• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Black Jogger Gunned Down In The Street

The judge said that even though he agreed the defense was likely rejecting jurors by race he was satisfied that the defense was able to give non-race reasons for rejection.
No, the judge said that there could be an appearance of that. You are making the same misrepresentation as the family shyster.
 
The judge said that even though he agreed the defense was likely rejecting jurors by race he was satisfied that the defense was able to give non-race reasons for rejection.
No, the judge said that there could be an appearance of that. You are making the same misrepresentation as the family shyster.
"This court has found that there appears to be intentional discrimination," Walmsley said Wednesday.

not "could appear", no.

I remember when even the appearance of impropriety used to be a bad thing in the judicial system.
 
I remember when even the appearance of impropriety used to be a bad thing in the judicial system.
There would be much bigger impropriety if jurors who knew the dead guy were allowed to be on the jury for example.
That's a different point... and not a direct response to what I said.

So, some appearance of impropriety is ok because there could be some other appearance of impropriety that could be worse?
 
Why does skin colour matter? Why should you, or anyone, be denied sitting on a jury just because your skin colour is different to the person beside you? This is an instance where justice should be colour-blind.
So if we make it color-blind, then white jurors get in more often. Then, we see unfairness in large statistics.
If you are area that has a majority of a certain skin colour then yes more jurors of that colour will be selected. You seem to think that is a problem when the jurors are white.

I did not claim that. Your inference is incorrect.
 
Why does skin colour matter? Why should you, or anyone, be denied sitting on a jury just because your skin colour is different to the person beside you? This is an instance where justice should be colour-blind.
So if we make it color-blind, then white jurors get in more often. Then, we see unfairness in large statistics.
If you are area that has a majority of a certain skin colour then yes more jurors of that colour will be selected. You seem to think that is a problem when the jurors are white.

I did not claim that. Your inference is incorrect.
In post 917 you said "So if we make it color-blind, then white jurors get in more often. Then, we see unfairness in large statistics.".
I looked at that and thought that you meant that white jurors are a problem. If that is incorrect I apologise.
 
Why does skin colour matter? Why should you, or anyone, be denied sitting on a jury just because your skin colour is different to the person beside you? This is an instance where justice should be colour-blind.
So if we make it color-blind, then white jurors get in more often. Then, we see unfairness in large statistics.
If you are area that has a majority of a certain skin colour then yes more jurors of that colour will be selected. You seem to think that is a problem when the jurors are white.

I did not claim that. Your inference is incorrect.
In post 917 you said "So if we make it color-blind, then white jurors get in more often. Then, we see unfairness in large statistics.".
I looked at that and thought that you meant that white jurors are a problem. If that is incorrect I apologise.
Thanks for apologizing, not sure if it is necessary or not. Let's try to work through the miscommunication. I'll try again from my end...

I don't think that the only issue in having more white people end up in juries is merely due to the majority-ness of white people in some areas.
 
Why does skin colour matter? Why should you, or anyone, be denied sitting on a jury just because your skin colour is different to the person beside you? This is an instance where justice should be colour-blind.
Pull 12 names out of a hat if you must. These are the first cut. Ask them is they have an financial, or otherwise, interest in the case. If N jurors fail then pull the next N names of out said hat. And keep going.
But colour is not a reason to deny a juror reason to sit.

There is no hat. Blacks were dismissed by the Defendant’s lawyer and it wasn’t because of some other dismissal hat.

This isn’t a case of the first 12 in the room sit on the jury and the racial makeup is random.
 
OBJECTION. Against holding two big trials at the same time. No time for both.
 
Some of you seem unduly concerned about the makeup of the jury. If it is because you are fearful that a white jury won't convict, rest assured, they will.

Aside from the political dynamics, the defense seems pretty certain they are getting a stacked jury - if only because they found it very difficult to find a juror that had not already formed an opinion or had a bias. This selection took so much longer than the one in Kenosha because 1/2 the people didn't show up when called (avoidance of being involved), and those that did weren't exactly unbiased. For example, this was Day 7 of jury selection, quite typical of the all the other days (about two weeks) required:

Of particular note from today’s general voir dire:

  • Fully 65% of today’s prospective jurors had already formed or expressed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused!
  • Fully 80% have had a close friend, relative, or themselves been arrested for a crime.
  • More than a third (35%) had been victims of burglary or home invasion.
  • Fully 75% conceded to having developed negative feelings, due to media coverage of the case, towards the defendants.
  • Just over half (55%) believed that the criminal justice system and police generally did not treat people of color fairly or equally.
  • On the expanded question of support for Black Lives Matter, that now also asks about support for “I Run With Ahmaud” type groups, just under half (45%) indicated that they had supported such groups and efforts to some degree.
  • On the new question asking if they had an opinion about the delay in arresting the defendants, fully 80% indicated that they had formed an opinion on this matter.

The defendants are toast.

 
So, some appearance of impropriety is ok because there could be some other appearance of impropriety that could be worse?

Since many things can lead to an appearance of impropriety, what often happens that a thing and the opposite of that thing can both appear improper. In such a case, it is better to go with mere appearance of impropriety rather than appearance and actuality of impropriety. I.e., in this case, it is better to have a jury that has a bit more white people than the county at large rather than actual impropriety of having jurors who knew the decedent.
 
So did the prosecutor ask potential black jurors, "Hey did you ever think something racist happened to you? You did? Okay, buy bye."
 
So, some appearance of impropriety is ok because there could be some other appearance of impropriety that could be worse?

Since many things can lead to an appearance of impropriety, what often happens that a thing and the opposite of that thing can both appear improper. In such a case, it is better to go with mere appearance of impropriety rather than appearance and actuality of impropriety. I.e., in this case, it is better to have a jury that has a bit more white people than the county at large rather than actual impropriety of having jurors who knew the decedent.
Do you know for certain that the black prospective jurors all knew the decedent? Is that why they were dismissed?
 
So, some appearance of impropriety is ok because there could be some other appearance of impropriety that could be worse?

Since many things can lead to an appearance of impropriety, what often happens that a thing and the opposite of that thing can both appear improper. In such a case, it is better to go with mere appearance of impropriety rather than appearance and actuality of impropriety. I.e., in this case, it is better to have a jury that has a bit more white people than the county at large rather than actual impropriety of having jurors who knew the decedent.
Do you know for certain that the black prospective jurors all knew the decedent? Is that why they were dismissed?

I think there is something like that in maxparrish's link. I find this part more interesting, though:
"Anyone participated in any demonstrations or marches related to social justice movement, either before or after this shooting? 500

...Anyone supported in any way the Black Lives Matter movement, financial, bumper sticker, yard sign, posting about it online, reposting, including all of the movements about justice for Ahmaud, or I run with ahmaud, could include “say his name: Ahmaud Arbery,” giving support for hate crime bill legislation? 467, 469, 479, 482, 488, 489, 498, 500, 510

Anyone feel they have ever been denied an opportunity because of ethnicity, background, or race? 485, 498, 501, 508

Indicate if you have ever been falsely accused of doing anything based on your ethnicity or race? 498

Do you agree that the old Georgia state flag, flown between 1956 and 2002, is a racist symbol? 479

Do you agree that people of color are not treated fairly in our criminal justice system? 467, 474, 475, 479, 485, 495, 498, 500, 501, 508, 502

Even more focused than criminal justice system, believe that police, generally, do not treat black and white folks equally? 467, 479, 485, 489, 495, 498, 500, 501, 502, 508, 475
"
 
So, some appearance of impropriety is ok because there could be some other appearance of impropriety that could be worse?

Since many things can lead to an appearance of impropriety, what often happens that a thing and the opposite of that thing can both appear improper. In such a case, it is better to go with mere appearance of impropriety rather than appearance and actuality of impropriety. I.e., in this case, it is better to have a jury that has a bit more white people than the county at large rather than actual impropriety of having jurors who knew the decedent.
Do you know for certain that the black prospective jurors all knew the decedent? Is that why they were dismissed?

I think there is something like that in maxparrish's link. I find this part more interesting, though:
"Anyone participated in any demonstrations or marches related to social justice movement, either before or after this shooting? 500

...Anyone supported in any way the Black Lives Matter movement, financial, bumper sticker, yard sign, posting about it online, reposting, including all of the movements about justice for Ahmaud, or I run with ahmaud, could include “say his name: Ahmaud Arbery,” giving support for hate crime bill legislation? 467, 469, 479, 482, 488, 489, 498, 500, 510

Anyone feel they have ever been denied an opportunity because of ethnicity, background, or race? 485, 498, 501, 508

Indicate if you have ever been falsely accused of doing anything based on your ethnicity or race? 498

Do you agree that the old Georgia state flag, flown between 1956 and 2002, is a racist symbol? 479

Do you agree that people of color are not treated fairly in our criminal justice system? 467, 474, 475, 479, 485, 495, 498, 500, 501, 508, 502

Even more focused than criminal justice system, believe that police, generally, do not treat black and white folks equally? 467, 479, 485, 489, 495, 498, 500, 501, 502, 508, 475
"
Reads like a loyalty test for "good old boys".
 
So, some appearance of impropriety is ok because there could be some other appearance of impropriety that could be worse?

Since many things can lead to an appearance of impropriety, what often happens that a thing and the opposite of that thing can both appear improper. In such a case, it is better to go with mere appearance of impropriety rather than appearance and actuality of impropriety. I.e., in this case, it is better to have a jury that has a bit more white people than the county at large rather than actual impropriety of having jurors who knew the decedent.
Do you know for certain that the black prospective jurors all knew the decedent? Is that why they were dismissed?

I think there is something like that in maxparrish's link. I find this part more interesting, though:
"Anyone participated in any demonstrations or marches related to social justice movement, either before or after this shooting? 500

...Anyone supported in any way the Black Lives Matter movement, financial, bumper sticker, yard sign, posting about it online, reposting, including all of the movements about justice for Ahmaud, or I run with ahmaud, could include “say his name: Ahmaud Arbery,” giving support for hate crime bill legislation? 467, 469, 479, 482, 488, 489, 498, 500, 510

Anyone feel they have ever been denied an opportunity because of ethnicity, background, or race? 485, 498, 501, 508

Indicate if you have ever been falsely accused of doing anything based on your ethnicity or race? 498

Do you agree that the old Georgia state flag, flown between 1956 and 2002, is a racist symbol? 479

Do you agree that people of color are not treated fairly in our criminal justice system? 467, 474, 475, 479, 485, 495, 498, 500, 501, 508, 502

Even more focused than criminal justice system, believe that police, generally, do not treat black and white folks equally? 467, 479, 485, 489, 495, 498, 500, 501, 502, 508, 475
"
Reads like a loyalty test for "good old boys".
Were any white jurors rejected on the basis of their answers to these questions?
 
So, some appearance of impropriety is ok because there could be some other appearance of impropriety that could be worse?

Since many things can lead to an appearance of impropriety, what often happens that a thing and the opposite of that thing can both appear improper. In such a case, it is better to go with mere appearance of impropriety rather than appearance and actuality of impropriety. I.e., in this case, it is better to have a jury that has a bit more white people than the county at large rather than actual impropriety of having jurors who knew the decedent.
Do you know for certain that the black prospective jurors all knew the decedent? Is that why they were dismissed?

I think there is something like that in maxparrish's link. I find this part more interesting, though:
"Anyone participated in any demonstrations or marches related to social justice movement, either before or after this shooting? 500

...Anyone supported in any way the Black Lives Matter movement, financial, bumper sticker, yard sign, posting about it online, reposting, including all of the movements about justice for Ahmaud, or I run with ahmaud, could include “say his name: Ahmaud Arbery,” giving support for hate crime bill legislation? 467, 469, 479, 482, 488, 489, 498, 500, 510

Anyone feel they have ever been denied an opportunity because of ethnicity, background, or race? 485, 498, 501, 508

Indicate if you have ever been falsely accused of doing anything based on your ethnicity or race? 498

Do you agree that the old Georgia state flag, flown between 1956 and 2002, is a racist symbol? 479

Do you agree that people of color are not treated fairly in our criminal justice system? 467, 474, 475, 479, 485, 495, 498, 500, 501, 508, 502

Even more focused than criminal justice system, believe that police, generally, do not treat black and white folks equally? 467, 479, 485, 489, 495, 498, 500, 501, 502, 508, 475
"
Reads like a loyalty test for "good old boys".

It also reads like a lawyer doing their job.

Finding the truth is not what lawyers do. They're not allowed to, legally. They're expected to represent the best interests of their client, no matter what. That includes lying, sometimes.

It's built into our U.S. adversarial judiciary system. The accused is entitled to a lawyer who's function is to get them off, not illuminate the truth. It's the prosecution staff who's function is to convict. Also not illuminate the truth. That's how it is.
Tom
 
Back
Top Bottom