Today marks the 100 year anniversary of the great earthquake of 1906 that hit Northern California on April 18. Somewhere between one and five thousand people were killed in San Francisco alone and until recently the story about the quake and its aftermath has not been adequately told. I think there is much here for criminologists to think about. Why has this story been so long in coming? Obviously we have a centennial anniversary of a great event that may hold commercial promise that could explain the recent interest in this issue. However, the lack of our adequate understanding of what happened is probably much deeper than we imagine. Past researchers have found that the distinctive tourist economy of San Francisco has suppressed its crime problem, and we know that the 1906 quake has been downplayed considerably: in the past it has been shown that photos have been doctored to make it appear that buildings were destroyed by fire and not the quake.
So there is so much more to this story than a quake and the inevitable death and suffering. As with many but not all catastrophic events, there was a law and order period following the event--although no formally declared martial law. In Philip Fradkin's (The Great Earthquakes and Firestorms of 1906: How San Francisco Nearly Destroyed Itself, U C Press, 2005) frank view,
Who, or what, was to blame for the earthquake and its violent aftermath? Not nature, which merely set the events in motion. San Francisco was the city that nearly destroyed itself, and is poised to do so again for most of the same reasons.
It seems pretty clear that Fradkin is not out to make San Francisco look pretty but rather to tell a story that has not been told: one of blatant racism West Coast style; the grab of commerce and price gouging by a power elite; the use of armed guards with orders to kill to protect propertied interests; and the purposeful suppression of the story of the quake.
Previously we noted the possible moratorium on the death penalty in California. Now there is even more activity in this area. An L.A. Times article discusses the UCLA conference on "The Faces of Wrongful Conviction" that took place on April 9, 2006. One speaker commented: "Good morning, my name is Gloria Killian...The state stole 22 years of my life for a robbery and murder I did not commit in Sacramento."
Amnesty International, the ACLU, Death Penalty Focus and others sponsored the event to draw attention to an important issue that a California Senate Commission will be examining. Aside from irrevocable error of executing death row inmates the danger is greater that lifers or long term inmates will experience wrongful conviction since their adjudications and sentences are less closely scruitinized than those of condemned inmates.
Thanks to Barbara Bloom for bringing this event to our attention.
Should California's Crime Clock on display at the Attorney General's Office, available here (at the bottom of the page) or with a click below, be canned?