Racism in Jury Selection - Supreme Court Case

[ok doser]

And I'm quite sure there are white people that would refuse to be impartial and not be suitable as jurors. Forget about Dylan Roof and supporters?



Because when black people do it, it's bad and they're thugs but when white people do it, they just got a little rowdy.

Media Potrayal

the video presents the media as manipulative scumbags (i'm paraphrasing)

you get no argument from me :idunno:

one of the reasons i unplugged eleven years ago

and, the reason i don't have any emotional investment in the Umpqua shootings and can examine it dispassionately

 

[ok doser]

The process is exactly as good or bad as we make it.

look, like the media, i have nothing but scorn for our "justice" system

it's irretrievably flawed and corrupt

 

[rexlunae]

look, like the media, i have nothing but scorn for our "justice" system

it's irretrievably flawed and corrupt

Then why bother talking about it, if you've given up on it entirely? What's the use?

 

[ok doser]

Then why bother talking about it, if you've given up on it entirely? What's the use?

because i recognize that it exists and will continue to exist

but i have no hope or expectations that it will change


:think: much like the inner city black culture of failure

 

[genuineoriginal]

It's not their decision. The number of peremptory challenges is controlled by the law.

The rights and duties of the jurors is also controlled by the law, but no prosecutor in the country will allow the jurors to be told about their rights and duties.
So, what makes you think juror selection should be any different?

You didn't get around to saying what you think of my solution. Curious.

I must have missed it.
What was your solution?

 

[brewmama]

this has always amused me

aren't the peers of a criminal other criminals?

:thumb:

 

[rexlunae]

The rights and duties of the jurors is also controlled by the law, but no prosecutor in the country will allow the jurors to be told about their rights and duties.

Have you ever served on a jury? Because every jury I've been on has had extensive discussions of what our duties are. Or are you referring to so-called "jury nullification" or something like that?

So, what makes you think juror selection should be any different?

Huh?

I must have missed it.
What was your solution?

Get rid of peremptory challenges. Make the attorneys show cause to dismiss a juror.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Have you ever served on a jury? Because every jury I've been on has had extensive discussions of what our duties are.

What you are told to do are not the duties of the jury.
Those instructions are the court system nullifying the power of the jury.

Or are you referring to so-called "jury nullification" or something like that?

I see you have heard of it, but you were never told that your duty as a juror is to be the judge of both the law and the alleged perpetrator of that law.
They also neglect to inform the jury about mandatory sentencing that applies and anything else that would allow the jury to make an informed decision.

There is also the issue with the lack of peers being the jury, since the prosecutors have convinced everyone that an actual peer (who knows the alleged perpetrator) is unable to be on a jury, but claims that complete strangers are peers.

No, the jury system has been deliberately broken to take the power of the people away and give it to the government.

Get rid of peremptory challenges. Make the attorneys show cause to dismiss a juror.

Would wearing a "Black Lives Matter" T-shirt to the juror interview be a cause to dismiss?

 

[rexlunae]

Would wearing a "Black Lives Matter" T-shirt to the juror interview be a cause to dismiss?

I doubt it. But it would be up to the judge, with the consultation of both attorneys. It might violate the dress code.

 

[genuineoriginal]

I doubt it. But it would be up to the judge, with the consultation of both attorneys. It might violate the dress code.

It is not the dress code that is the problem, but the stated bias of the prospective juror.

You may have missed it because you have the same bias, as evidenced by your posts on this forum.

A similar bias from a different color would be shown by a person wearing an "I ♥ White Folks" T-shirt.

 

[rexlunae]

It is not the dress code that is the problem, but the stated bias of the prospective juror.

What bias? One that suggests that black people are as valuable as anyone else?

You may have missed it because you have the same bias, as evidenced by your posts on this forum.

A similar bias from a different color would be shown by a person wearing an "I ♥ White Folks" T-shirt.

Not even remotely.

 

[genuineoriginal]

What bias? One that suggests that black people are as valuable as anyone else?

No, the "Black Lives Matter" bias held by people that want to keep police from enforcing the law when black people violate it.

Not even remotely.

The message on the "I ♥ White Folks" T-shirt is just as racially biased as the message on the "Black Lives Matter" T-shirt.

 

[rexlunae]

No, the "Black Lives Matter" bias held by people that want to keep police from enforcing the law when black people violate it.

That's a pretty outrageous claim, given that the movement sprung from an area where black people were being systematically targeted by the police.

The message on the "I ♥ White Folks" T-shirt is just as racially biased as the message on the "Black Lives Matter" T-shirt.

Only ripped from context.

 

[genuineoriginal]

That's a pretty outrageous claim, given that the movement sprung from an area where black people were being systematically targeted by the police.

No, it came from an area where a rich white man, George Soros, funded activist groups to create a race riot by exploiting ignorant black people who have been raised to think "whitey am de debil".

 

[rexlunae]

No, it came from an area where a rich white man, George Soros, funded activist groups to create a race riot by exploiting ignorant black people who have been raised to think "whitey am de debil".

I'm happy to let that statement speak for itself.

 

[genuineoriginal]

I'm happy to let that statement speak for itself.

That is expected, since I am putting all the blame for the Ferguson riots on some rich white guy.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Because the rules should be about making the process fairer, not securing convictions.

Securing the conviction of a criminal, SHOULD be the FIRST matter, that is what justice is.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Securing the conviction of a criminal, SHOULD be the FIRST matter, that is what justice is.

Not perverting justice should be the first matter.

Leviticus 19:15 NIV 15 “‘Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.​

 

[Angel4Truth]

Not perverting justice should be the first matter.

Leviticus 19:15 NIV 15 “‘Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.​

What part of "a criminal" did you miss in my post? All defendants arent criminals.

Securing the conviction of a criminal, SHOULD be the FIRST matter, that is what justice is.

 

[genuineoriginal]

What part of "a criminal" did you miss in my post? All defendants arent criminals.

In the eyes of the prosecutors, all defendants ARE criminals, otherwise they would not be prosecuting them.