Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: [SCOTUS] High court reviews juror discrimination [peremptory strike]

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA

    Post imported post

    WASHINGTON, Dec. 3 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court will consider a New Orleans case involving an African-American man who was sentenced to death by an all-white jury.

    At issue is whether prosecutor Jim Williams violated the constitutional rights of defendant Allen Snyder by removing all the potential black jurors at the start of Snyder's 1996 trial, The Los Angeles Times reported Monday.

    The Snyder case is not the first involving allegations of misconduct by Williams. Of five African-American men he sent to death row in the mid-1990s, two have been exonerated, another two have had their sentences commuted to life and a fifth won a retrial after an appeals court overturned the verdict.

    In addition to deciding whether Snyder lives or dies, the case will affect how courts around the country weigh claims of unlawful racial discrimination during the jury selection process.

    At the end of Snyder's trial, prosecutor Williams exhorted the all-white jury to give Snyder the death sentence because the case was similar to the "most famous murder case" just a year earlier in which former football star O.J. Simpson "got away with it."
    At 11 a.m.[Tuesday], the Court is scheduled to hear argument in Snyder v. Louisiana (06-10119), asking whether a Louisiana prosecutor improperly struck black jurors from the defendant’s murder trial in light of a subsequent comparison of the case during the penalty phase to the O.J. Simpson trial. Stephen B. Bright of Atlanta will argue for the petitioner, and Terry M. Boudreaux of the Louisiana Attorney General’s office will argue for the respondent.
    Click the case names above for full previews of the argument, or go directly to SCOTUSwiki.,7832490.story
    Jury under justices' scrutiny template_bastemplate_bas The Supreme Court will hear a Louisiana case in which a black man was sentenced to die after all blacks were kept off the panel. By Henry Weinstein, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
    December 3, 2007 NEW ORLEANS -- Jim Williams had a reputation as a highly skilled, tenacious prosecutor -- maybe even a little bloodthirsty.

    After scoring convictions in dozens of murder cases, he told a reporter: "It got to the point where there was no thrill for me unless there was a chance for the death penalty."

    In the mid-'90s, Williams posed for Esquire magazine standing behind a miniature electric chair with mug shots of five African American men he sent to death row. Since then, two of the defendants have been exonerated, two had their sentences commuted to life because of misconduct by Williams, and the fifth won a retrial after an appeals court overturned the verdict.

    On Tuesday, the Supreme Court is to review another case in which Williams obtained a death sentence against a black man. The key question is whether Williams violated Allen Snyder's constitutional rights by removing all the potential black jurors at the start of his 1996 trial.

    The Supreme Court's decision is expected to affect not only whether death-row inmate Snyder lives or dies but also how courts around the country weigh claims of unlawful racial discrimination during jury selection.

    At the end of the trial, Williams exhorted the all-white jury to give Snyder a death sentence because the case was "very, very similar" to the "most famous murder case" just a year earlier, in which former football star O.J. Simpson "got away with it."

    Williams declined to be interviewed for this story.

    As long ago as 1879, the Supreme Court said it was impermissible to arbitrarily exclude jurors because of their race. But putting teeth into such rulings has proved difficult.

    In 2005, the Supreme Court overturned the murder conviction of a black man in Contra Costa County who was tried by an all-white jury, concluding that the California Supreme Court set too high a standard for when a trial judge should question a prosecutor's explanation for removing jurors.

    In U.S. courts, attorneys are allowed to remove potential jurors in two ways. The first is called a challenge for cause, where the lawyer has to offer a specific reason for removal, such as when a juror is married to a police officer in a case involving an officer.

    The second is called a peremptory strike, where lawyers are permitted to remove a juror based simply on a hunch or intuition. States generally limit the number of peremptory strikes -- in a capital-murder trial in Louisiana, the limit is 12.

    In the last 40 years, the Supreme Court has issued four major decisions aimed at limiting the ability of prosecutors to use peremptory strikes to exclude someone from a jury who is the same race as the defendant. Over time, the court has attempted to tighten the process, acknowledging that the problem continued despite its prior rulings.

    In 2005, Justice David H. Souter, writing for the majority in a ruling that overturned a death sentence in Texas, felt compelled to observe that "the very integrity of the courts is jeopardized" when there is racial bias in jury selection.

    The setting of the Snyder case is Jefferson Parish, across the Mississippi River from New Orleans. Named for Thomas Jefferson, the parish is "familiar with racial divisions and appeals to race," noted veteran defense lawyer Stephen B. Bright in his Supreme Court brief on Snyder's behalf. David Duke, a former grand wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, was elected to the Legislature from the parish in 1989 as a Republican.

    Trouble for defendants

    The parish is considered a particularly tough place to be a defendant in a criminal trial. In the mid-1990s, the Louisiana Supreme Court Task Force on Racial and Ethnic Fairness in the Courts held a hearing where Denise LeBoeuf testified about her experiences as a public defender in Jefferson. "Sitting judges used the 'n-word' in conversation in the courtroom," she said.

    LeBoeuf also said that some prosecutors, including Williams, periodically bought each other special awards when they won murder trials. Each plaque, she testified, had "a mock hypodermic needle, a big one, along with the date and the name of the defendant who had been sentenced to death."

    In 2003, the Louisiana Crisis Assistance Center (now the Louisiana Capital Assistance Center), which represented defendants in death penalty appeals, released a study of 390 trials and more than 13,000 potential jurors, showing that over a nine-year period Jefferson Parish prosecutors used peremptory strikes to throw blacks off juries more than three times as often as whites.

    Jefferson Parish District Atty. Paul D. Connick Jr. blasted the study as politically motivated. He said that his prosecutors did not make decisions based on race, and said only one of his office's verdicts had been overturned because of jury-selection misconduct.

    The Snyder case involves a murder in the summer of 1995 that stemmed from a marriage that went bad. Snyder's wife, Mary, moved out and went to her mother's house with the couple's three children. One evening, Snyder, an ex-Marine who was working as a shipyard dispatcher, went to the house after midnight in hopes of speaking to his estranged wife.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA

    Post imported post

    Bringing race into the picture is just going to complicate an already complicated situation. We should be giving medals to those in the criminal justice system who have the integrity to ensure a death sentence to those people (alleged criminals, of course).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts