Justices Side With Death Row Inmate on Jury Bias

[Dash_Riprock]

[ QUOTE ]
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court sided Tuesday with a black Texas death row inmate who claimed prosecutors stacked the jury with whites and said he was not allowed to present evidence of the alleged bias.

The high court ruled 8-1 that Thomas Miller-El should have been given an opportunity to present his evidence during his federal appeals. The court's action does not mean Miller-El will ultimately win his case. The justices sent the case back to a lower court, where Miller-El could get a new hearing on his claims that prosecutors used their power to challenge specific jurors as a way to eliminate 10 out of 11 potential black jurors before Miller-El's trial.


[/ QUOTE ]

Are you innocent or guilty, Mr. Miller-El?

The Rest of the Story (http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/politics/AP-Scotus-Jury-Bias.html?ex=1047445200&en=c95e9d4149f56262&ei=500 4&partner=UNTD)

[Venus]

Dash, due process is important, too.

[Greymon]

Just wondering....I wonder how important it is for most DAs to get a conviction? Is it important enough to deny a man a change to present all the evidence? Important enough to stack the jury?

[Venus]

It's very important to get a conviction. Convictions are career-makers - too many defeats are career-breakers. The answer to the rest of your questions is that a balance between ethics and procedures is required to have good judgment in those matters, so you have to look at specific cases to make that determination about individual prosecutors.

[Dash_Riprock]

[ QUOTE ]
Dash, due process is important, too.

[/ QUOTE ]

So is the truth.

Are you innocent or guilty, Mr. Miller-El?

[Venus]

The issue before the SCOTUS relates to due process, not guilt.

[Dash_Riprock]

[ QUOTE ]
The issue before the SCOTUS relates to due process, not guilt.

[/ QUOTE ]

The last refuge for the guilty.

Are you innocent or guilty, Mr. Miller-El?

[Venus]

Indeed, and sometimes for the innocent as well.

BTW, your needle is stuck.

[Dash_Riprock]

Not stuck, just focused.

[Venus]

"Not stuck, just focused."

And off-topic.

[Dash_Riprock]

I'm willing to bet the family of the victim wouldn't think so.

[Venus]

The family doesn't sit on the SCOTUS.

[MaximumSam]

How do we know if someone is guilty if the jury is rigged?

[DesertFox]

How do we know he isn't?

[Venus]

Laypeople hear evidence, too, as trials progress, but the jury is the trier of facts, as you know. Thus, we have opinions but the jury has the authority as charged by the court to decide guilt and fate. I know nothing about the case. My only point to Dash is that the matter before the SCOTUS relates to due process, not guilt. Beyond that, screening jurors through various 'profiles' is nothing new and is the basis for the ability to challenge in the first place. That's hardly the same thing as 'rigging' a jury.

[MaximumSam]

DF,

How do we know he isn't?


Also a good question. When the government abuses the criminal process, we can't have a reliable answer on guilt or innocence.

Venus,

Laypeople hear evidence, too, as trials progress, but the jury is the trier of facts, as you know. Thus, we have opinions but the jury has the authority as charged by the court to decide guilt and fate. I know nothing about the case. My only point to Dash is that the matter before the SCOTUS relates to due process, not guilt. Beyond that, screening jurors through various 'profiles' is nothing new and is the basis for the ability to challenge in the first place. That's hardly the same thing as 'rigging' a jury.


I was just answering Dash's question with a another question - in that a biased jury is not a reliable trier of fact. Hence, he should be allowed to present such evidence to an appellate court.

[Venus]

Because the jury is legally bound by the (rebuttable) presumption of innocence. As laypeople, however, we have our opinions and will be damned if anyone is going to take them away from us! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Venus]

Generally, I agree, although jurors do have biases - the questions are type and degree. Don't know nuthin' 'bout this case, though. I'll presume the SCOTUS did the right thing. As for the trial, an all black jury might easily be too biased against the prosecution, at least in certain parts of the country - like South Central L.A..