anti-multiple races, group 45 5.3

Anti-American Indian/ 4 0.5

Alaskan Native

Figure 3

HATE CRIME EVENTS, 2006Race/Ethnicity/National Origin

Source: Table 1.Note: Percentages do not add to 100.0 because of rounding.

Source: Table 1.

*Anti-other ethnicity/national origin includes Arab or Middle Easternbias motivated hate crimes.

seual renan hate crimes decreased 3.5 percent

from 255 in 2005 to 246 in 2006 while relgn hate crimesremained the same for both years.

Anti-Asian/Pacifc Islanderhate crimes increased 4.0 per-

cent from 50 in 2005 to 52 in 2006. An-Hpanc hate crimeevents increased 4.1 percent from 147 in 2005 to 153 in 2006.

An-whe and An-mulple race hate crimes decreased16.9 percent and 26.2 percent, respectively, from their 2005

values. In addition, An-black hate crimes decreased 11.8percent while An-her ehncy/nanal rg n hate

crimes increased 5.6 percent from their 2005 values.

64.6%

18.8%

Race/ethnicity/nationalorigin

Sexualorienta-

tion

Religion Gender Disability

15.7%

0.6% 0.2%

Figure 2HATE CRIME EVENTS, 2006

Bias Motivation

BiAs MotiVAtioN

RACE/EtHNiCitY/NAtioNAL oRiGiN

8/9/2019 PX0674

14/59


Intimi-dationAggra-vatedassault

Simpleassault Robbery

36.0%

29.7%30.4%

3.7%

Murder ForcibleRape

0.1% 0.1%

Destruction/vandalism

Burglary Arson Larceny-theft

93.2%

3.6% 1.8% 1.2% 0.2%

Motorvehicle

theft


in 2006, 1,702 hate crime offenses were reported. Thesubtotals are as follows:


Violent crimes 1,044 61.3

Property crimes 658 38.7

Figure 4HATE CRIME OFFENSES, 2006

Type of Crime

Figure 6HATE CRIME OFFENSES, 2006Property Crimein 2006, 658 property crime offenses were reported.

The subtotals are as follows:


Destruction/vandalism 613 93.2Burglary 24 3.6

Arson 12 1.8

Larceny-theft 8 1.2

Motor vehicle theft 1 0.2

Source: Table 2.

Source: Table 2.

Vlen crme ene decreased 4.7 percent from1,096 in 2005 to 1,044 in 2006. Prpery crme ene

increased 10.6 percent from 595 in 2005 to 658 in 2006.

Derucn/vandalm hate crimes increased 10.8 percent

from 553 in 2005 to 613 in 2006.

in 2006, 1,044 violent crime offenses were reported.

The subtotals are as follows:


Aggravated assault 376 36.0

Intimidation 317 30.4

Simple assault 310 29.7

Robbery 39 3.7

Murder 1 0.1

Forcible rape 1 0.1

Aggravaed aaul hate crimes increased 18.6 percentfrom 317 in 2005 to 376 in 2006. inmdan hate crimes

decreased 28.4% from 443 in 2005 to 317 in 2006.Finally,rbbery hate crimes increased 8.3 percent from 36 in 2005

to 39 in 2006.

Figure 5HATE CRIME OFFENSES, 2006Violent Crime

Source: Table 2.

PROPERTY

CRIMES

38.7% VIOLENTCRIMES

61.3%

tYPE of CRiME

VioLENt CRiME

PRoPERtY CRiME

8/9/2019 PX0674

15/59

CRI ME DATA

ResidenceHighway School Church/synagogue

Parkinglot

FieldRestaurant All otherlocations

26.8%

30.2%

10.4%

7.6%6.1%

2.8% 2.3%

13.7%

87.0%

5.1%

Individuals Governmentproperty

Religiousorganizations

Business/financial

institutions

5.0%2.9%

Other

0.1%

in 2006, 1,306 hate crime events were reported. Theyoccurred in the following locations:

Lcan Number Percenage

Highway/road/alley/street 395 30.2

Residence/home/driveway 350 26.8

School/college 136 10.4

Parking lot/garage 99 7.6

Church/synagogue/temple 80 6.1

Restaurant 37 2.8

Fields/woods/park 30 2.3

All other locations 179 13.7

Figure 7HATE CRIME EVENTS, 2006

Location


Parkng l/garage hate crimes decreased 7.5 percent from107 in 2005 to 99 in 2006. Church/ynaggue/emple

hate crimes decreased 2.4 percent from 82 in 2005 to 80

in 2006. Reauran hate crime increased 19.4 percentfrom 31 in 2005 to 37 in 2006.

in 2006, there were 1,611 victims in all reported hate

crime events. Victims can be either individuals orinstitutions. The subtotals are as follows:

type vcm Number Percenage

Individuals 1,401 87.0

Religious organizations 82 5.1

Government property 80 5.0

Business/nancial 46 2.9institutions

Other 2 0.1

Business/fnancial institution hate crimes increased

35.3 percent from 34 in 2005 to 46 in 2006. Relgurganzan hate crimes increased 43.9 percent from 57

in 2005 to 82 in 2006. Hate crimes reported for ndvdu-al decreased 3.5 percent from 1,452 in 2005 to 1,401 in

2006 (See Appendix 3, Data Characteristics and Known

Limitations, Item #8).

Figure 8

HATE CRIME EVENTS, 2006Type of Victim


CRIME DATA 11

LoCAtioN

tYPE of ViCtiM

8/9/2019 PX0674

16/59

ProSECUTorIal

DaTa

Hate

Crime

8/9/2019 PX0674

17/59


HAtE CRiME CAsEsWitH A DisPositioN

249


HAtE CRiMECoNViCtioNs

140

fgure 9HAtE CRiME PRosECUtioN DisPositioNs, 2006

REPoRtED HAtE CRiMEs

1,306

Source: Tables 1, 7A, and 7B.Note: The number of hate crime lings with dispositions includes cases referred in 2006 and prior years.

HAtE CRiME CAsEs REfERRED to PRosECUtoRs

363

CRiMiNAL CAsE fiLiNGs334

otHERCoNViCtioNs

78

NotCoNViCtED

31

HAtE CRiME CAsE fiLiNGs

272

iNtERPREtiNG PRosECUtoRiAL DAtA

To show the criminal justice systems response to hate

crimes, in March 1995, the Attorney General requestedall district attorneys and city attorneys to submit summary

data of complaints led and convictions secured. The2006 District Attorneys and City Attorneys Report Fileof Hate Crime Cases contains summary data based on

cases referred to each district attorney or city attorney, andlings and convictions which occurred between January

1 through December 31, 2006.

There are many factors that must take place for a caseto be forwarded for possible prosecution in Californias

criminal justice system. In our continuing effort to bringclarity to the nature and value of prosecutorial data,this brief overview is provided.

At the request of district attorneys, collection procedures

were modied to ensure the collection of all juvenile,

as well as all adult, case data. The overview below

contains all juvenile and adult prosecution data submittedfor 2006.

In addition, the reader is advised that relating thenumber of hate crimes reported by law enforcement

agencies to the number of hate crimes prosecuted bydistrict attorneys and city attorneys is not possible. First,

crimes often occur in different reporting years than theirsubsequent prosecutions. Second, the number of crimes

reported by law enforcement is much higher than thosewarranting prosecutorial action.

8/9/2019 PX0674

18/59

PROSECUTORI AL DATA

totAL CAsEs fiLEDfoR PRosECUtioN

in 2006, of 334 cases led by District Attorney and CityAttorney ofces for prosecution:

272 cases (81.4 percent) were led as hatecrimes.

62 cases (18.6 percent) were led as non-bias

motivated crimes.

Figure 11HATE CRIMES, 2006

Total Cases Filed for Prosecution

Source: Table 7A.

PROSECUTORIAL DATA 15

totAL CAsEs REfERRED

in 2006, of 363 cases that were referred by law

enforcement agencies for prosecution:

334 cases (92.0 percent) were filed for

prosecution. This was an increase compared to88.4 percent of 448 cases referred in 2005.

29 cases (8.0 percent) were rejected forprosecution for various reasons (e.g., insufcient

evidence, witness not available, defendant notavailable, etc.).

Figure 10

HATE CRIMES, 2006Total Cases Referred

Source: Table 7A.

CASES FILED

92.0%

CASESREJECTED

8.0%

NON-BIASMOTIVATED

CRIMESFILINGS

18.6%

HATE CRIMESFILINGS

81.4%

8/9/2019 PX0674

19/59


HAtE CRiME CoNViCtioNs

in 2006, of the 140 hate crime convictions:

102 convictions (72.9 percent) were either aplea of guilty or nolo contendere.

38 convictions (27.1 percent) were trialverdicts.

Figure 13HATE CRIMES, 2006

Hate Crime Convictions

Source: Table 7B.


totAL DisPositioNs

in 2006, of 249 cases with a disposition:

140 cases (56.2 percent) resulted in a hatecrime conviction.

78 cases (31.3 percent) resulted in otherconvictions.

31 cases (12.4 percent) resulted in no

conviction.

Figure 12

HATE CRIMES, 2006Total Dispositions

Source: Table 7B.Note: Percentages do not add to 100.0 because of rounding.

HATECRIME

CONVICTIONS

56.2%

OTHERCONVICTIONS

31.3%

NOTCONVICTED

12.4%

TRIALVERDICTS

27.1%

GUILTY PLEAOR NOLO

CONTENDERE

72.9%

8/9/2019 PX0674

20/59

TrEnD

DaTa

Hate

Crime

8/9/2019 PX0674

21/59



EVENts

In 2006, reported hate crime events decreased6.5 percent from the previous year, continuing adownward trend that began with a 26.6 percent

decrease in 2002 and a 10.1 percent decrease in2003. Hate crime events in 2001 increased 15.5

percent from their level in 2000 in response to thewave of post-9/11 hate crimes targeting individuals

or their property who were, or perceived to be, MiddleEastern or Muslims. From 1997 to 1999, hate crime

events uctuated declining 4.4 percent from 1997

1998 and increasing 12.1 percent in 1999. (See Table11 for hate crime events by bias-motivation.)

offENsEs

In 2006, reported hate crime offenses increasedslightly (0.7 percent) from the previous year. From

1997 to 2001, hate crime offenses fluctuated

declining 11.0 percent in 1998 and increasing 11.1percent in 1999. After increasing by 13.1 percentfrom 2000 to 2001, hate crime offenses decreased25.3 percent from 2001 to 2005.

ViCtiMs

In 2006, reported number of hate crime victimsdecreased 1.8 percent from the previous year,continuing a downward trend that began with a 28.6

percent decrease in 2002, and a 9.6 percent decreasein 2003. From 1997 to 1998, victims of hate crimesdeclined 6.3 percent. The next three years, 19992001, the number of victims varied year to year with a

14.0 percent increase in 1999, a 3.4 percent decreasein 2000, and a 19.6 percent increase in 2001.

KNoWN sUsPECts

In 2006, reported number of known suspectsincreased 1.4 percent from the previous year. Thisfollows the 6.3 percent increase in 2005. From 1997

to 2001, the number of known suspects uctuated

decreasing 10.0 percent from 1997-1998 and

increasing 1.8 percent in 1999, 4.3 percent in 2000,

and 17.7 percent in 2001.

The trends in hate crime events, offenses, victims, and known suspects were similar between 1997 and 2006. Thesehate crime statistics were fairly constant from 19972000. A dramatic increase occurred in 2001, after which time theyhave slowly decreased to their current 2006 values.

HAtE CRiME EVENts, offENsEs, ViCtiMs, AND KNoWN sUsPECts

19972006

8/9/2019 PX0674

22/59

TREND DATA

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

2006200520042003200220012000199919981997

YEAR

NUMBER

VICTIMS

SUSPECTS

EVENTS

OFFENSES

0

TREND DATA 19

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Events ................... 1,831 1,750 1,962 1,957 2,261 1,659 1,491 1,409 1,397 1,306

Offenses ................ 2,023 1,801 2,001 2,002 2,265 2,009 1,815 1,770 1,691 1,702

Victims ................... 2,279 2,136 2,436 2,352 2,812 2,007 1,815 1,741 1,640 1,611

Known Suspects .... 2,206 1,985 2,021 2,107 2,479 1,963 1,629 1,495 1,589 1,612

Figure 14

HAtE CRiMEs, 19972006Events, Offenses, Victims, and Known Suspects

Table N-2

EVENts, offENsEs, ViCtiMs, AND KNoWN sUsPECts19972006

8/9/2019 PX0674

23/59


0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

200620052004200320022001YEAR

NUMBER

RELIGION

SEXUALORIENTATION

RACE/ETHNICITY/NATIONAL ORIGIN


Source: Table 12.

Figure 15

BIA S MOTIVATIONReport ed Hat e Cr ime Offense Cate gor ies, 20012006

RACE/EtHNiCitY/NAtioNAL oRiGiN In 2006,

these types of hate crime offenses increased 0.7 per-cent, after decreasing 3.0 percent in 2005. A downwardtrend began in 2002 with a 16.8 percent decrease and

continued with a 9.6 percent decrease in 2003. Hatecrime offenses based on a victims race/ethnicity/national

origin have been the largest bias motivation category,totaling 60 percent or greater since the beginning of hate

crime reporting in California. Hate crime offenses basedon a victims race/ethnicity/national origin increased

20.8 percent in 2001 due in large part to post-9/11hate crime activity.

sExUAL oRiENtAtioN In 2006, these types ofhate crime offenses increased 3.6 percent. Hate crime

offenses based on a victims sexual orientation havebeen the second largest bias motivation category since

the inception of hate crime reporting in California. From1997 to 2006, hate crime offenses targeting a victimssexual orientation have been at least 18 percent of

the reported total. These types of hate crime offenses

decreased 7.4 percent in 2000, then increased in thetwo-year period 2001-2002 (by 1.9 percent and 5.9percent, respectively).

RELiGioN In 2006, these types of hate crime offenses

increased 0.4 percent after decreasing 9.6 percent in2005. Hate crime offenses based on a victims religion

have consistently been the third largest bias motivationcategory since hate crime reporting began in California.

From 2000 to 2003, this type of hate crime steadily de-creased: 9.7 percent in 2000; 3.3 percent in 2001; 8.8percent in 2002; and 10.0 percent in 2003.

GENDER and PHYsiCAL/MENtAL DisABiLitY hate

crime offenses are the remaining two categories of biasmotivation hate crimes. These two categories have

totaled less than 2 percent of the hate crimes reported,and thus were not included in the above graph.

8/9/2019 PX0674

24/59

TREND DATA

0

200

400

600

800

200620052004200320022001YEAR

NUMBER

BLACK

WHITE

GAY MALES

JEWISH

OTHER RACE/ETHNIC GROUP

HISPANIC

Figure 16

BIA S MOTIVATIONSelec ted Report ed Hat e Cr ime Offenses, 20012006

TREND DATA 21

Source: Table 12.

ANti-BLACK offENsEsThese continue to be the

highest reported bias motivation category (24 total cat-egories) since data collection started in California. Anti-black hate offenses averaged 597 between 2001 and

2005, with a high value of 613 in 2004 and a low of 580in 2002. In 2006, 588 of these offenses were reported,

a decrease of 3.1 percent from their 2005 value.

ANti-HisPANiC offENsEs Anti-Hispanic offensesaveraged 187 between 2001 and 2005, with a high value

of 207 in 2001 and a low of 142 in 2003. In 2006, 218of these offenses were reported, an increase of 16.0percent from their 2005 value.

ANti-MALE HoMosExUAL (GAY) offENsEsAnti-

male homosexual (gay) offenses averaged 269 between2001 and 2005, with a high value of 345 in 2001 and

a low of 192 in 2005. In 2006, 206 of these offenseswere reported, an increase of 7.3 percent from their2005 value.

ANti-JEWisH offENsEs Anti-Jewish offenses av-

eraged 175 between 2001 and 2005, with a high value

of 194 in 2002 and a low of 157 in 2005. In 2006, 146 of

these offenses were reported, a decrease of 7.0 percentfrom their 2005 value.

ANti-otHER EtHNiCitY/NAtioNAL oRiGiNoffENsEs Prior to 2001, there were about 100 or

less of these offenses reported annually. In 2001, therewas a dramatic increase to 428 offenses which was

largely due to post-9/11 hate crimes directed at Arab/Middle Eastern individuals and their property. Since

2001 these offenses began to decrease. Anti-otherethnicity/national origin offenses averaged 218 between2001 and 2005, with a high value of 428 in 2001 and

a low of 103 in 2005. In 2006, 118 of these offenseswere reported, an increase of 14.6 percent from their

2005 value.

ANti-WHitE offENsEs With the exception of 2005,these offenses decreased since 2001. Anti-white of-fenses averaged 100 between 2001 and 2005, with a

high value of 128 in 2001 and a low of 69 in 2004. In2006, 82 of these offenses were reported, a decrease

of 10.9 percent from their 2005 value.

8/9/2019 PX0674

25/59



Figure 17

TYPE OF CRIM EReport ed Hat e Cr ime Offenses, 20012006

totAL offENsEs Total offenses averaged 1,910

between 2001 and 2005, with a high value of 2,265 in2001 and a low of 1,691 in 2005. In 2006, 1,702 of-fenses were reported, an increase of 0.7 percent from

the 2005 value.

VioLENt CRiME offENsEs Total offensesaveraged 1,332 between 2001 and 2005, with a high

value of 1,662 in 2001 and a low of 1,096 in 2005. In2006, 1,044 offenses were reported, a decrease of 4.7

percent from the 2005 value.

PRoPERtY CRiME offENsEs Total offenses

averaged 578 between 2001 and 2005, with a high valueof 635 in 2004 and a low of 492 in 2002. In 2006, 658

offenses were reported, an increase of 10.6 percentfrom the 2005 value.

Source: Table 13.

Note: From 1995 to 2001, a hierarchy rule was used toidentify the most serious crime type. For these years, the

total number of offenses in a multiple offense hate crimeevent would still be recorded, but the crime type would be

given as the most serious crime type. For example, a hate

crime event that had two offenses a simple assault, and

an aggravated assault would be counted as two offenseswith the most serious offense as aggravated assault.

Starting in 2002, the Department of Justice began counting

each offense in each hate crime event, whether it hadone offense (a majority of the events) or multiple offenses

(a minority of the events). This was undertaken to moreaccurately count each type of criminal offense (e.g.,

intimidation, simple assault, vandalism, etc.). Using thisnew standard of count, comparisons and trend analysis

should be limited to 2002 and forward. (See Appendix 3,

Data Characteristics and Known Limitations, on page52 for a further explanation of the hierarchy rule.)

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

200620052004200320022001YEAR

NUMBER

TOTAL OFFENSES

PROPERTY OFFENSES

VIOLENT OFFENSES

8/9/2019 PX0674

26/59

TREND DATA

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

200620052004200320022001YEAR

NUMBER

INTIMIDATION

ROBBERYMURDER

SIMPLE ASSAULT

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT

TREND DATA23

iNtiMiDAtioN offENsEs (involving threats of

violence) These offenses continue to be one of thelargest category of violent hate crimes since 2001.The dramatic increase in 2001 to 822 offenses, a 47.8

percent increase from the previous year, was due inlarge measure to post-9/11 hate crimes directed at

Arab/Middle Easterners. Since 2001 there has beena steady decline in the number of intimidation offenses.

Total offenses averaged 590 between 2001 and 2005,with a high value of 822 in 2001 and a low of 443 in

2005. In 2006, 317 offenses were reported, a decreaseof 28.4 percent from the previous year.

AGGRAVAtED AssAULt offENsEs Total offensesaveraged 253 between 2001 and 2005, with a high value

of 317 in 2005 and a low of 179 in 2003. In 2006, 376offenses were reported, an increase of 18.6 percent

from the 2005 value.

siMPLE AssAULt offENsEs As was noted forintimidation offenses, simple assault offenses showeda dramatic increase in 2001 to 524 offenses, a 40.1

percent increase from the previous year. In addition,simple assault offenses have been decreasing since2001. Total offenses averaged 427 between 2001 and

2005, with a high value of 524 in 2001 and a low of 298 in2005. In 2006, 310 offenses were reported, an increase

of 4.0 percent from the previous year.

Source: Table 13.

RoBBERY offENsEs Total offenses averaged 59

between 2001 and 2005, with a high value of 75 in 2002and a low of 36 in 2005. In 2006, 39 offenses werereported, an increase of 8.3 percent from the previous

year.

MURDER offENsEs Total offenses averaged twobetween 2001 and 2005, with a high value of four in

2002 and 2003 and a low of zero in 2004. In 2006, therewas one reported offense compared to one offense inthe previous year.

Figure 18

VIOLENT CRIMESelec ted Report ed Hat e Cr ime Offenses, 20012006

Note: From 1995 to 2001, a hierarchy rule was used toidentify the most serious crime type. For these years, the

total number of offenses in a multiple offense hate crime

event would still be recorded, but the crime type would begiven as the most serious crime type. For example, a hate

crime event that had two offenses a simple assault, andan aggravated assault would be counted as two offenses

with the most serious offense as aggravated assault.

Starting in 2002, the Department of Justice began count-

ingeachoffense ineachhate crime event, whether it hadone offense (a majority of the events) or multiple offenses

(a minority of the events). This was undertaken to moreaccurately count each type of criminal offense (e.g., intimi-

dation, simple assault, vandalism, etc.). Using this new

standard of count, comparisons and trend analysis shouldbe limited to 2002 and forward. (See Appendix 3, Data

Characteristics and Known Limitations, on page 52 fora further explanation of the hierarchy rule.)

8/9/2019 PX0674

27/59


Figure 19

PROPERTY CRIMESelec ted Report ed Hat e Cr ime Offenses, 20012006


DEstRUCtioN/VANDALisM offENsEs These

offenses have consistently been the highest categoryof property crime offenses since 2001. Total offensesaveraged 535 between 2001 and 2005, with a high value

of 593 in 2004 and a low of 451 in 2002. In 2006, 613offenses were reported, an increase of 10.8 percent

from the previous year.

BURGLARY offENsEs Total offenses averaged30 between 2001 and 2005, with a high value of 38 in

2001 and a low of 25 in 2003. In 2006, 24 offenses werereported, an 11.1 percent decrease from the previousyear.

ARsoN offENsEs Total offenses averaged 7 be-

tween 2001 and 2005, with a high value of 11 in 2004and a low of 4 in 2002. In 2006, 12 offenses were

reported, an increase from the 7 offenses reported theprevious year.

Source: Table 13.

0

200

400

600

800

200620052004200320022001YEAR

NUMBER

DESTRUCTION/VANDALISM

BURGLARYARSON

Note: From 1995 to 2001, a hierarchy rule was used to

identify the most serious crime type. For these years, the

total number of offenses in a multiple offense hate crimeevent would still be recorded, but the crime type would be

given as the most serious crime type. For example, a hatecrime event that had two offenses a simple assault, and

an aggravated assault would be counted as two offenseswith the most serious offense as aggravated assault.

Starting in 2002, the Department of Justice began count-ingeachoffense ineachhate crime event, whether it had

one offense (a majority of the events) or multiple offenses(a minority of the events). This was undertaken to more

accurately count each type of criminal offense (e.g., intimi-

dation, simple assault, vandalism, etc.). Using this newstandard of count, comparisons and trend analysis should

be limited to 2002 and forward. (See Appendix 3, DataCharacteristics and Known Limitations, on page 52 for

a further explanation of the hierarchy rule.)

8/9/2019 PX0674

28/59

TREND DATA

0

200

400

600

800

200620052004200320022001YEAR

NUMBER

FIELD

SCHOOL

PARKING LOT

CHURCH

RESIDENCE

HIGHWAY

Figure 20

LOCATI ON OF CRIMESelec ted Report ed Hat e Cr ime Offenses, 20012006

TREND DATA25

REsiDENCE/HoME/DRiVEWAY This location

continues to be the largest category of hate crimeoffenses since 2001, the only exceptions being 2002and 2006, when the number of hate crime offenses was

larger for the category of highway/road/alley/street. Totaloffenses averaged 585 between 2001 and 2005, with

a high value of 711 in 2001 and a low of 511 in 2005.In 2006, 504 offenses were reported, a decrease of 1.4

percent from the previous year.

HiGHWAY/RoAD/ALLEY/stREEt This locationcontinues to be the second largest category of hate crimeoffenses since 2001, the only exceptions being 2002 and

2006 when this category exceeded the number of hatecrimes at the location of residence/home/driveway. Total

offenses averaged 558 between 2001 and 2005, with ahigh value of 654 in 2002 and a low of 456 in 2005. In

2006, 545 offenses were reported, an increase of 19.5percent from the previous year.

sCHooL/CoLLEGE Total offenses averaged 169

between 2001 and 2005, with a high value of 189 in

2001 and a low of 150 in 2003. In 2006, 152 offenseswere reported, a decrease of 13.6 percent from theprevious year.

PARKiNG Lot/GARAGE Total offenses averaged

108 between 2001 and 2005, with a high value of 138in 2005 and a low of 79 in 2002. In 2006, 135 offenses

were reported, a decrease of 2.2 percent from the pre-vious year.

CHURCH/sYNAGoGUE/tEMPLE Total offensesaveraged 78 between 2001 and 2005, with a high

value of 92 in 2001 and a low of 66 in 2003. In 2006,84 offenses were reported, the same as in the previous

year.

fiELD/WooDs/PARK Total offenses averaged 39between 2001 and 2005, with a high value of 51 in 2003and a low of 31 in 2004. In 2006, 38 offenses were

reported, the same as in the previous year.

Source: Table 14.

8/9/2019 PX0674

29/59

DaTa

T aB l E S

Hate

Crime

8/9/2019 PX0674

30/59



.

.

.

.

.

.

Table 1HATE CRIMES, 2006

Events, Offenses, Victims, and Known Suspects by Bias Motivation

Bias motivationEvents Offenses Victims Known suspects

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Total........................................................ 1,306 100.0 1,702 100.0 1,611 100.0 1,612 100.0

Race/ethnicity/national origin 844 64.6 1,145 67.3 1,074 66.7 1,126 69.9

Anti-white........................................... 64 4.9 82 4.8 76 4.7 110 6.8

Anti-black........................................... 432 33.1 588 34.5 552 34.3 543 33.7

Anti-Hispanic......................... 153 11.7 218 12.8 203 12.6 281 17.4

Anti-American Indian/

Alaskan native................................. 4 0.3 5 0.3 4 0.2 4 0.2

Anti-Asian/Pacific Islander................. 52 4.0 74 4.3 72 4.5 58 3.6

Anti-multiple races, group..... 45 3.4 60 3.5 54 3.4 34 2.1

Anti-other ethnicity/

national origin 94 7.2 118 6.9 113 7.0 96 6.0

Religion................................... 205 15.7 227 13.3 223 13.8 117 7.3

Anti-Jewish........................................ 129 9.9 146 8.6 145 9.0 72 4.5Anti-Catholic...................................... 11 0.8 11 0.6 11 0.7 2 0.1

Anti-Protestant................................... 13 1.0 13 0.8 13 0.8 8 0.5

Anti-Islamic (Muslim)............. 14 1.1 14 0.8 14 0.9 13 0.8

Anti-other religion.............................. 23 1.8 28 1.6 25 1.6 15 0.9

Anti-multiple religious, group. 14 1.1 14 0.8 14 0.9 7 0.4

Anti-atheism/agnosticism/etc............. 1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1 0 0.0

Sexual orientation.................. 246 18.8 317 18.6 301 18.7 354 22.0

Anti-male homosexual (gay). 163 12.5 206 12.1 195 12.1 249 15.4

Anti-female homosexual..... 23 1.8 29 1.7 29 1.8 25 1.6

Anti-homosexual............................ 57 4.4 79 4.6 74 4.6 79 4.9

Anti-heterosexual.. 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-bisexual..................................... 3 0.2 3 0.2 3 0.2 1 0.1

Physical/mental disability...... 3 0.2 4 0.2 4 0.2 4 0.2

Anti-physical disability.......... 1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1

Anti-mental disability............. 2 0.2 3 0.2 3 0.2 3 0.2

Gender 8 0.6 9 0.5 9 0.6 11 0.7

Anti-male 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-female 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-transgender 8 0.6 9 0.5 9 0.6 11 0.7

Notes: Percentages may not add to subtotals or 100.0 because of rounding.

An event indicates the occurrence of one or more criminal offenses committed against one or more victims by one or more suspects/perpetrators.

A victim can have more than one offense committed against them.

The term 'known suspect' does not imply that the identity of the suspect is known.

For a more complete definition of each criminal justice term, please refer to the glossary (Appendix 5).

8/9/2019 PX0674

31/59

DATA TABLES

DATA TABLES 29


Offenses by Type of Crime

Type of crimeOffenses

Number Percent

Total 1,702 100.0

Total Violent crimes 1,044 61.3

Murder 1 0.1

Forcible rape 1 0.1

Robbery 39 2.3

Aggravated assault 376 22.1

Simple assault 310 18.2

Intimidation 317 18.6

Total Property crimes 658 38.7

Burglary 24 1.4

Larceny-theft 8 0.5

Motor vehicle theft 1 0.1

Arson 12 0.7Destruction/vandalism 613 36.0

Notes: One suspect can commit more than one crime.

Percentages may not add to subtotals or 100.0 because of rounding.

One victim can have more than one offense committed against him/her.

An event indicates the occurrence of one or more offenses.

8/9/2019 PX0674

32/59




Events, Offenses, Victims, and Known Suspects by Location

LocationEvents Offenses Victims Known suspects

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Total 1,306.......................................... 100.0 1,702 100.0 1,611 100.0 1,612 100.0

Air/bus/train terminal............ 6 0.5 6 0.4 6 0.4 11 0.7

Bank/savings and loan................... 2 0.2 2 0.1 2 0.1 2 0.1

Bar/night club....................... 15 1.1 21 1.2 21 1.3 28 1.7

Church/synagogue/temple.... 80 6.1 84 4.9 82 5.1 29 1.8

Commercial/office building.... 27 2.1 30 1.8 30 1.9 16 1.0

Construction site.................. 3 0.2 3 0.2 3 0.2 1 0.1

Convenience store............... 10 0.8 12 0.7 11 0.7 22 1.4

Department/discount store... 3 0.2 4 0.2 4 0.2 2 0.1

Drug store/Dr.'s office/hospital 5 0.4 5 0.3 5 0.3 2 0.1

Field/woods/park.................. 30 2.3 38 2.2 36 2.2 58 3.6

Government/public building............ 24 1.8 25 1.5 25 1.6 22 1.4

Grocery/supermarket........... 11 0.8 11 0.6 11 0.7 10 0.6

Highway/road/alley/street..... 395 30.2 545 32.0 520 32.3 692 42.9Hotel/motel/etc..................... 9 0.7 9 0.5 9 0.6 14 0.9

Jail/prison............................. 8 0.6 10 0.6 9 0.6 12 0.7

Lake/waterway/beach.......... 6 0.5 9 0.5 9 0.6 7 0.4

Liquor store.................................... 4 0.3 5 0.3 5 0.3 8 0.5

Parking lot/garage................ 99 7.6 135 7.9 122 7.6 146 9.1

Rental storage facility........... 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Residence/home/driveway... 350 26.8 504 29.6 465 28.9 327 20.3

Restaurant........................... 37 2.8 40 2.4 39 2.4 44 2.7

School/college..................... 136 10.4 152 8.9 147 9.1 125 7.8

Service/gas station.............. 7 0.5 7 0.4 7 0.4 7 0.4

Specialty store (TV, fur, etc.) 11 0.8 12 0.7 12 0.7 9 0.6

Other/unknown...................... 28 2.1 33 1.9 31 1.9 18 1.1

Notes: Percentages may not add to 100.0 because of rounding.

An event indicates the occurrence of one or more criminal offenses committed against one or more victims by one or more suspects/perpetrators.A victim can have more than one offense committed against them.

The term 'known suspect' does not imply that the identity of the suspect is known.

For a more complete definition of each criminal justice term, please refer to the glossary (Appendix 5).

8/9/2019 PX0674

33/59

DATA TABLES

DATA TABLES 31

.

.

.


Victim Type by Bias Motivation

Bias motivationTotal1 Individual

Business/

financial

institution2

Government2Religious

organization2 Other

2

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Total....................................... 1,611 100.0 1,401 100.0 46 100.0 80 100.0 82 100.0 2 100.0

Race/ethnicity/national origin 1,074 66.7 966 69.0 33 71.7 67 83.8 8 9.8 0 0.0

Anti-white......................... 76 4.7 73 5.2 1 2.2 2 2.5 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-black........................ 552 34.3 498 35.5 12 26.1 39 48.8 3 3.7 0 0.0

Anti-Hispanic............................. 203 12.6 191 13.6 7 15.2 5 6.3 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-American Indian/

Alaskan native................ 4 0.2 4 0.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-Asian/Pacific Islander 72 4.5 66 4.7 4 8.7 1 1.3 1 1.2 0 0.0

Anti-multiple races, group.. 54 3.4 33 2.4 4 8.7 17 21.3 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-other ethnicity/

national origin.... 113 7.0 101 7.2 5 10.9 3 3.8 4 4.9 0 0.0

Religion............................... 223 13.8 125 8.9 11 23.9 13 16.3 73 89.0 1 50.0

Anti-Jewish................................ 145 9.0 102 7.3 7 15.2 12 15.0 23 28.0 1 50.0Anti-Catholic.............................. 11 0.7 2 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 9 11.0 0 0.0

Anti-Protestant........................... 13 0.8 3 0.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 10 12.2 0 0.0

Anti-Islamic (Muslim)...... 14 0.9 9 0.6 2 4.3 0 0.0 3 3.7 0 0.0

Anti-other religion............. 25 1.6 8 0.6 2 4.3 0 0.0 15 18.3 0 0.0

Anti-multiple religious, group. 14 0.9 1 0.1 0 0.0 1 1.3 12 14.6 0 0.0

Anti-atheism/agnosticism/etc 1 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.2 0 0.0

Sexual orientation............. 301 18.7 297 21.2 2 4.3 0 0.0 1 1.2 1 50.0

Anti-male homosexual (gay). 195 12.1 195 13.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-female homosexual... 29 1.8 29 2.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-homosexual................ 74 4.6 70 5.0 2 4.3 0 0.0 1 1.2 1 50.0

Anti-heterosexual.......... 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-bisexual................. 3 0.2 3 0.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Physical/mental disability.... 4 0.2 4 0.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0Anti-physical disability....... 1 0.1 1 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-mental disability........... 3 0.2 3 0.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Gender 9 0.6 9 0.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-male.......... 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-female........... 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Anti-transgender......... 9 0.6 9 0.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Note: Percentages may not add to subtotals or 100.0 because of rounding.1Numbers represent total number of victims (i.e., entities and individuals), not the number of hate crime events.

Numbers represent acts directed at entities other than individuals.

8/9/2019 PX0674

34/59



.

.


Victim Type by Location

LocationTotal

1 Individual

Business/

financial

institution2

Government2 Religious

organization2 Other

2

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Total.................................... 1,611 100.0 1,401 100.0 46 100.0 80 100.0 82 100.0 2 100.0

Air/bus/train terminal......... 6 0.4 6 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Bank/savings and loan............... 2 0.1 2 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Bar/night club.................... 21 1.3 21 1.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Church/synagogue/temple 82 5.1 13 0.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 69 84.1 0 0.0

Commercial/office building 30 1.9 19 1.4 11 23.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Construction site............... 3 0.2 2 0.1 1 2.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Convenience store............ 11 0.7 9 0.6 2 4.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Department/discount store 4 0.2 2 0.1 2 4.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Drug store/Dr.'s office/hospital 5 0.3 4 0.3 1 2.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Field/woods/park........................ 36 2.2 33 2.4 0 0.0 3 3.8 0 0.0 0 0.0

Government/public building 25 1.6 8 0.6 0 0.0 17 21.3 0 0.0 0 0.0

Grocery/supermarket.................. 11 0.7 8 0.6 3 6.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0Highway/road/alley/street.. 520 32.3 505 36.0 4 8.7 11 13.8 0 0.0 0 0.0

Hotel/motel/etc.................. 9 0.6 9 0.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Jail/prison.......................... 9 0.6 9 0.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Lake/waterway/beach....... 9 0.6 9 0.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Liquor store....................... 5 0.3 5 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Parking lot/garage............. 122 7.6 121 8.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.2 0 0.0

Rental storage facility........ 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Residence/home/driveway 465 28.9 459 32.8 5 10.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 50.0

Restaurant........................ 39 2.4 33 2.4 6 13.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

School/college.................. 147 9.1 82 5.9 6 13.0 48 60.0 10 12.2 1 50.0

Service/gas station........... 7 0.4 7 0.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Specialty store (TV, fur, etc.) 12 0.7 11 0.8 1 2.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Other/unknown................... 31 1.9 24 1.7 4 8.7 1 1.3 2 2.4 0 0.0

Note: Percentages may not add to 100.0 because of rounding.

Numbers represent total number of victims (i.e., entities and individuals), not the number of hate crime events.Numbers represent acts directed at entities other than individuals.

8/9/2019 PX0674

35/59

DATA TABLES

DATA TABLES 33

1,306 1,702 1,611 1,612

33 53 52 281 1 1 0

1 1 1 3

10 21 21 9

1 1 1 1

4 4 4 3

3 5 5 3

2 4 3 1

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 4

4 5 5 1

2 2 2 0

1 1 1 0

2 6 6 3

0 0 0 0

1 2 1 2

1 2 1 2

2 2 2 1

2 2 2 1

0 0 0 0

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

20 31 26 17

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 0

7 8 8 6

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 1

3 4 4 6

1 10 5 2

3 3 3 2

0 0 0 0

2 6 3 3

1 4 2 0

1 2 1 3

12 17 17 20

3 4 4 3

7 11 11 15

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

0 0 0 0

2 4 3 2

2 4 3 2

3 3 3 6

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 5

1 3 1 0

1 3 1 0

21 38 27 37

10 21 14 25

8 12 10 9

3 5 3 3

Bishop

Inyo County....

(continued)

Ridgecrest..

Kern County.

Newark..

Del Norte County.

El Dorado County....

Fresno County.

Colusa County...

Contra Costa County.

Sheriff's Dept.

Antioch

Brentwood.

Concord

El Cerrito

Pittsburg.

Pleasant Hill.

Sheriff's Dept.

Fresno.......

State Center Community.

Imperial County....

Humboldt County..

Arcata

Sheriff's Dept.

Williams.

Calaveras County.

Bakersfield.................

Richmond

San Pablo..

Walnut Creek..

CSU Fresno

Glenn County....

Clovis..

San Leandro....

CSU East Bay..

UC Berkeley....

Sheriff's Dept....

Alpine County.....

Table 6

Events, Offenses, Victims, and Known Suspects by County and Jurisdiction

HATE CRIMES, 2006

Alameda County

Total

Known

suspects

Alameda

Albany.........

Berkeley

Calexico..

Butte County

Chico...

Fremont......

Oakland

Livermore

Pleasanton.............

County and

jurisdiction*Events Offenses Victims

Union City

E. Bay Reg. Park District.

Sheriff's Dept.

South Lake Tahoe

Amador County...............

8/9/2019 PX0674

36/59



0 0 0 0

8 9 9 128 9 9 12

0 0 0 0

450 542 535 644

121 140 139 157

46 49 49 54

3 4 3 3

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 2

3 3 3 2

3 3 3 2

1 2 2 3

2 2 2 1

2 4 4 2

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 6

3 4 4 2

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 2

3 3 3 6

8 11 11 10

2 2 2 2

2 2 2 1

5 7 7 7

8 9 9 22

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 0

8 12 12 10

1 1 1 3

4 5 5 7

1 1 1 0

2 3 3 3

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 0

4 9 9 3

3 3 3 1

8 9 9 5

2 2 2 2

5 6 6 8

2 2 2 1

1 1 1 1

16 18 18 10

3 3 3 2

3 3 3 0

25 32 30 38

211 252 250 338

4 7 7 11 1 1 0

1 1 1 1

14 22 20 53

6 10 10 10

(continued)

La Mirada3.....

La Puente3.

Lakewood3...

Compton3.....

Duarte3.....

La Habra Heights3

Cudahy3.....

Diamond Bar3.....

Los Angeles..

Lawndale3....

Mailbu3.....

Pico Rivera3....

Paramount3....

Santa Clarita3.........

Glendora

Gardena

El Segundo

Bell..

West Hollywood3.

Temple City3....

Glendale

Covina

Burbank

HATE CRIMES, 2006


Sheriff's Dept.

Kings County.....

Sheriff's Dept1

Unincorporated2......

Table 6 - continued

Lake County...

Lassen County

Los Angeles County.

Bellflower3...

Agoura Hills3....

Carson3....

Calabasas3..........

Cerritos3......

Artesia3....

Avalon3......

Rosemead3....

Hawaiian Gardens3

Beverly Hills

Baldwin Park

Westlake Village3.

Azusa

San Dimas3.............

Lancaster3....

Norwalk3...

County and


Known

suspects

Palmdale3.........

Claremont

Pomona..

El Monte..

Monterey Park.

La Verne...

Long Beach.

Manhattan Beach..Maywood

Pasadena..

8/9/2019 PX0674

37/59

DATA TABLES

DATA TABLES 35

1 1 1 2

2 2 2 3

2 2 2 14 4 4 0

5 5 5 2

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

0 0 0 0

8 8 8 2

1 1 1 0

2 2 2 0

5 5 5 2

4 5 5 5

4 5 5 5

5 6 6 9

2 2 2 4

3 4 4 5

3 3 3 1

2 2 2 1

1 1 1 0

0 0 0 0

1 4 2 2

1 4 2 2

3 10 10 5

2 9 9 5

1 1 1 0

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

78 104 96 95

1 2 1 1

6 8 8 9

3 3 3 3

3 3 3 7

8 9 9 0

4 4 4 6

9 10 10 13

11 12 11 12

5 17 17 10

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 3

1 2 1 1

1 2 1 1

2 2 2 3

2 3 2 2

2 2 2 1

5 6 6 9

2 2 2 0

2 3 2 4

1 2 1 4

3 4 4 1

4 5 4 5

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 0

0 0 0 0

HATE CRIMES, 2006


Novato.....

San Rafael..

County and

jurisdiction*

CSU Dominguez Hills...

UC Los Angeles...

Brea

Sheriff's Dept..

Merced County....

CSU Monterey Bay

Sheriff's Dept....

Modoc County...

Napa County...

Aliso Viejo4.

Anaheim..

Marina

Mono County....

Monterey County...

Mammoth Lakes....

Marin County.....

West Covina....

CSU Northridge...

Events Offenses VictimsKnown

suspects

Table 6 - continued

Nevada County...

Roseville..

Plumas County....

Orange County

Costa Mesa...

CSU Fullerton

Fountain Valley.

Fullerton...

Garden Grove.

Los Alimitos

Mission Viejo4

Newport Beach

Rancho Santa Margarita4

Huntington Beach.

Laguna Beach.

Laguna Hills4

Irvine.

Laguna Niguel4

Lake Forest4

Santa Ana

Placentia

Orange

San Clemente4

Westminster

(continued)

Placer County..

Santa Monica...

Redondo Beach.....

San Gabriel.....

Atwater....

Fort Bragg

Madera County.....

Sheriff's Dept...

Mendocino County....

Sheriff's Dept..

Mariposa County....

8/9/2019 PX0674

38/59



102 149 141 98

18 29 27 17

1 1 1 61 2 2 0

7 9 9 5

12 16 14 9

3 7 5 2

1 5 5 0

3 7 7 2

1 1 1 1

4 5 4 1

12 16 16 17

5 6 5 5

3 5 5 1

26 35 35 30

5 5 5 2

60 74 68 64

16 18 17 12

2 2 2 3

4 4 4 41 1 1 2

37 49 44 43

2 2 2 2

2 2 2 2

21 29 27 18

1 1 1 1

8 11 11 4

1 1 1 3

1 1 1 1

1 4 2 1

1 1 1 0

2 2 2 2

2 4 4 5

2 2 2 0

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 0

129 181 161 165

31 52 41 34

3 4 4 2

1 1 1 6

3 4 4 5

3 3 3 3

8 19 11 14

1 2 1 3

2 2 2 6

2 3 3 3

2 2 2 3

3 3 3 6

1 1 1 0

8 8 8 12

55 69 69 64

1 3 3 1

3 3 3 3

2 2 2 0

106 125 122 135

100 119 116 134

6 6 6 1

10 11 11 9

2 3 3 3

3 3 3 3

5 5 5 3

(continued)

El Cajon

Yucaipa6

Escondido

Riverside County....

Table 6 - continuedHATE CRIMES, 2006


Known

suspects

Sheriff's Dept..

Corona..

City of Canyon Lake5

Colton.

Big Bear6

Calimesa

5

Hemet

La Quinta5.

Moreno Valley5.

Lake Elsinore5.

Norco5.

Palm Dessert5

Palm Springs..

Perris5...

Riverside

Temecula5

Rancho Mirage5..

Sacramento County...........

Sheriff's Dept.

CSU Sacramento

Folsom....Galt...

Sacramento..

San Benito County..

San Bernardino County

Hollister..

Chino.

Chino Hills6

Fontana ............................

Ontario

Montclair....

Stockton.

Rialto.

San Bernardino......

Sheriff's Dept....

San Diego..

San Diego Harbor..

San Joaquin County

CSU San Francisco

Upland..

Encinitas7

Santee7..

Poway7

San Marcos7

La Mesa

National City

Manteca

Lodi

San Diego County...

County and


Chula Vista

Lemon Grove7

San Francisco

San Francisco County

Oceanside..

San Diego Coast DPR

CSU San Marcos

Vista7.

8/9/2019 PX0674

39/59

DATA TABLES

DATA TABLES 37

7 7 7 5

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 1

3 3 3 3

25 28 28 24

1 2 2 0

1 3 3 0

1 1 1 0

2 2 2 1

1 1 1 3

2 2 2 4

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 1

14 14 14 14

1 1 1 1

4 4 4 7

3 3 3 7

1 1 1 0

38 48 48 54

1 1 1 1

1 2 2 1

1 1 1 2

1 2 2 2

3 3 3 2

30 38 38 43

1 1 1 3

25 38 31 34

6 8 8 9

14 25 18 20

4 4 4 5

1 1 1 0

13 18 17 18

4 4 4 4

9 14 13 14

0 0 0 0

1 4 4 4

1 4 4 4

13 18 18 5

1 2 2 0

4 4 4 1

1 1 1 1

7 11 11 3

19 29 29 15

6 11 11 5

1 1 1 0

2 2 2 1

2 3 3 2

6 10 10 5

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

16 17 17 92 3 3 1

10 10 10 6

1 1 1 0

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 0

5 6 5 4

3 4 3 0

2 2 2 4

2 2 2 1

2 2 2 1

(continued)

HATE CRIMES, 2006Events, Offenses, Victims, and Known Suspects by County and Jurisdiction

Atascadero

Pismo Beach

San Luis Obispo.

San Mateo County.

Burlingame

Menlo Park

Sutter County...

Modesto..

Yuba City..

Tehama County..

San Bruno

Table 6 - continued

Sheriff's Dept.

San Luis Obispo County

San Mateo

Sheriff's Dept..

South San Francisco

Santa Barbara County.

Santa Barbara

Palo Alto

San Jose

UC Santa Barbara

Santa Clara County.

Morgan Hill

Los Gatos

Petaluma

CSU Stanislaus

Mountain View

Santa Cruz.

Watsonville....

Santa Cruz County.

Santa Clara....

UC Santa Cruz....

Fairfield..

Vacaville..

Sonoma County.

Shasta County..

Sheriff's Dept

Redding..

Sierra County..

Siskiyou County...

Solano County....

Sheriff's Dept..

Sheriff's Dept.

Cotati

Suisun..

Rohnert Park..

Santa Rosa.

CSU Sonoma

Stanislaus County.......

Sonoma.

Sheriff's Dept...

Patterson

Turlock.

Riverbank

Known

suspects

County and


Belmont

Daly City

Half Moon Bay

Sheriff's Dept..

Red Bluff..

Pacifica

Redwood City

Milpitas

Weed..

8/9/2019 PX0674

40/59



0 0 0 0

6 7 7 4

1 1 1 1

5 6 6 3

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

24 32 31 26

1 1 1 0

8 9 9 6

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 0

3 4 3 2

5 5 5 5

5 11 11 12

12 13 13 12

5 6 6 10

7 7 7 2

6 7 6 6

5 6 5 6

1 1 1 0

1Includes unincorporated and contracts.

2"Unincorporated" patrolled by Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.

3Contracts with Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.

4Contracts with Orange County Sheriff's Department.

5Contracts with Riverside County Sheriff's Department.

6Contracts with San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department.

7Contracts with San Diego County Sheriff's Department.

9Contracts with Ventura County Sheriff's Department.

*Only those jurisdictions which reported a hate crime are listed in this table.

Table 6 - continuedHATE CRIMES, 2006


Trinity County..

8Contracts with Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department.

Tuolumne County........

Sonora..

Ventura County....

Sheriff's Dept..

Wheatland

Yolo County..

Davis....

Woodland..

Yuba County.

Sheriff's Dept..

Simi Valley.

Ventura...

Camarillo9........

Moorpark9........

Santa Paula...

Known

suspects

County and


Ojai9.................

Tulare County..

Tulare.

Visalia..........

8/9/2019 PX0674

41/59

DATA TABLES

DATA TABLES 39

Table 7A

SUMMARY OF CASES REFERRED

BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES AND TYPE OF FILINGS

For the Period January 1 Through December 31, 2006

Agency Total hate crimecases referred

Total cases filedas hate crimes

Total cases filed as

non-bias motivated

crimes

Total................................ 363 272 62

County District Attorneys 337 262 58

City Attorneys 26 10 4

Note: Please see Data Table 8 for details.

Table 7B

SUMMARY OF HATE CRIME CASE DISPOSITIONSFor the Period January 1 Through December 31, 2006

AgencyTotal

dispositions

Not

convicted

Convictions

Total

convictions

Hate crime convictionsAll other

convictionsTotalGuilty plea/nolo

contendere

Trial

verdict

Total............................................. 249 31 218 140 102 38 78

County District Attorneys 245. 31 214 136 98 38 78

City Attorneys. 4 0 4 4 4 0 0

Note: Please see Data Table 9 for details.

8/9/2019 PX0674

42/59



Table 8CASES REFERRED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

AND TYPE OF FILINGS

AS REPORTED BY

COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND CITY ATTORNEYS


363 272 62

337 262 58

4 4 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

1 4 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 6 0

4 3 10 0 0

2 2 0

0 0 0

4 2 2

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 6 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

145 106 23

1 1 0

3 0 10 0 0

10 6 4

0 0 0

0 0 0

1 1 0

1 1 0

0 0 0

2 0 2

16 14 0

0 0 0

0 1 1

10 8 2

6 3 00 0 0San Benito................................

Placer...........................

Plumas........................

Riverside.....................

Sacramento.............

Monterey......................

Napa.....................................

Nevada.....................................

Orange.....................................

Mendocino............................

Merced..................................

Modoc..........................

Mono............................

Los Angeles3,4..............

Madera...................

Marin.....................................Mariposa....................

Kern1,2,4............................

Kings.....................................

Lake......................................

Lassen.....................

Inyo..............................

Butte.............................................

Colusa.................

Contra Costa.........................

Del Norte...............................El Dorado..............................

Fresno......................................

Glenn....................................

Humboldt......................

Alpine.......................................

Alameda1,2,4..................................

Amador........................................

Imperial........................

(continued)

AgencyTotal hate crime

cases referred

Total cases filed

as hate crimes


non-bias motivated

crimes

County District Attorneys

Calaveras..........

Total..............................................

8/9/2019 PX0674

43/59

DATA TABLES

DATA TABLES 41

Table 8 - continuedCASES REFERRED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

AND TYPE OF FILINGS

AS REPORTED BY



6 6 0

13 9 1

26 9 7

2 2 0

7 6 1

8 7 0

2 0 1

19 11 7

6 3 1

5 13 2

0 0 0

0 0 0

1 1 0

6 5 0

2 2 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

1 2 0

1 0 0

12 11 1

3 2 1

7 5 0

26 10 4

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

2 2 0

12 4 2

0 0 0

12 4 2

0 0 0

Notes: Zero indicates that no case information was reported in this reporting category.

The number of complaints filed by county district attorneys and city attorneys or the number of cases

that resulted in hate crime convictions cannot be linked to the number of hate crimes reported by law

enforcement agencies.1Does not track hate crime cases referred to their offices.2Tracks only total number of hate crimes filed by their office.3Does not track cases referred to their branch offices; tracks total number of hate crimes filed by the Hate

Crime Unit and branch offices.

of cases filed by each agency plus the number of cases rejected by each agency. These counts

Inglewood

Long Beach

represent the miminum cases that would have had to be received in each agency in order to file or reject

Los Angeles...

Pasadena

San Diego

Torrance

Yuba

City Attorneys

Anaheim

Burbank

Tulare

Tuolumne

Ventura

Yolo.

Stanislaus..................

Sutter

Tehama

Trinity

Sierra.......................

Siskiyou.............................

Solano.......................

Sonoma........................

San Bernardino.....................

San Diego...................

San Francisco.............

Agency

the number of cases reported in these two reporting categories.

4The counts for these agencies in the "cases referred" category are determined by adding the total number

San Joaquin.............................

San Luis Obispo...........

San Mateo...................

Santa Barbara.......................

Santa Clara...........................

Santa Cruz...............................

Shasta..........................

Total hate crime

cases referred

Total cases filed

as hate crimes


non-bias motivated

crimes

8/9/2019 PX0674

44/59



Table 9

HATE CRIME CASE DISPOSITIONS

AS REPORTED BY



Agency Totaldispositions

Notconvicted

Convictions

Total

convictions

Hate crime convictions All other

convictionsTotalGuilty plea/

nolo contendere

Trial

verdict

Total 249.............................................. 31 218 140 102 38 78

County District Attorneys 245 31 214 136 98 38 78

Alameda..................................... 5 0 5 5 5 0 0

Alpine......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Amador... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Butte........................................... 3 0 3 1 1 0 2

Calaveras................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Colusa........................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Contra Costa.............................. 9 2 7 1 1 0 6

Del Norte.................................... 4 0 4 3 3 0 1

El Dorado................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fresno........................................ 2 0 2 1 0 1 1

Glenn... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0Humboldt.................................... 2 1 1 1 1 0 0

Imperial .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Inyo............................................ 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kern........................................... 4. 0 4 0 0 0 4

Kings.............................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lake........................................... 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lassen... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Los Angeles............................... 117. 17 100 71 39 32 29

Madera....................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Marin.......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mariposa... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mendocino.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 6. 1 5 1 1 0 4

Merced....................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Modoc.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mono.......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Monterey.................................... 2 0 2 1 1 0 1

Napa.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nevada....................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Orange....................................... 12 0 12 11 10 1 1

Placer......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Plumas....................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Riverside.................................... 7 0 7 3 2 1 4

Sacramento................................ 2 0 2 2 2 0 0

San Benito... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

San Bernardino.......................... 2 1 1 0 0 0 1

San Diego... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 7. 0 7 5 5 0 2

San Francisco............................ 11 2 9 5 5 0 4

San Joaquin............................... 1 0 1 1 1 0 0

San Luis Obispo......................... 5 4 1 1 1 0 0

San Mateo.................................. 3 0 3 0 0 0 3

Santa Barbara............................ 1 0 1 0 0 0 1Santa Clara................................ 5 0 5 5 5 0 0

Santa Cruz................................. 3 0 3 2 2 0 1

Shasta........................................ 9 1 8 4 4 0 4

Sierra......................................... 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Siskiyou.................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Solano........................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sonoma...................................... 4 0 4 4 4 0 0

Stanislaus.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2. 0 2 0 0 0 2

(continued)

8/9/2019 PX0674

45/59

DATA TABLES

DATA TABLES 43

Table 9 - continuedHATE CRIME CASE DISPOSITIONS

AS REPORTED BY



Agency Totaldispositions

Notconvicted

Convictions

Total

convictions

Hate crime convictions All other

convictionsTotalGuilty plea/

nolo contendere

Trial

verdict

Sutter......................................... 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Tehama...................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Trinity......................................... 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Tulare......................................... 1 0 1 0 0 0 1

Tuolumne................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ventura.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 8. 1 7 6 3 3 1

Yolo............................................ 3 1 2 1 1 0 1

Yuba........................................... 5 0 5 1 1 0 4

City Attorneys. 4 0 4 4 4 0 0

Anaheim..................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Burbank......................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Inglewood 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Long Beach................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Los Angeles.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 2. 0 2 2 2 0 0

Pasadena. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

San Diego... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 2. 0 2 2 2 0 0

Torrance..................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Notes: Zero indicates that no case information was reported in this reporting category.e num er o comp a nts e y county str ct attorneys an c ty attorneys or t e num er o cases t at

resu te n ate crme convc tons cannot e n e to t e num er o ate crmes reporte y aw en orcement agences.See Criminal Justice Glossary (Appendix 5) for definition of terms.

Table 10HATE CRIME CASES, 1997-2006

COMPLAINTS FILED AND TOTAL CONVICTIONS AS REPORTED BY

COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS

AND CITY ATTORNEYS

Type of

prosecuting

attorney

1997 1998 1999 2000

Complaints Total Complaints Total Complaints Total Complaints Total

filed convictions filed convictions filed convictions filed convictions

Total.......................... 313 280 244 174 372 229 360 275

County District Attorneys 259 240 226 158 341 206 341 262

City Attorneys 54 40 18 16 31 23 19 13

Type of

prosecuting

attorney

2001 2002 2003 2004

Complaints Total Complaints Total Complaints Total Complaints Total

filed convictions filed convictions filed convictions filed convictions

Total.......................... 314 207 351 253 304 197 277 242

County District Attorneys 290 187 333 236 293 188 263 229

City Attorneys.. 24 20 18 17 11 9 14 13

Type of

prosecuting

attorney

2005 2006

Complaints Total Complaints Total

filed convictions filed convictions

Total.......................... 330 238 272 218

County District Attorneys 315 227 262 214

City Attorneys 15 11 10 4

Notes: The number of complaints filed by county district attorneys and city attorneys or the number of cases that

resulted in hate crime convictions cannot be linked to the number of hate crimes reported by law enforcement agencies.

See Criminal Justice Glossary (Appendix 5) for definition of terms.

In 2006, adjustments were made to the 2005 conviction data; therefore, counts do not match previously published data.

8/9/2019 PX0674

46/59

8/9/2019 PX0674

47/59

8/9/2019 PX0674

48/59

46

Table 13HATE CRIMES, 1997-2006Offenses by Type of Crime

Type of crime1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percen

Total............................ 2,023 100.0 1,801 100.0 2,001 100.0 2,002 100.0 2,265 100.0 2,009 100.0 1,815 100.0 1,770 100.0

Violent crimes 1,489 73.6 1,232 68.4 1,353 67.6 1,312 65.5 1,662 73.4 1,517 75.5 1,252 69.0 1,135 64.1

Murder........................ 3 0.1 2 0.1 3 0.1 5 0.2 2 0.1 4 0.2 4 0.2 0 0.0

Forcible rape............... 1 0.0 1 0.1 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 2 0.1 0 0.0

Robbery...................... 52 2.6 41 2.3 71 3.5 55 2.7 63 2.8 75 3.7 61 3.4 60 3.4

Aggravated assault..... 338 16.7 246 13.7 238 11.9 321 16.0 250 11.0 272 13.5 179 9.9 246 13.9

Simple assault............ 380 18.8 385 21.4 427 21.3 374 18.7 524 23.1 478 23.8 477 26.3 360 20.3

Intimidation................. 715 35.3 557 30.9 613 30.6 556 27.8 822 36.3 687 34.2 529 29.1 469 26.5

Property crimes 534 26.4 569 31.6 648 32.4 690 34.5 603 26.6 492 24.5 563 31.0 635 35.9

Burglary................................. 23 1.1 15 0.8 16 0.8 34 1.7 38 1.7 33 1.6 25 1.4 27 1.5

Larceny-theft......................... 15 0.7 9 0.5 9 0.4 14 0.7 7 0.3 4 0.2 3 0.2 4 0.2

Motor vehicle theft................. 1 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.1 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Arson..................................... 18 0.9 10 0.6 11 0.5 10 0.5 10 0.4 4 0.2 5 0.3 11 0.6

Destruction/vandalism........... 477 23.6 535 29.7 610 30.5 631 31.5 548 24.2 451 22.4 530 29.2 593 33.5

Notes: Percentages may not add to subtotals or 100.0 because of rounding.

Dash indicates that percent changes are not calculated when the base number (2005) is less than 50, or that no data were reported.

From 1997 to 2001, a "hierarchy rule" was used to count the various types of crime. For a further explanation of the "hierarchy rule," see the Data Characteristics and Known Limitations Section

8/9/2019 PX0674

49/59

8/9/2019 PX0674

50/59

aPPEnDICES

Hate

Crime

8/9/2019 PX0674

51/59



APPENDIX 1BACKGROUND

In January 1986, the California Department of Justice(DOJ) submitted a report to the Legislature in responseto Senate Bill 2080 (Watson). This report, entitled Racial,

Ethnic, and Religious Crime Project, Preliminary Stepsto Establish Statewide Collection of Data, recommended

the following:

Documents

PX0674