Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court Denounces Racial Bias in Picking Jury
Yahoo News ^ | June 13, 2005 | Associated Press

Posted on 06/13/2005 3:51:19 PM PDT by Hurricane Andrew

By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer1 hour, 10 minutes ago

The Supreme Court warned prosecutors on Monday to use care in striking minorities from juries, siding with black murder suspects in Texas and California who contended their juries had been unfairly stacked with whites.

Justice Clarence Thomas, the only black member of the high court, voted against both suspects.

The court used the cases to bolster its landmark 1986 decision barring prosecutors from disqualifying potential jurors based on their race.

"The court is sending a very strong message that racial discrimination in jury selection is not to be tolerated," said Stephen Bright, director of the Southern Center for Human Rights.

Justice Stephen Breyer suggested a radical change in the way juries are picked. He said that the only way to get discrimination out of jury selection may be to stop letting prosecutors and defense lawyers dismiss some potential jurors without giving a reason. That suggestion was made by the late Thurgood Marshall, the first black justice, and Breyer seemed to launch a lobbying effort for it.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: capitalpunishment; deathpenalty; judicialactivism; supremecourt
This is just another example of the unreliability of Kennedy and O'Conner. We need to get some appointments NOW!
1 posted on 06/13/2005 3:51:21 PM PDT by Hurricane Andrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Hurricane Andrew

An all white jury just let a child molestor off scott free. There is no justice in this country anymore.


2 posted on 06/13/2005 3:55:06 PM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hurricane Andrew

Here in Buffalo, a black defendant has the right to pick an all black jury if he wants.


3 posted on 06/13/2005 3:55:58 PM PDT by twas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hurricane Andrew

All jurors must now hide their identity so they won't be released from jury duty. Voice altered also.


4 posted on 06/13/2005 3:56:16 PM PDT by handy old one (It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims. Aristotle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
There is no justice in this country anymore.

Sure there is...how much would you like to buy?

5 posted on 06/13/2005 3:58:35 PM PDT by randog (What the....?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hurricane Andrew

How about a system where the first 12 on the list are it...no challenges go with what ya' got.


6 posted on 06/13/2005 3:59:10 PM PDT by engrpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
An all white jury just let a child molestor off scott free. There is no justice in this country anymore.

Exactly. There's only power, money and political interests. Ya ain't got that, ya ain't got nuttin.

7 posted on 06/13/2005 4:04:57 PM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: twas

The defendant doesn't exactly have the right to "pick" a jury. The defense and prosecution are presented with a jury pool, and pare it down to twelve. Each side tries to sit sympathetic jurors. If a defendent ends up with an sympathetic jury, the prosecution isn't doing its job.


8 posted on 06/13/2005 4:05:01 PM PDT by cubram
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Hurricane Andrew
My wife, a White, Christian, Republican, Registered Nurse was a member of that Jury. Here are the facts.

.Mr El and his partner robbed the motel across from texas Stadium. In order to get away scott free they decided to kill the two night clerks. The clerks were forced to kneel in a closet and were shot in the back of the head. One died and one survived because Mr El's aim was low on the second shot. The clerks spinal cord was severed and he is now a quadriplegic, but he was able to testify and identify Mr El. His partner had turned states evidence to avoid the death penalty.

During the penalty phase my wife heard additional testimony about Mr El. He had been captured after a robbery which included a running gun battle in which a Houston Police Officer was wounded.

Would an ALL BLACK jury have found the facts somehow different. I think that this SOCTUS decision is BAD!

9 posted on 06/13/2005 4:07:46 PM PDT by Young Werther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther

Think OJ and you have your answer.


10 posted on 06/13/2005 4:17:10 PM PDT by sgtbono2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002
Justice Clarence Thomas, the only black member of the high court, voted against both suspects.

Who is the moron writing or editing this piece? Thomas voted against the appellate argument of the defendants, he was not casting a vote of guilt or innocence as the jury had done at trial. That's not even a subtle point.

11 posted on 06/13/2005 4:22:46 PM PDT by Wally_Kalbacken (Seldom right, but never in doubt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cubram

I understand that but by law, a law that was passed a couple years back, blacks have the right to have a jury made up solely of blacks.

The prosecution can try to find blacks who are on his side but the fact remains, the pool for a black defendant can be all black.

It's the law.


12 posted on 06/13/2005 4:38:07 PM PDT by twas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: twas

That's a load of crap.

I guess then, that the jury of a KKK member (say, Sen. Byrd) has to be made up of all white racists too?


13 posted on 06/13/2005 4:44:00 PM PDT by Hurricane Andrew (History teaches that wars begin when governments believe the price of aggression is cheap.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther

I agree with you; the SCOTUS decision is bad. It presupposes racism by using race to predispose racism.


14 posted on 06/13/2005 5:12:33 PM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Hurricane Andrew
States don't get to run their own courts. Peremptory challenges aren't. Juries must be exactly like you--there's no possibility of them being an average citizen--they must be exactly like you. And of course Kennedy seizes on the opportunity to drag legislative solutions into what should be a judicial ruling.

God forbid the justices ever are held responsible for this horseshit they just make up out of thin air. No Constitutional authority for any of this trash beyond judge-made law.

God forbid anyone really do anything to change bias like this, "Thomas, one of the most conservative members of the court, has opposed black defendants in the past and has voted against affirmative action." When did Thomas 'oppose black defendants?' WHEN? He's a judge, ruling on law, not an advocate ruling on a person!

SCOTUS news makes me sick.

15 posted on 06/13/2005 7:02:52 PM PDT by LibertarianInExile (<-- sick of faux-conservatives who want federal government intervention for 'conservative things.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile

Makes me sick as well.


16 posted on 06/13/2005 7:37:54 PM PDT by satchmodog9 (Murder and weather are our only news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson