1) On August 28, 1986, a woman named Queen Madge White was found dead in her home in Rome, Georgia. She was a 79-year-old widow and was found to be beaten, sexually assaulted, and strangled to death. Her home had also been burglarized. Timothy Foster, an 18-year-old black male, confessed to the crime and officers recovered some of the stolen items from Foster’s home. The State subsequently indicted him for malice, murder, and burglary and the jury that was selected convicted him of capital murder and assigned the death penalty. However, when the jury selection process of his trial was underway, the State used peremptory challenges to strike every black prospective juror that was qualified- four to be exact. This selection process had two phases- …show more content…
During the trial, however, the state of Georgia used peremptory strikes to remove all qualified black jurors. Foster filed a Batson claim stating that the strikes were racially motivated, which violated Batson v. Kentucky, but this was rejected by the trial court. The trial court applied the principle of res judicata to support this rejection. Foster then tried to lodge another Batson claim, this time as a motion for a new trial, which was denied and the denial was affirmed by the Georgia Supreme Court. Following this denial, Foster filed another Batson claim with the Superior Court of Butts county, Georgia seeking a writ of habeas corpus. This court denied his relief, and the Supreme Court of Georgia declined him a Certificate of Probable Cause, which he would need to attempt to appeal. During the waiting period of his attempt to obtain a writ of habeas corpus, Foster was given access to the records of the jury selection process from his initial trial through the Georgia Open Records Act. These records provided him with evidence that showed the purposeful discrimination of the stricken jurors, but the court denied that he had proven this. The Supreme Court of the United States held that it had the jurisdiction to review the lower courts’ decision citing Harris v. Reed and Ake v. Oklahoma. Reviewing the evidence submitted by Foster, the Court concluded that the strikes had been driven by race citing Snyder v. Louisiana, as well as the fact that the evidence also showed that the conditions met by the black jurors that resulted in them being stricken were also met by white jurors that were deemed qualified to serve, suggesting purposeful discrimination (Miller-El v. Dretke). Following these precedents, the Court reversed and
Holding Yes. The Court ruled unanimously in favor of Clarence Brandenburg. 5. Opinion of the Court
In this case, the prosecution used peremptory challenge to dismiss all of the black jurors. Batson claimed that the prosecutions use of a peremptory challenge violated the constitutions Equal Protection Clause (Findlaw | Cases and Codes, n.d.). The request was denied because Batson failed to show a pattern to which all of the black jurors were dismissed. The court established a standard for this case that a petitioner had to prove racial exclusion for discriminatory
The defense argued that the peremptory strikes were based off of race. Snyder appealed to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, which found that the judge did not act unreasonably in dismissing the case as a Batson violation. This case parallels the case at hand. The prosecutor used their peremptory strikes to remove the black jurors for pretext reasons, not justifiable ones. In Foster’s case, the court used reasons such as the jurors being too close in age to the defendant, Foster, to strike a prospective juror.
Another layer of white supremacy was in the courts as Assata was being charged for bank robbery and kidnapping, which seem to be a stage theater to give the illusion of a fair trial when in fact it was just another tool to continue to subjugate African American. The bank robbery case was suspicious when the F.B.I. started to fingerprint and took photographs of Assata in the same clothing as the bank robbers and at the same angle. However, what got the case, postpone was the judge and his inability to contain his prejudice saying that he thought Assata was guilty and when the case resumed still were not able to get a conviction. The other case of the kidnapping of the drug dealer (James freeman), which quickly fell apart when Freeman testify and was asked if he was being coerce to frame Assata, he
The case Foster v. Chatman is a very difficult and unpleasant case. The case highlights the embarrassing and disgraceful episodes of the United States’ history. Racism, discrimination and prejudice have occurred, since the inception of the country. The United States’ pledge of allegiance reads, “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” This statement is a very strong declaration, when it is often said, it can lose its sticking meaning, however this pledge can be deceptive.
The case Furman v Georgia made it all the to the supreme court because it would affect the way the whole country delivered punishment. Although it surprised many people that it made it that far because most people were for capital punishment. Michael Meltsner said,”Georgia was a shock. Before LDF's anti-capital punishment campaign, there had been no successful court challenge of the death penalty — even when it had been handed down in a blatantly racist or totally arbitrary manner” (www.michealmeltsner.com/interview.html). .
In his first two trials he had all-white juries and that could be a reason why he wasn’t convicted
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967) Facts of the case: In 1924, the state of Virginia passed the Racial Integrity Act of 1924 which banned the marriage between a white person and a person of color. The law only targeted interracial marriages that consisted of a white person and a non-white person. The act had additional provisions that penalized the travel out of state for purposes of marriage between a white person and person of color; upon return to Virginia, the marriage would be subject to Virginian law. The punishment for the marriage was one to five years incarceration, and the marriage would be void “without any judicial proceeding.” Aware of the Racial Integrity Act, Richard Loving, a white man, and Mildred Jeter, a black woman, traveled
In her book, The New Jim Crow, Alexander argues the discrimination of jury selections which is an unfair of treatment for people of color under the law (The Fourth Amendment). Moreover, she provides more information about the juries and juror race-based selection in the justice system. The statistical shows that there is approximately 30 percent of black man are automatically banned or rejected from the jury service and many cases all black jurors are eliminated with the irrational explanations, such as the physical appearance, clothing style, and even marital status (Alexander, 2012). She also reports the interesting case of the two black men who was convicted of second degree robbery in a Missouri court. In addition, she emphasizes that during
Brown v. the Board of Education Summary Brown v. the Board of Education consisted of five separate cases about segregation. Each case was in a different state but the organization NAACP helped those filing each case. The cases were in Kansas, Virginia, Delaware, South Carolina, and Washington D.C. Each case consisted of numerous families.
Attorney General Field's response argued that Rives did not have the right to take over the case on the grounds of jury selection because nowhere does the constitution grant a trial by a jury of peers, or grant the right to "a negro jury. " His contention assumed that Rives argued for an all-black jury, or even that he demanded for a partially black jury. This argument overlooked the illegal selection of the jury pool by judges who excluded blacks solely based on race which was at the core of Rives’s assertion. These judges are representative of the greater infringement upon black rights as many citizens had not yet come to terms with racial
Jarred Jones Ransom Mr. Dennis College Comp II 2 May 2017 The 1900s Race Riots and Mediocrity of Fair Trial: A Look into Racial Tension and the Judiciary System during the 1900s In the documentary “The People v. Leo Frank” tells the story of a murder case in Atlanta Georgia. Mary Phagan, a thirteen-year-old from Georgia, left home on the morning of April 26 to pick up her wages at the pencil factory and view the Confederate Day Parade. She never returned home.
Background Clarence Brandley was an African American wrongly convicted man, sent to jail, and was nearly executed twice on two separate occasions. Clarence Brandley was born September 24, 1951 to his mother Minnie Ols, Brandley always knew he would have a hard life especially being a black living in a racist town like Conroe Texas. He says he could remember as a child his grandfather “Putt” Bradley had been shot dead by a white bully in front of everal individuals that were doing their Saturday shopping, killed for his color and there was no chance of his murder ever getting justice (Davies, 1991). Clarence was from Conroe Texas which is East Texas where the whites used to hang warning signs “Nigger, don’t let the sun set on you here meaning
Chief Justice Roberts on behalf of the majority struck down previous rulings that had sought to
To Kill a Mockingbird Essay When controversy and conflicts sprout, many individuals go to courts to seek justice and to have a fair and just trial. Since this is the United States, a country known internationally for its equality and democracy, many individuals would think that the court system in the U.S. is the fairest and has the most sophisticated court system. However, for many individuals, this simply is not the case.