How To Get Away With Murder: Jaahnavi Kandula and the Devaluation of Women of Color
On Jan. 23 2023, Jaahnavi Kandula, a graduate student at Northeastern University in Seattle, was struck and killed by a police officer going 74 mph in a 25 mph zone. Jaahnavi’s family mourned for months, aggrieved by the loss of her happy presence and the fact that she was so close to achieving her dreams, only months away from graduation. Then, shocking new footage emerged.
In the video, taken the day after the accident, Officer Daniel Auderer, the vice president of the police union, is seen driving around while chatting on the phone with Mike Solan, the union’s president. They’re talking about the case, and Auderer is nauseatingly flippant about the situation.
When discussing Jaahnavi, Auderer begins to laugh. “It’s a regular person,” he says. There’s a pause as he listens to Solan’s reply.
Then, in a mocking tone, he scoffs, “Yeah, just write a check.” Laughing uproariously, Auderer remarks, “Yeah, $11,000. She was 26 anyways. She had limited value.”
For members of the community, Auderer’s comments could not be farther from the truth. Jaahnavi’s presence was irreplaceable, and to dismiss her as irrelevant is a cruelty that can only result from extreme prejudice. These comments, along with the general handling of Jaahnavi’s case, are clear examples of the devaluation of women of color within our society, and it’s something that can’t be ignored any longer.
To truly understand the iniquity of this situation, it’s worth revisiting the 2015 case People v. Turner. Brock Turner was an athlete at Stanford University who sexually assaulted Chanel Miller, a Santa Barbara graduate, while she was unconscious. The judge in Turner’s case could have given him up to 14 years in prison, but instead, delivered a six month sentence, of which Turner only served three months.
This judge explained his unusual decision in the case simply: should Turner have received a longer sentence, it would have had a “severe impact on him.” No regard appeared to have been given to Chanel Miller, the victim of the assault, or the lasting effects his behavior would have on her life. Instead, Brock Turner and his ambitions were prioritized.
So what differentiates Brock Turner from Chanel Miller and Jaahnavi Kandula? Why would authorities see the life of a convicted criminal as valuable enough to merit a reduced sentence, but the life of a girl wrongfully killed as having “limited value?”
The answer is obvious. Jaahnavi, like Chanel, was a woman of color simply trying to live her life. In contrast, Brock Turner and the officers from Jaahnavi’s case were white men, wielding their systemic power to avoid consequences for their atrocious behavior.
The disparity in the treatment of these cases shows a very clear trend of law enforcement and the justice system devaluing the lives of women and minorities. No one has “limited value,” and the mere fact that an officer of the law felt comfortable saying such a thing is cause for concern.
Another appalling aspect of the new footage was the monetary compensation that Daniel Auderer suggested. Auderer is heard laughing and flippantly telling Mike Solan to “write a check” for “$11,000,” a remark which he followed with an inaccurate assessment of her age.
Before assessing whether or not this is fair, I’d advise you to think about the people in your life, everyone you love and are loved by. Your little sister. Your mother. Your best friend. Now imagine that they were suddenly ripped away from you. Imagine you would never again see their brilliant smile, hear their raucous laughter, or feel the safety and comfort of their presence.
Now ask yourself, how much would it cost to replace them? Would a measly $11,000 satisfy you? Would you regard the loss as immaterial, something that could be scoffed about and forgotten?
The idea of suggesting $11,000 as recompense for the loss of a young woman is horrific. There isn’t enough money in the world to account for the absence of a loved one. And yet, Officer Auderer’s phrasing and laughter would suggest that he does not share this sentiment.
It may not come as a surprise to learn that Auderer is not unique. In fact, his behavior is quite consistent with existing research on empathy-deficiencies within police departments toward wrongfully-murdered people of color.
For example, one study surrounding law enforcement statements after police killings of African Americans found that the infrequent statements made by police agencies on these incidents rarely showed empathy for the victims, meaning they could not verbally show any understanding of the distress that the victim’s family and community felt after their passing. In fact, police unions, like the Seattle Police Union to which Officer Auderer belonged, expressed empathy for those killed in only 6.7% of cases. That’s a ridiculously low number, and it's indicative of a serious problem within policing. If authority figures are lacking empathy for minority groups, it leaves room for potential abuse of power. Jaahavi’s death is just one example of this abuse. Not only did the police take few precautions in their driving, leading to her death, they saw fit to mock her after the fact. Overall, our society needs to pay better attention to police responses to crime, because a lack of public backlash can make crimes of this nature seem inconsequential.
Beyond the actions of the Seattle Police Department, the coverage of Jaahnavi’s death by local news agencies was noteworthy for demonstrating clear bias against an innocent victim. One article from KING 5 Seattle, an affiliate of NBC, raised eyebrows with its description of the circumstances surrounding Jaahnavi’s death. According to KING 5, Jaahnavi was wearing “black pants” and a “black jacket” when she was hit by a car going three times the legal speed limit. KING 5 also felt compelled to point out that she “may have had Apple Airpods in both ears.”
These facts are extraneous when the greater circumstances of the situation are taken into account. Wearing black clothing on a crosswalk is not illegal, and neither is the usage of Airpods. Stating these details in an article about the wrongful death of a young woman of color is a clear attempt to convince the reader that Jaahnavi was somehow culpable in her own death, and it's a sign of highly prejudiced journalism.
Furthermore, the subheading of the article used passive language to make the officer seem less responsible for his actions. KING 5 states that “the officer was traveling at 74 miles per hour…before his police cruiser hit Jaahnavi,” phrasing that makes it seem as though the “police cruiser” is at fault, rather than the individual driving the car. Wording the subheading in this way diminishes the impact of law enforcement’s actions while simultaneously making Jaahnavi’s death seem less important. When taken into account with the fact that this type of passive, exonerative language is frequently observed in police killings involving people of color, it’s not hard to identify this as a serious journalistic failure. Law enforcement should be held accountable for their actions, just like the average citizen is. Shifting blame away from officers and toward innocent people of color only serves to lessen the impact of these stories, preventing the public from becoming rightfully angry and raising a large-enough response to attain justice.
When a rash decision ends the life of a young woman of color, and law enforcement sees fit to mock and divert blame, members of the community can only wonder if they, too, might meet a similar fate.
And yet there’s no comfort to be had in this situation. Each year, we see an increase in police violence toward minorities with virtually no repercussions. As a society, we must ask ourselves, how long can we allow this to go on? How long must women of color wait to achieve the “liberty and justice for all” that our nation’s pledge supposedly endows us?
Our country must act now to restrict law enforcement, to ensure that those who hold power are no longer capable of abusing it so flagrantly. The lives of marginalized people do not have limited value, and the more we tolerate remarks of this nature, the less likely we are to prevent them from happening in the first place.
Jaahnavi Kandula deserves justice, and if we can’t hold our authorities responsible for their actions, justice will be nowhere to be found.