Batson Challenges

The above cases fought to prevent this type of practice from occurring over the years and one such case helped even further, Foster v. Chatman. In Foster v. Chatman, in 1986 Timothy Tyrone Foster was charged and convicted of murdering a white woman. The prosecution in his case used peremptory strikes to remove all four of the qualified black jurors. In this case the defense argued this violated the decision in Batson v. Kentucky, prohibiting this type of behavior. However, the courts in the case shifted the burden to the prosecution, who could justify their action and the court allowed them to continue with the case. Foster was convicted of the murder and the death sentence was imposed. The U.S. Supreme court reviewed the case and determined from notes obtained from the prosecution in the 1986 case, that the prosecution indeed violated the ruling Batson, since their notes indicated that they were racially motivated to remove black juries. (Foster v. Chatman,

However, the formal education of judges allows them to focus wholly and neutrally on the case on which they are weighing. In Cartoon 2 of Document E, the jury declares “We, the jury, find the defendant to be guilty as he looks.” This type of discrimination is less likely to happen in a bench trial because it is the judge’s actual job to be unbiased. However, most of the time jurors are not especially excited to be reaching this verdict, and they also could be harboring unknown discrimination that could easily sway their opinions. Also, the judge is much more focused on the case at hand, contrary to what is seen in Carton 1 of Document E, where only a fraction of the jurors are actually paying attention to the case. A judge has a professional opinion that he or she is prepared to deliver on a case-by-case basis because they are choosing to serve as a judge. Jury duty is a “right” that many people would rather not even have. “…If we’d long had trial by Judge in criminal cases and I were now to suggest that his reasoned and professional judgment as to facts and inferences should be replaced by the blanket verdict of pretty well any twelve men and woman placed in a cramped box and holed up there for days or even weeks at a time you would rightly think that I had taken leave of my senses”

“The harm from discriminatory jury selection extends beyond that inflicted on the defendant and the excluded juror to touch the entire community. Selection procedures that purposefully exclude black persons from juries undermine public confidence in the fairness of our system of justice. Discrimination within the judicial system is most pernicious because it is ‘a stimulant to the race prejudice which is an impediment to securing to [black citizens] that equal justice, which the law aims to secure to all others.’” (72 A.B.A.J. 68, July, 1986) With the Court’s ruling new standards were set that required the defendant to show: --That they are members of a cognizable racial group and that the prosecutor has exercised peremptory challenges to remove from the venire members of the defendants’ race --The defendants may rely on the fact that peremptory challenges are a jury selection practice which allow those who are minded to discriminate to do so --That these facts and any other relevant circumstances raise an inference that the prosecutor used that practice to exclude the veniremen from the petit jury on account of their race. (Batson v. Kentucky 476 U.S. 79 [1986])

Juror 8 has a strong belief in justice, and feels that everyone should be treated fairly .Regardless of what race or gender; everyone should be

Ordinarily, the questions put to jurors are limited in number, frequently only one or two in number, and take a forced choice response format, requiring only yes or no answers. Most often judge does not allow further exploration of the juror’s reasoning behind the answer and appointed two jurors to make their decision based on the prospective juror ’s yes or no response as to whether he or she can be fair and impartial. Although the challenge procedure as it pertains to racial bias has been in place for some time, research analyzing its efficacy has been sparse.

The article Racially Based Jury Nullification: Black Power in the Criminal Justice system was written in December, 1995 in a Yale Law Journal by Paul Butler, and then later republished in 2015 in Introduction to Legal Studies. This article was published in North America, for academics in the law stream, or anyone with an interest in law. The author poses different views on the racism in todays court rooms faced by African Americans. In this essay, I will examine the article in detail to determine whether or not the author has been accurate with his conclusions, and whether these conclusions apply today.

So, being able to use a person’s race in order to get an acquittal and guarantee against double jeopardy, is a privilege that many jurors should be willing to utilize when need be. I agree that race-based jury nullification could be useful if there is a case that just does not seem right. All the evidence should prove that this individual is guilty; yet there is something that just does not fit right in the puzzle; or a person minority person is about to be sent to prison for breaking a law where it would seem that the ends to not justify the means. Instead of declaring a mistrial due to the jury not being able to come up with a decision, race-based jury nullification could be considered a good option if it is permissible at the time.

The three steps are as follows (1) The defense shows a prima facie case of discriminatory use of peremptories, (2) the prosecutor must provide race-neutral reason for challenged strikes, and (3) the defense has the burden of demonstrating intentional discrimination. There were similar cases prior to Batson v. Kentucky that also went to the Supreme Court, these include Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400 (1991), Miller-El v. Dretke, 545 U.S. 231 (2005), Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (2008), and Foster v. Chatman, 578 U.S.__(2016). In 1991, the Court concluded

I would disagree with Paul Butler’s call for racially based nullification. Butler (1995) states African-American defendants should have all black jury and deems it as a legal and morally appropriate factor in refusing to convict. Butler (1995) believes African-Americans who are tried for non-violent crimes should be allowed set free rather than be punished. Butler further identified that black jurors should have the opportunity to decide one’s punishment based on compassion or “sticking together” rather than ethically legal moral decisions.

My name is Samantha and I am a high school Freshman in the Bay Area. Recently in English class, we have finished the classic book To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee. In the book, we looked at the symbolism and how it relates to modern issues. I quickly noticed that the book not only show the court system in the 1960s but also the court system standing today. By having a colored man convicted of a crime he did not relates to today's issue of the colored community getting harsher and longer sentences. You are one of the people with the most power in this country so I am asking for you to put an end to the racial profiling that goes on in this country by having the jury and judge not see the defendant during hearings.

Few in this country would argue with the fact that the United States criminal justice system possesses discrepancies which adversely affect Blacks in this country. Numerous studies and articles have been composed on the many facets in which discrimination, or at least disparity, is obvious. Even whites are forced to admit that statistics indicate that the Black community is disproportionately affected by the American legal system. Controversy arises when the issue of possible causes of, and also solutions to, these variations are discussed. It’s not just black versus white, it is white versus white, and white versus oriental, whatever the case may be, and it is not justice. If we see patterns then the judges should have the authority to say something. Jury nullifications cannot be overturned regardless of the cause. Exclusionary rule, according to CULS (2010) – Prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of U.S. Constitution; like unreasonable search and seizure (Fourth Amendment).

At times the defendant is treated very unfairly and is often discriminated due to his personal background. It is certainly the 10th juror who most vehemently represents the potential frightening power of racism and xenophobia. He is convinced that the defendant is guilty and he views the defendant “not as an individual, but as a representative of a larger group.” The 10th Juror does not want any further discussions and wants the boy to be sent to the electric chair. The 10th is very unfair on the defendant and expresses his hate towards people from the slums “it’s

juror including race and sex. Part of the reasoning behind the right to a jury

The US courts were put in place to examine a case and make a legal decision that will settle the dispute. These courts have flaws that affect the outcome of justice being served and falsely incriminate the innocent. Courts utilize a jury to see the different perspectives throughout the trial and determine a verdict, while the judge creates a sentence appropriate to the offense. The jurors are required to come to a non-bias decision but that not always the situation. Decisions are sometimes made on the race, religion, ethnicity and/or sexual orientation of the defendant, no matter their innocence. In research done in “What It’s Like to Be Black in the Criminal Justice System”, Andrew

Ignorance and racism are seeded deep within the nooks and crannies of our society. While it may not be visible at first glance I can assure you, it is engraved in the back of the brains of a portion of our population. A literary example of such behavior can be found in Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose. The book is set in a jury room where 12 men debate the innocence or guilt of a teenage boy accused of murdering his father. However, one of the Jurors (Juror 10) has racist beliefs that greatly affect the debate. Should men like Juror 10 be on a jury?