RSS Feed
Newsletter
Judge Rejects Notion of Jury Bias In D.C
June 20th, 2008Instead, he ruled that the District has one of the most “inclusive” systems in America
A judge has ruled that the jury system in Washington, D.C., long considered “Chocolate City,” does not tend to block Blacks from duty in favor of Whites. The ruling by Superior Court Judge James E. Boasberg was a blow to the D.C. Public Defender Service, wh
ich has argued vehemently that the nation’s capital systematically excludes Black jurors. But Boasberg said Blacks might even be overrepresented in the pool of potential jurors. Armed with court orders, the Public Defender Service brought in scores of experts to scour through two years worth of papers and procedures, and to analyze jury pools and other data. What the attorneys found was that in D.C., which is 60 percent Black, 36 percent of Superior Court jurors were Black. But, instead of agreeing with the lawyers based on the statistical evidence, the judge found the data “wholly misleading.” Boasberg wrote in his ruling, “The data uncovered in this litigation conclusively prove that Black jurors are not unconstitutionally underrepresented in Superior Court [lists] – in fact, they are overrepresented in summonses issued – and there is also no systematic exclusion of Black jurors.” What he did find convincing was another study conducted for the U.S. attorney’s office showing that Blacks made up 56 percent of the city’s “adult” population and about 53 percent of the jurors over that two-year period. The public defenders’ concerns have fallen on sympathetic ears in recent years. Take the criminal case last year of a Black defendant who drew a jury pool of 70 candidates that included 61 Whites, eight Blacks and an Asian. The presiding judge, Neal E. Kravitz, agreeing with defense attorneys, demanded a new panel.
The United States Constitution does NOT give you the right to a “jury of your peers.”
Article 3, Section 2 states that all criminal trials will be jury trials, held in the state where the offense occurred. And the 6th Amendment says that the jury must be “impartial”… but nowhere does the phrase “Jury of your peers” appear, nor is it implied.
My source for the above posting is:
http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#jury
A link to the source for my previous posting is:
http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#jury
Once again here is evidence of how the law is used in favor of white people who love to put black people in jail. As long as you have a majority of them who are prejudice in the legal system, we will have rulings like this. We have to direct our youth to become Lawyers so we can combat corrupt decisions, and have more equal representation who ever controls the laws control the people.
Lynn: i agree that there should be more minorities in legal positions (i am an asian JD). Instead of insinuating that we should have more minorities so we can ‘get other minorities out,’ we should look at the process of appeals. While there may be some biased judges out there, the system as a whole is solid. I know first hand.
But you seem to paint a picture that most of the said imprisoned blacks are innocent. They are not. Obviously there are instances of wrongful incarceration, but when you make up a huge portion of the prison population, there are bound to be mistakes.
LYNN: I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU
B.E.T you are getting soft again
CRACKAS BE SEREAL KILLERS AN YOU DONT SEE THEM GOING TO JAIL
Set it off! power to the people
interesting… Ya’ll but CHECK OUT THIS VIDEO ON YOUTUBE!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwtyLHcrfu0
HIT ME UP
Umlaw:
Are you really an asian man ,their you go talking
about black issuse again,take your meds luni…..
Please stop your obsession with black folks
you are so crazy…………….