Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Race and the justice system

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Race and the justice system

    So who is still dumb enough to believe that we do not have race relations problems in United States today?

    Louisiana murder trial and race discrimination


    By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
    1 hour, 5 minutes ago



    WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court threw out the death sentence and conviction in a Louisiana murder case Wednesday, citing racial prejudice in the actions of a prosecutor who called the murder trial his "O.J. Simpson case" and kept blacks off the jury.

    ADVERTISEMENT

    By a 7-2 vote, the justices said state prosecutor Jim Williams improperly excluded blacks from the jury that convicted Allen Snyder of killing his estranged wife's companion. Snyder is black and the jurors were white.

    Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, said the trial judge should have blocked Williams from striking a black juror. Alito's opinion made no mention of Simpson.

    Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia dissented. Thomas said he would not "second-guess" the judge.

    During jury selection in the trial, Williams disqualified all five blacks in the pool of prospective jurors. The Supreme Court ruled in 1986 that prosecutors may not exclude people from a jury solely because of their race. The court already had sent Snyder's case back to the Louisiana courts following a ruling in 2005 that bolstered the prohibition on race bias in jury selection.

    The prosecutor's explanation for striking a prospective black juror was "suspicious," said Alito. The prospective juror's supervisor said he did not think a schedule conflict between the upcoming trial and the prospective juror's work would be a problem.

    In contrast, the prosecutor accepted white jurors who disclosed conflicting obligations "that appear to have been at least as serious as" the prospective black juror who was excused, Alito wrote.

    The trial took place in August 1996, less than a year after Simpson was acquitted of killing his ex-wife and a male friend of hers. Leading up to the trial, Williams made repeated public references to the Snyder case as his "O.J. Simpson case."

    Snyder was convicted of first-degree murder in Jefferson Parish, just outside New Orleans. He was found guilty of repeatedly slashing his estranged wife, Mary Snyder, and a man, Harold Wilson, with a knife when he found them in a car outside her mother's home in August 1995. His wife survived, but Wilson died.

    Adding to the Simpson comparison, Snyder told police just before his arrest that he was suicidal. Simpson, armed with a gun and apparently considering suicide, led police on a dramatic, televised chase before surrendering.

    In a 4-3 decision, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that race had no part in the state's decisions involving black potential jurors.

    When the case was argued in December, the justices were critical of the trial judge, Judge Kernan "Skip" Hand, for overruling many defense objections about the prosecutor's use of race and Simpson's name.

    Stephen Bright, Snyder's Atlanta-based lawyer, said the ruling shows there is broad agreement among the justices that courts must closely examine the reasons given for excusing potential jurors when racial motives might be present but not acknowledged.

    "The disturbing thing is that courts in Louisiana and elsewhere were just deferring to trial judges, no matter the reasons," Bright said.

    Snyder will get a new trial as a result of the ruling, Bright said.

    The case is Snyder v. Louisiana, 06-10119.
    A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

  • #2
    Yes, as OJ Simpson's case showed, whites are routinely disqualified from jury by the defense lawyers of black defendants soley based on race.

    Good article
    "The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hmmm... Since the wife survived in this case, I would assume she was an eye witness who could actually identify her attacker (even though the story doesn't say so) this is totally different than the Simpson case where there were no eye witnesses to the actual crime.
      Something tells me that another trial really isn't going to change the eventual outcome.
      Keep on Civin'
      RIP rah, Tony Bogey & Baron O

      Comment


      • #4
        My concern was not whether or not another trial would change the outcome. Obviously if he's the murderer, he should be convicted.

        Rather, to me the issue seems to be that racism and discrimination against blacks, Hispanics, and so forth sometimes seriously undermines how our justice system is suppose to work.
        A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by MrFun
          My concern was not whether or not another trial would change the outcome. Obviously if he's the murderer, he should be convicted.

          Rather, to me the issue seems to be that racism and discrimination against blacks, Hispanics, and so forth sometimes seriously undermines how our justice system is suppose to work.
          It could just as well have been that the black potential jurers were prejudice as the jurers seemed to be in the OJ case.
          I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
          - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

          Comment


          • #6
            The case arose in 96-hopefully the justice system in LA has progressed a bit since then.

            Batson is a well established precedent, so the result is a pretty obvious one, hence the 7-2 vote headed by Alito. Here you have a rogue judge that apparently doesn't believe in Sup Ct precedence, which you will find from time to time across the country in all manner of cases.

            Batson-great case. -leads to some funny situations though.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Kidicious


              It could just as well have been that the black potential jurers were prejudice as the jurers seemed to be in the OJ case.
              The assumption then would be that black jurors are prejudiced while white jurors are not; which is a very racist assumption, and hence not permitted. It's one thing to exclude someone for cause for saying "I will not convict a black person", but you can't assume a black person will not convict a black person for the same reason you can't assume a white person will not convict a white person.
              <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
              I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

              Comment


              • #8
                @ asleepathewheel: Something I've always wondered since I've heard this precedent is if you as a defense attorney are able to racially stack the jury if you choose to?
                I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
                For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DinoDoc
                  @ asleepathewheel: Something I've always wondered since I've heard this precedent is if you as a defense attorney are able to racially stack the jury if you choose to?
                  Not effectively. Because the pool is random, both called from the community and when distributed to the court, its very unlikely that you would end up with a majority-minority jury. Further, the prosecutor likewise can raise the Batson issue against defense strikes.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I thought Batson was silent on what the Defense can and can not do.
                    I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
                    For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Yes, but it was extended to prevent similar defense peremptory challenges in Georgia v. McCollum.

                      Fun fact: I know of a white attorney (have met him, now works where i used to work) in Indiana who had a case in which he was a defendant (a traffic violation) reversed due to the exclusion of african americans from the panel. Yes, white folks are protected from having all black folks struck from the jury.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        He took a traffic violation to court?
                        <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
                        I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by snoopy369
                          He took a traffic violation to court?
                          Yup, it was an ego thing. Professor at the local law school. operating with improper taillights. Overturned and remanded on a batson violation

                          link

                          Not sure if it has been retried yet. Imagine the costs involved with that trial/appeal/retrial. really a joke.

                          edit: Must say that it was a jury trial, which may not be obvious to readers, hence the Batson issue.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Mr Fun, stirring the stink pot again. USA sucks, what's new?
                            Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
                            "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
                            He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by snoopy369


                              The assumption then would be that black jurors are prejudiced while white jurors are not; which is a very racist assumption, and hence not permitted. It's one thing to exclude someone for cause for saying "I will not convict a black person", but you can't assume a black person will not convict a black person for the same reason you can't assume a white person will not convict a white person.
                              Yep; some people have unfair assumptions about people of another race, and completely remove those assumptions when it comes to their own race.
                              A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X