“Snitches End Up in Ditches” and Other Cautionary Tales

• Author: Edward W. Morris
• DOI: 10.1177/1043986210368640
• Date: 01 August 2010
• Published date: 01 August 2010
• Subject Matter: Articles

Articles

Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice

26(3) 254 –272

© 2010 SAGE Publications

Reprints and permission: http://www.

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1043986210368640

http://ccj.sagepub.com

“Snitches End Up

in Ditches” and Other

Cautionary Tales

Edward W. Morris1

Abstract

This article examines the “stop snitching” phenomenon in relation to teenagers and

schooling. It shows evidence of a code against sharing information with formal authori-

ties among students at two low-income schools: a predominately Black, urban school

and a predominately White, rural school. Using Bourdieu’s concept of habitus, the

analysis demonstrates how antisnitching is woven into the social fabric of these com-

munities, prompting student ambivalence toward school-sanctioned methods of conflict

resolution. The findings highlight the broad reach of the antisnitching phenomenon,

situating this mentality as the result of community-based distrust of formal authority.

The article assesses implications of antisnitching for school discipline and climate.

Keywords

school discipline, criminalization, urban education, rural education, habitus

A mantra of “stop snitching” has become popular in various communities throughout

the country. This motto—famously trumpeted by several hip hop artists—appears on

T-shirts, in song lyrics, and in films. It discourages revealing information to authorities

that could directly lead to a conviction, such as witnesses who are offered reduced sen-

tences in exchange for providing evidence against their criminal associates. Recently,

evidence suggests that “stop snitching” has broadened into a more general “street code”

(Anderson, 1999; Rosenfeld, Jacobs, & Wright, 2003) which castigates any cooperation

with police or other authorities. Some might adhere to the “no snitching” precept from

simple fear of retaliation, and some might genuinely believe that cooperating with police

creates more harm than good. Regardless, the newest incarnation of this longstanding

1University of Kentucky, Lexington

Corresponding Author:

Edward W. Morris, University of Kentucky, Department of Sociology, Patterson Office Tower 1569,

Lexington, KY 40506-0027

Email: edward.morris@uky.edu

Morris 255

ethos among criminals has trickled out into larger segments of society, including other-

wise law-abiding people (Kahn, 2007).

In this article, I examine the “stop snitching” phenomenon in relation to teenagers

and schooling. Based on a comparative ethnography of two low-income high schools,

I find evidence of antisnitching principles among students. My findings build on previ-

ous research in several ways. First, my findings demonstrate the burgeoning purview of

antisnitching. I locate an antisnitching mentality among high school students who were

not career criminals, and even among well-behaved, school-attached students. In addi-

tion, the comparative design of my ethnography examines a predominately Black, urban

school and a predominately White, rural school. Surprisingly, I found evidence of a stop

snitching code among students at both schools. This research also extends existing lit-

erature by connecting antisnitching to research on school disengagement. Previous work

has understood “stop snitching” primarily from the perspective of criminological theories,

but linking it to education-focused theories can enhance our understanding of snitching

within the context of schools. Specifically, I employ Bourdieu’s concept of habitus to

understand how antisnitching becomes woven into the social fabric of some communi-

ties, prompting student ambivalence toward school-sanctioned methods of conflict

resolution.

Background

The basic concept of “no snitching” is nothing new. As Kahn (2007) reports, it has a

long history of enactment within circles of organized crime. This code discourages

criminals from cooperating with police to receive reduced sentences (Rosenfeld et al.,

2003). The practice of using “snitches” has been seen by law enforcement as an effective

means to combat various forms of crime (Greer, 1995). A “snitch” provides insider

information that reveals various perpetrators and processes of criminal activity to authori-

ties (Laskey, 1997). This method has been particularly useful in infiltrating gangs and

forms of organized crime (Laskey, 1997; Marx, 1988). Gangs and criminals have reacted

against this, however, by intimidating informants and enforcing a strict code of silence

(Akerstrom, 1989; Kahn, 2007). Brown (2007) argues that “tough on crime” approaches

to criminal justice beginning in the 1980s exacerbated the criminal code of silence by

encouraging the use of informants’ testimony even in lieu of direct evidence. Thus, a

strikingly bold iteration of the code of silence appears in the “stop snitching” mantra

currently found in music, clothing, films, and other forms of popular culture.

There is limited but informative research on the “stop snitching” phenomenon. Most

research on antisnitching stems from samples of active criminal offenders. Rosenfeld

et al. (2003) interviewed street offenders, asking about their perceptions of the police and

police informants. Their results revealed strong antipathy for police. Interviewees recounted

stories of police bias, invasive surveillance, and brutality. In logical extension, these

interviewees reported acute distrust of police and no desire to aid law enforcement. Even

if interviewees stated that they themselves were victimized, they still disavowed seek-

ing police help. These offenders thus adhered to a “code of the street” (Anderson, 1999)