In West Hartford, again, the arrest rate was much higher among African American students (4 arrests among 14 offenses, or about 27 percent) and Hispanic students (5 arrests among 16 offenses, or about 31 percent) than among white students (8 arrests among 82 offenses, or about 10 percent).

If that seems too oblique or selective, there’s also this from page 41:

Taken together, incidents in which a student used physical force against another person — in the parlance of ED 166, this broad category includes ‘fighting/altercation/physical aggression/physical altercation’ and ‘battery assault’ — produced far more school-based arrests than any other type of incident.

The authors go on to discuss East Hartford and Hartford before saying:

But the same cannot be said for West Hartford. There, both Hispanic and African American students involved in incidents of this type were more likely to be arrested than white students committing the same offense. In fact, the rate at which African American students committing such offenses were arrested (32 arrests among 140 offenses, or an arrest rate of about 23 percent) was more than double the comparable rate for white students (18 arrests among 160 offenses, or an arrest rate of about 11 percent.

The report itself admits that it’s sort of singling out West Hartford (and Hartford and East Hartford) as examples of a national problem. And its real argument is that the more we arrest students from school, the more we’re preparing them for a life of being arrested. And it also has a lot of good things to say about West Hartford, too. And in a few days, I’ll get into all that.

But, according to my reading (and, as always, I’m open to the idea that I’ve missed something), the paper most certainly does not reach the general conclusion that arrest rates for whites and minorities in West Hartford for the same crime are equivalent.