This tag was created by Anonymous. 

Harlem in Disorder: A Spatial History of How Racial Violence Changed in 1935

Looting in the courts (50)

Police arrested sixty individuals for looting. In only forty-two cases do sources record the location allegedly looted; in eighteen cases that information is missing. Police arrested more than one person for looting eight stores. Ten of those reported arrested for looting in newspapers do not appear in legal records or newspaper stories about legal proceedings, only in lists of those arrested for burglary published in newspapers, so are not included here. There are also an additional twenty individuals for whom no details of their alleged offense survive, some of whom may have been involved in looting as they were charged with disorderly conduct, a charge made against six of those police arrested for looting.

The initial charge made in the Magistrates Court against those arrested for looting was typically burglary (38 of 50 cases). A charge of burglary required breaking into a store, entering it, and taking merchandise - all the elements that made up looting. If police did not have evidence of all three elements, the charge had to be to another offense that carried lesser penalties. Seven of those arrested for looting were charged with petit larceny instead of burglary. In those cases police likely had evidence an individual had taken merchandise but not that they had broken into and entered a store to take those goods. What form of larceny that evidence supported depended upon the value of the goods allegedly stolen. Petit larceny indicated that in all seven cases the goods were worth less than $100. Another three of those arrested for looting were charged with disorderly conduct instead of burglary. That charge could indicate that police had evidence an individual broke windows but not that they took merchandise, or that they had part of a crowd near looting. Police charged the remaining two men with robbery.

After the initial arraignment, prosecutors in the Magistrates Court later changed a charge of burglary to a lesser offense in eight cases: unlawful entry for Elva Jacobs; petit larceny for Henry Goodwin; and disorderly conduct for Joseph Payne, Raymond Taylor, Preston White, Elizabeth Tai, Arthur Davis and Herbert Hunter (that change is not recorded in the docket book for Davis and Hunter, but the Magistrate convicted them, which he could only do if they were charged with disorderly conduct). The charge of unlawful entry against Jacob suggests that police presented evidence that she had entered a store or put but no that she had taken merchandise.

Magistrates sent just over half (28 of 50) of those arraigned for looting to the grand jury. 


As Part of Related Categories:

This page has tags:

Contents of this tag:

This page references: