Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
 Appendix A: Notes on Preparation of the Country Reports and Explanatory Notes
 U.S. Human Rights and Democracy Strategy
 Nguyen Tat Thanh ( Viet Nam) at the Sixty-first United Nations General Assembly, Third Committee
 "The Right To Life In International Law",
Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Mr. Bacre Waly Ndiaye, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/61, Addendum: Mission to the United States of America
 Preamble, Universal Declaration of Human Rights
 See 
 The U.S. Human Rights Report -- Its Evolution
 Background Note: Canada
 Background Note: New Zealand
 Background Note: United Kingdom
 Background Note: Australia
 Appendix E: Country Assistance FY2006
 Israel: U.S. Foreign Assistance", Issue Brief for Congress
But another calculation puts it at nearly double that:
see The Cost of Israel to U.S. Taxpayers: True Lies About U.S. Aid to Israel
 The United States in the General Assembly
 Israel and the occupied territories: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006
 Palestinians who died following an infringement of the right to
 President Delivers State of the Union Address
 State Sponsors of Terror Overview
 Background Note: North Korea
 Background Note: Libya
 Australia: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006
 United Kingdom: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006
 Syria: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006
 Cuba: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006
 To encourage States to report such deaths to the Attorney General, the Act declared that, in order for a State to be eligible to receive a grant for correctional facilities, its grant application must include assurances that the State will follow the guidelines established by the Attorney General in reporting, on a quarterly basis, data on deaths that occur in two primary stages of the criminal justice system: first, deaths that occur "in the process of arrest" or during transfer after arrest; and, second, deaths in any municipal or county jail, State prison, or other local or State correctional facility.
RE: Amendments to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, United States Statutes at Large, 13 Oct. 2000
Data collection from local jails began in 2000, State prisons were added in 2001, State juvenile correctional agencies were added in 2002, and coverage of arrest-process deaths began in 2003.
Corrections Statistics: Deaths in Custody Reporting Program
 Press release
 Justifiable Homicide: by Weapon, Law Enforcement, 2002-2006
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_13.html - see footnote 1
 Uniform Crime Reports- Frequently Asked Questions
 See table at 
 Photos online brew trouble, The News & Observer, 15 Jul. 2007
 Reservist Due for Iraq Is Killed in Standoff With Police, Washington Post, 27 Dec. 2006
 Fatal Shooting of Veteran Justified, State's Attorney Finds, Washington Post, 11 April 2007
 Did Police execute Antonio Bryant?, The Hudson Valley Press, Vol. 24, No.2
 How Newburgh's two worlds collide, Times Herald-Record, 1 Nov. 2006
 Witness Rejects Police Account of Fatal Shooting, Washington Post, 28 Sep. 2006
 What Happened To James ChasseMental Health Association of Portland
 Leniency in Fairfax, Washington Post, 25 Mar. 2006
 Death raises concern at police tactics, BBC News, 21 Mar. 2006
 Va. Officer Might Be Suspended For Fatality, Washington Post, 25 Nov. 2006
 Potter fires cop, citing 10 mistakes, The Oregonian, 17 Aug. 2007
 Shooting Review Board Review Completed Regarding Fouad Kaady, Press Release from: Clackamas Co. Sheriff's Office, 21 Jan. 2006
 Transcript of Taped Interview of Willard and Bergin
 28 seconds: The Killing of Fouad Kaady (Video: Part 1 of 5)
 NY police in manslaughter charges, BBC News, 19 Mar. 2007
 Family of Woman Killed by Police Sues, New York Times, 22 Nov. 2007
 May 2, 2007: Rep. John Lewis on Kathryn Johnston Murder
 Conyers Calls on Justice Department to Seek Answers for Wrongful Death of 92-year-old Woman in Drug Raid, Press Release, 3 May 2007
 South Africa data found for 4/2005-3/2006 omitted: the custodial death rate of 14.0 skewed the range. Source: South Africa: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006
 CIA World Factbook
 Australia: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2005
 India: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006
Cites two sources, providing very different figures:
From January 2005 through July of the year, the Home Ministry reported 139 deaths in police custody. However, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) confirmed 1,730 deaths in police and judicial custody during the same time period.
 Malaysia: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006
Deaths during or following police contact: Statistics for England and Wales 2006/7
Deaths during or following police contact: Statistics for England and Wales 2005/06
 United Kingdom: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2005
 "Death in custody" does not have a standard definition. For the US, this report assumes the BJS term "arrest-related death" is roughly equivalent. To be clear about the term's definition, its's worthwhile to fully quote the BJS report:
Defining deaths "in the process of arrest"
BJS had to define the term "in the process of arrest," specified in the Death in Custody Reporting Act (PL 106-297).
BJS staff consulted with the International Association of
Chiefs of Police (IACP), the National Sheriffs' Association
(NSA), and criminal justice researchers to identify which circumstances involved an "arrest process."
All deaths of persons in the physical custody or under the
physical restraint of law enforcement officers were included.
This resulted in the reporting of 75 deaths over three years
in which no criminal charges were involved. Law enforcement responses to people exhibiting mental health problems accounted for 44 of these cases, while another 9
cases involved persons who had to be restrained by police
for medical transportation. In another 22 cases, the reason
for law enforcement involvement was not specified, but the
record indicated that no criminal charges were involved.
The deaths of any other persons not subject to an
attempted arrest were excluded, including bystanders and
law enforcement officers killed during an attempted arrest.
State contacts were instructed to include all deaths resulting
from use of force by law enforcement officers. Arrest-related
suicides were also included in this collection, provided that
law enforcement officers were in some type of contact with
the arrest subject prior to the suicide. For example, if an
armed suspect was surrounded by officers and chose to
take his own life rather than surrender, the death would be
included. However, if an offender was actively sought by
police but committed suicide before the police located him,
the death would be excluded. The reason for the exclusion
is that no officers were present at the time of death to
attempt an arrest.
Vehicular accident deaths that were not specifically related
to arrest activities were excluded from the collection. States
were instructed to include vehicular accident deaths only
when law enforcement officers actively took some role in
causing the accident during an arrest attempt. This included
shooting at the vehicle or driver or forcing the vehicle off the
road with a police vehicle or other obstructions (such as a
spike strip to blow out tires or a roadblock). All other vehicular deaths were excluded.
States were also instructed to disregard whether an arrest
warrant had been issued. Because officers frequently make
arrests in response to unexpected events, requiring an
arrest warrant would leave many arrest-related deaths unreported. Likewise, States were told to exclude the deaths of
persons who had arrest warrants issued against them that
went unenforced. For example, if an offender had a bench
warrant issued for their arrest, but later died before any
officers attempted to enforce this arrest warrant, the State
was told to exclude that record. In such cases, the arrest
warrant indicated an administrative criminal justice status
and not an attempt to bring the subject into custody.
Deaths of arrestees were subject to the data collection from
the time police encountered them in the field until the time
they were booked into a local jail facility. This included
deaths of arrest subjects who died at medical facilities due
to injuries or medical problems, as well as any persons who
died in transit from an arrest scene in a police vehicle or
ambulance. All deaths in jails are reported to BJS under a
separate DCRP collection with different questionnaires.
Once records of arrest-related deaths were submitted to
BJS, the forms were reviewed to ensure that each case met
the established guidelines. Deaths were checked against
the DCRP database of jail facility deaths for the same year
to avoid double-counting. BJS staff and the State contacts
routinely discussed and resolved cases that were ambiguous or appeared to involve circumstances that would
exclude them from the collection.
from "Methodology", Bureau of Justice Statistics, Special Report: Arrest-Related Deaths in the United States, 2003-2005
 Yearly police killing rate found, but omitted to avoid data skew:
El Salvador (2005) = 3.4
Jamaica (2006) = 66
Jamaica (2005) = 54
Saint Lucia (2006) = 17.6
Saint Lucia (2005) = 24
South Africa (4/2005-3/2006) = 8.0
 Poland: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006
 Jamaica Braeton Seven - A Justice System on Trial: Question and Answers, Amnesty International Report, AI Index: AMR 38/004/2003
 Gun-happy police add to Jamaica's killing spree, The Observer. 2 Sep. 2007
 Australian crime : facts and figures 2005
 Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2006/07
 Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2005/06
 Violent Crime Overview, Homicide and Gun Crime 2004/2005
Murder - Crime in the United States 2006
Murder - Crime in the United States 2005
Murder - Crime in the United States 2004
 About the IPCC
Belgium has Standing Committee P:
The organic law of 18 July 1991 on monitoring police forces and intelligence services and on the Coordinating Body for Threat Analysis introduced specifically external monitoring of the police by an independent and neutral body: Standing Committee P.
In particular, Standing Committee P monitors the way in which efficiency, effectiveness and coordination are achieved and the way in which fundamental rights and freedoms are respected during police work...
Committee P's mission to protect the fundamental rights of citizens in the context of police work makes it an important Belgian partner for international human rights bodies, notably the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT), the United Nations Committee against Torture (CAT), the Human Rights Committee, European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) and the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD).
The diversity of information currently possessed by the Committee and the expertise in assessing failings in the police system which it has built up over the past 10 years in its capacity as a global police watchdog make it a reliable source of knowledge and of some use to the international bodies responsible for monitoring respect for human rights.
 Revisiting Who Is Guarding the Guardians?, Chapter 4 - External Controls
 A Brief History of NACOLE
 U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Criminal Section: Overview
 The rush to clear police in shootings
 Police gun sanctions infrequent
 Editorial: Police Shootings, Hold your fire
 The Use of Force/Discipline's obstacles/Few complaints against police upheld - even fewer bring serious discipline
 District Police Lead Nation in Shootings: Lack of Training, Supervision Implicated as Key Factors
 USA, United States of America, Taken from the Amnesty International Report 2007
 4 U.S. marines face Haditha murder charges
 Marine accused of leading Haditha massacre avoids murder charges
 Interrogator Found Guilty of Negligent Homicide in Death of Iraqi Officer
 Iraq general's killer reprimanded
 Michelle Malkin: An Interview With Ilaro Pantano
 Ilario Pantano Biography, American Entertainment International Speakers Bureau
 Hell's Kitchen
 Marine charged with murders of Iraqis
 Jones Asks For President's Protection of Marine's Rights
 Marine's Shooting of Iraqis Called Justified
 Marine cleared in deaths of two Iraqis
 Pantano, other vets ready for law enforcement careers
 See 
 Committee Against Torture Concludes Thirty-Ninth Session
 David Cingranelli biography
 CIRI Human Rights Data Project: FAQ
 About the Political Terror Scale
 Worldwide Gorvernance Indicators, 1996-2006, World Bank
 The Human Security Report Project
 World Report 2007: United States, Human Rights Watch
 The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2006, The Information Office of the State Council of the government of China
 "On Human Rights Violations by Law Enforcement and Judicial Departments", in The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2006
 Records Paint Dark Portrait Of Guard: Before Abu Ghraib, Graner Left a Trail Of Alleged Violence
 Abuse Charges Bring Anguish in Unit's Home
 Abu Ghraib in Virginia: Abuse of Iraqi inmates follows a pattern established in Southern prisons
 The report goes on to say:
When Human Rights Watch began this research in 2005, two additional states, Massachusetts and Arizona, also permitted the use of dogs in cell extractions. In 2006, however, corrections departments in those states instituted new policies prohibiting such use of dogs.
"Summary", Cruel and Degrading: The Use of Dogs for Cell Extractions in U.S. Prisons
Later that year, Human Rights Watch followed up on their research, reporting:
...every state other than Connecticut that has used dogs for cell extractions has now given up the practice. Two days after the release of the Human Rights Watch report on the use of dogs for cell extractions, the Iowa department of Corrections announced it was ending the practice effective immediately, having decided it was "not necessary". Earlier this year, Massachusetts did the same thing, the head of its corrections department concluding that there are other ways to compel an inmate to comply with an order "than sending in an animal to rip his flesh".
Cruel and Degrading in Connecticut Prisons
 "Case study: the use of lethal force by law enforcement officials", Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions
 In Your Hands: A Guide for Community Action for the Tenth Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.", Eleanor Roosevelt, 27 March 1958, United Nations
Supplement: Gleaning A Standard From The Country Reports
To understand the Country Reports, their official purpose must be understood. The 1976 Foreign Assistance Act required the secretary of
state to transmit to Congress "a full and complete report" every year concerning "respect for internationally recognized human rights in
each country proposed as a recipient" of U.S. security assistance. The Act also imposed restrictions on U.S. security assistance to
foreign governments that violate internationally recognized human rights. Subsequent laws added restrictions on economic (non-security)
assistance to countries allegedly violating human rights. Consequently, the Reports expanded to include an entry on each member of the
United Nations, along with countries that are not U.N. members (Taiwan, e.g.). 
The initial draft of the Report comes from US embassies, that gather information throughout the year. The final version is produced in
Washington by the State Department. It is reasonable to assume that the economic influence of the Report would lead it to be biased
toward presenting close allies in the most favorable light, and enemies in the least favorable way. The range of reporting standards can
be observed by using the reports on close allies and declared enemies as the endponts.
Surprisingly, determining who are US friends and enemies, using State Dept. Background Notes, turned out to be less straightforward than
expected. Allies that have traditionally been close to the US have recently shown greater independence than the State Department would
The relationship between the United States and Canada is probably the closest and most extensive in the world. It is reflected in the
staggering volume of bilateral trade--the equivalent of $1.5 billion a day in goods--as well as in people-to-people contact.
About 300,000 people cross the shared border every day...Canada views good relations with the United States as crucial to a wide range
of interests, and often looks to the U.S. as a common cause partner promoting democracy, transparency, and good government around the
world. That said, it has pursued policies at odds with our own. Canada decided in 2003 not to contribute troops to the U.S.-led military
coalition in Iraq (although it later contributed financially to Iraq's reconstruction and provided electoral advice). Other recent
examples are Canada's leadership in the creation of the UN-created International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes, which the U.S.
opposes due to fundamental flaws in the treaty that leave the ICC vulnerable to exploitation and politically motivated prosecutions;
its decision in early 2005 not to participate directly in the U.S. missile defense program; and its strong support for the Ottawa
Convention to ban anti-personnel mines. 
Bilateral relations are excellent. The United States and New Zealand share common elements of history and culture and a commitment to
democratic principles...New Zealand's legislation prohibiting visits of nuclear-powered ships continues to preclude a bilateral security
alliance with the U.S. The legislation enjoys broad public and political support in New Zealand. 
A more favorable report is given for the United Kingdom (UK):
The United Kingdom stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S.,
and its military forces are part of the coalition force in Afghanistan...The U.K. was the United States' main coalition partner in
Operation Iraqi Freedom and continues to have more than 5,000 troops deployed in Iraq to help stabilize and rebuild the country...
Britain's participation in the Iraq war and its aftermath remains a domestically controversial issue. 
And also for Australia:
The World War II experience, similarities in culture and historical background, and shared democratic values have made U.S. relations
with Australia exceptionally strong and close...For example, both countries sent military forces to the Persian Gulf...both attach high
priority to controlling and eventually eliminating... anti-personnel landmines... 
While it is not easy finding countries fully supporting the US, the list of countries supported by the US - i.e. receiving economic
support from the US - in 2006 has one clearly dominant entry. The list reports that Israel, with less than 6.5 million people, received
just under $2.5 billion of funding from this legislation , which was:
- almost 70% of the total US assistance to all countries in sub-Sahara Africa
- almost $1 billion more than the total US assistance to all countries in East Asia, the Pacific islands, Europe, and Eurasia combined
- over 47% more than the total US assistance to all countries in the Western Hemisphere
over 19% more than the total assistance to all countries of South and Central Asia (which includes Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, and
By financial measures, Israel has been a consistent US ally: The State Dept. reports that Israel has received $3 billion each year since 1985. 
In addition, the US often found Israel was one of its only allies against world opinion in the United Nations. For example, in the 70 contested
resolutions of the 2002-2003 General Assembly, the US voted no 49 times (70%) - on 4 of those casting the sole no (including a right to food
resolution). Israel joined the US and a few small US-dependent Pacific island nations in a tiny minority bloc 25 of those times. 
Despite Israel's good standing with the US, the report on Israel  could not provide a useful indicator of State Dept. standards in
reporting human rights practices. Although it was expected that bias would lead to some recasting of the events, the Israel report strays
so far from the guidelines given that its usefulness as a standard is questionable.
For example, although the definition states that the section is about killings by government forces or through government complicity
(including failure to punish), the section includes detailed reports of civilian casualties in Israel attributed to Hizballah
and Islamic Jihad.
Furthermore, regarding Israel's so-called "targeted killings" (as Israel calls it's extrajudicial killings) in the Occupied
Territories, the section titled "Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life" states:
According to B'Tselem [human rights organization], Israeli security forces killed 22 Palestinians in targeted killings during
the year and an undetermined number of bystanders.
But a few paragraphs down, the section titled "Use of Excessive Force and Other Abuses in Internal and External Conflicts" states:
During the year according to B'Tselem, 22 Palestinians directly died in targeted killings. According to Palestinian security and media
reports, IDF forces killed at least 60 bystanders in these operations.
Thus, looking at only "Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life" misses 60 casualties, even though the definition states that
"Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life" should include killing of bystanders.
In addition, "Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life" does not include Palestinians who died after medical treatment was delayed due
to restrictions of movement (B'Tselem reports 3 cases in 2006 ).
Consequently, for the purposes of this analysis, the Israel report, though significant and revealing, is too flawed and thus is best
viewed as an anomaly, a special case, in State Dept. standards in reporting human rights practices. Consequently, only the UK and
Australia reports are used.
The enemy list has also dwindled under US economic and military dominance. The enemy list begins with the countries the US labeled in
2002 as constituents of an "axis of evil" , alleged to be pursuing weapons of mass destruction: Iraq, Iran, and North Korea.
But Iraq is now considered purged of official evil. Iran and North Korea are anomalies, since the US has no embassy in those countries.
That means the Reports do not draw on the usual sources and are more limited. Next on the enemy list are countries the US labeled as
"State Sponsors of Terror" : Cuba, Iran, North Korea (In February 2007, the US agreed to begin the process of removing North Korea
from this list ), Sudan, and Syria. Lybia was removed from the list June 30, 2006 . For 2006, Libya and Sudan are reported as
continuing to significantly cooperate with the US, so their status as enemies is in jeopardy. Only the Cuba and Syria Reports provided
a useful view of State Dept. standards in reporting on the human rights practices of enemies.