Racism still alive and well in America

I'm sure none of us here believed that racism is dead, but the extent to which it is still prevalent in the South baffles me. How things like these stories can still happen in 2010 makes my head hurt.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/us/02jury.html

Study Finds Blacks Blocked From Southern Juries

In late April in a courthouse in Madison County, Ala., a prosecutor was asked to explain why he had struck 11 of 14 black potential jurors in a capital murder case.

The district attorney, Robert Broussard, said one had seemed “arrogant” and “pretty vocal.” In another woman, he said he “detected hostility.”

Mr. Broussard also questioned the “sophistication” of a former Army sergeant, a forklift operator with three years of college, a cafeteria manager, an assembly-line worker and a retired Department of Defense program analyst.

The analyst, he said, “did not appear to be sophisticated to us in her questionnaire, in that she spelled Wal-Mart, as one of her previous employers, as Wal-marts.”

Arguments like these were used for years to keep blacks off juries in the segregationist South, systematically denying justice to black defendants and victims. But today, the practice of excluding blacks and other minorities from Southern juries remains widespread and, according to defense lawyers and a new study by the Equal Justice Initiative, a nonprofit human rights and legal services organization in Montgomery, Ala., largely unchecked.

In the Madison County case, the defendant, Jason M. Sharp, a white man, was sentenced to death after a trial by a jury of 11 whites and one black. The April hearing was the result of a challenge by defense lawyers who argued that jury selection was tainted by racial discrimination — a claim that is difficult to prove because prosecutors can claim any race-neutral reason, no matter how implausible, for dismissing a juror.

While jury makeup varies widely by jurisdiction, the organization, which studied eight Southern states — Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee — found areas in all of them where significant problems persist. In Alabama, courts have found racially discriminatory jury selection in 25 death penalty cases since 1987, and there are counties where more than 75 percent of black jury pool members have been struck in death penalty cases.

An analysis of Jefferson Parish, La., by the Louisiana Capital Assistance Center found that from 1999 to 2007, blacks were struck from juries at more than three times the rate of whites.

In North Carolina, at least 26 current death row defendants were sentenced by all-white juries. In South Carolina, a prosecutor said he struck a black potential juror because he “shucked and jived” when he walked.

Studies have shown that racially diverse juries deliberate longer, consider a wider variety of perspectives and make fewer factual errors than all-white juries, and that predominantly black juries are less likely to impose the death penalty.

Excluding jurors based on race has been illegal since 1875, but after Reconstruction, all-white juries remained the norm in the South.

“It really made lynching and the Ku Klux Klan possible,” said Christopher Waldrep, a historian at San Francisco State University and the author of a forthcoming book about a lawyer who was able, in a rare case, to prove jury discrimination in Mississippi in 1906. “If you’d had a lot of black grand jurors investigating crimes, it would have made lynching impossible.”

Back then, judges and prosecutors often argued that blacks lacked the intelligence or education to serve. That such claims persist is evidence, said Bryan A. Stevenson, the executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative, that jury selection remains largely unscrutinized.

“There’s just this tolerance, there’s indifference to excluding people on the basis of race, and prosecutors are doing it with impunity,” Mr. Stevenson said. “Unless you’re in the courtroom, unless you’re a lawyer working on these issues, you’re not going to know whether your local prosecutor consistently bars people of color.”

In jury selection, potential jurors are first dismissed for cause — reasons like scheduling conflicts or opposition to the death penalty. Then, both sides can ask questions and take turns dismissing jurors using what are called peremptory strikes (the number of strikes varies by state, but it is often enough for one side to eliminate all qualified minorities).

In a 1986 case, Batson v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court ruled that if a pattern of discrimination emerged during peremptory strikes, lawyers must provide nonracial reasons for their strikes. The reason does not have to be “persuasive, or even plausible,” the Supreme Court ruled in a later case in which a prosecutor said he dismissed one black juror because he had long hair, and another because he had a goatee, saying, “I don’t like the way they looked.” It is up to the judge to decide if there was deliberate discrimination.

That is a high bar, defense lawyers say — so high that in Tennessee and North Carolina, there has never been a successful reversal based on Batson.

“Anybody with any sense at all can think up any race-neutral reason and get away with it,” said Stephen B. Bright, a capital defense lawyer in Atlanta.

Prosecutors have claimed to strike jurors because they live in high-crime neighborhoods, are unemployed or are single parents. In one Louisiana case, a judge allowed a black juror to be dismissed because the prosecutor said he “looked like a drug dealer.”

Often, a defense lawyer’s challenge is based on showing that white jurors who answered questions the same way or had the same characteristics were not struck. For example, in the Sharp case, Mr. Broussard said that because one juror was studying to be a minister, she “was not the kind of juror we were looking for.” But a white man who was a minister was allowed to serve.

Mr. Broussard did not respond to requests for comment, but Stephen Wimberly, the first assistant district attorney in Jefferson Parish, said that of more than 2,000 jury trials since 1997, only two had been reversed because of discrimination. “The legal standard is not representation of any race or gender, but the fairness and impartiality of each respective juror,” Mr. Wimberly said.

In one Mississippi case, a black man, Curtis Flowers, was sentenced to death in 2004 for killing four furniture store employees. The jury was made up of 11 whites and one black after prosecutors used all 15 of their peremptory strikes on black jurors. Montgomery County, where the crime occurred, is 45 percent black. The Mississippi Supreme Court reversed the case, noting that “racially motivated jury selection is still prevalent 20 years after Batson.”

At a retrial, in which prosecutors did not seek the death penalty, the jury of seven whites and five blacks was split along racial lines, resulting in a hung jury. At the second retrial, prosecutors sought the death penalty, which eliminated more blacks from the pool of qualified jurors. The jury, nine whites and three blacks, hung again when one black member declined to convict, said Andre De Gruy, the director of the state’s Office of Capital Defense Counsel.

The Equal Justice Initiative study argues that jury diversity “is especially critical because the other decision-making roles in the criminal justice system are held mostly by people who are white.” In the eight Southern states the study examined, more than 93 percent of the district attorneys are white. In Arkansas and Tennessee, all of them are white.
Bolding mine

Also this little gem out of Arizona:

http://wonkette.com/415809/arizona-...es-on-mural-be-changed-to-white#ixzz0pv3e1wQ3

I honestly don't even know what to say sometimes
 

vonFiedler

I Like Chopin
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Alive and well? The victims of lynchings and other lethal hate crimes was just over a hundred last year, according to the NSPCC half that number of children are sexually abused every day. But both racism and pedophilia are now completely unacceptable. Even the people who wouldn't have harmed a black man but felt nervous about voting one into office are now gone. These people in the deep south know that they are universally looked down on, and they should still be punished for their crimes, but the rest of us need to put race behind us.
 
Alive and well? The victims of lynchings and other lethal hate crimes was just over a hundred last year, according to the NSPCC half that number of children are sexually abused every day. But both racism and pedophilia are now completely unacceptable. Even the people who wouldn't have harmed a black man but felt nervous about voting one into office are now gone. These people in the deep south know that they are universally looked down on, and they should still be punished for their crimes, but the rest of us need to put race behind us.
what does this have anything to do with what I linked in the OP at all
 
I live in Georgia, and people tend to forget that white people aren't the only wrong doers in letting go of "old" racism. Any racism is a crime towards humanity. It's not really bad here in Georgia, but cross the line into rural Alabama and it's downright disgusting.
 

Deck Knight

Blast Off At The Speed Of Light! That's Right!
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
In this thread popemobile learns that prosecutors offer bullshit reasons not to allow jurors to sit on cases, but blames racism for it. Prosecutors have done this in every court case since time immemorial. Bullshit pre-emptory strikes are the norm.

Studies have shown that racially diverse juries deliberate longer, consider a wider variety of perspectives and make fewer factual errors than all-white juries, and that predominantly black juries are less likely to impose the death penalty.
It could be that the prosecutors are looking for juries most likely to uphold the death penalty. I'm not quite sure how you make a "factual error" when the standard for a jury is either preponderance of the evidence or beyond reasonable doubt (death penalty), but that hardly matters. Such a death penalty case would require all 12 jurors to make such a "factual error." Juries examine facts (evidence) presented by the prosecution and defense, not create them. What makes it an error other than the creators of these studies did not like the outcome?

Speaking of the racist south, Harvard Law Dean (and Obama Supreme Court Nominee) Elena Kagan apparently doesn't like to hire minorities. You have an interesting narrative, but quite frankly the Northeast has always been just as racist, if not moreso, than the South.

As for wonkette, from the linked article:

R.E. Wall, director of Prescott's Downtown Mural Project, said he and other artists were subjected to slurs from motorists as they worked on the painting at one of the town's most prominent intersections.

"We consistently, for two months, had people shouting racial slander from their cars," Wall said. "We had children painting with us, and here come these yells of (epithet for Blacks) and (epithet for Hispanics)."

Wall said school Principal Jeff Lane pressed him to make the children's faces appear happier and brighter.

"It is being lightened because of the controversy," Wall said, adding that "they want it to look like the children are coming into light."

Lane said that he received only three complaints about the mural and that his request for a touch-up had nothing to do with political pressure. "We asked them to fix the shading on the children's faces," he said. "We were looking at it from an artistic view. Nothing at all to do with race."

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/artic...mural-sparks-racial-debate.html#ixzz0pwSVZMO0
Assholes (allegedly) shouting racial epithets from their vehicles! Three complaints! I'm Outraged!

Racism never dies, but the idea that it is well in America is ridiculous. Usually it's just a few stupid people that race-baiters latch onto to say "AHA! America is still racist! I knew it!" America will never stop being racist to such people because they actively go looking for racism to get outraged about. In a country of 300 million people, they're bound to find somebody who is still openly racist.
 

cim

happiness is such hard work
is a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Alive and well? The victims of lynchings and other lethal hate crimes was just over a hundred last year, according to the NSPCC half that number of children are sexually abused every day. But both racism and pedophilia are now completely unacceptable. Even the people who wouldn't have harmed a black man but felt nervous about voting one into office are now gone.
You have an incredibly naive world view if you think this is a universal truth. Obviously racism is not as prevalent as before but if you really think this is the case, you haven't explored much of the country.
 
In this thread popemobile learns that prosecutors offer bullshit reasons not to allow jurors to sit on cases, but blames racism for it. Prosecutors have done this in every court case since time immemorial. Bullshit pre-emptory strikes are the norm.
Deck Knight did you not read a single word of the article

I really don't think you did
 

vonFiedler

I Like Chopin
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
You have an incredibly naive world view if you think this is a universal truth. Obviously racism is not as prevalent as before but if you really think this is the case, you haven't explored much of the country.
I didn't say they knew they were wrong. These days, they can join together on white supremacist forums and tell each other that they are right and that the majority is evil or some such. But they know that their habits are universally not allowed. The modern racist has to hide behind "devils advocate" arguments and constantly accuse non-racists of racism in an attempt to weaken their position. And that's good enough for me to say that racism isn't well.
 

Deck Knight

Blast Off At The Speed Of Light! That's Right!
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Deck Knight did you not read a single word of the article

I really don't think you did
You can take two approaches to the NYTimes story.

A. Prosecutors looking for the death penalty for someone charged with a capital crime are merely maximizing the likelihood the jury will reach the penalty they seek.

B. Prosecutors are racist.

You choose to see racism. I do not. The laws regarding the number and justification of pre-emptory strikes is admittedly bad, but striking blacks from death penalty cases on the basis they will be unlikely to convict is sound legal strategy. That's a problem with how pre-emptory strikes are set up, since they do not even have to reach a standard of plausibility. They have no teeth. Considering blacks are a large proportion of the population in the South, getting the legislature to put a bill up to strengthen these laws should not be a difficult task.

Furthermore these are all presumably statistics about death penalty cases and not cases in general (all paragraphs relate to capital cases or death sentences). Capital cases are extremely rare and the death penalty is already a politically charged issue. Of course if you just skimmed the headlines you would assume "The South has Come Again!" Which appears to be what you have done. What other conclusion would a headline skimmer draw from "Study Finds Blacks Blocked From Southern Juries?"

Your entire topic is basically a massive race-bait. I have little patience for your condescension.
 
Racism doesn't only extend to blacks. I still get strange looks and the occasional snide comment when I go into airports with my family. Hell, I'm not even of Arabic descent!
 
I'm glad we've established the problem that the current system allows for unchecked racism.

Please tell me why quotes like "he looked like a drug dealer" and "shucked and jived" aren't racist. Sure I'll give you that they may want to pursue the death penalty and it will be easier to convict with less blacks on the jury, but the way that it's gone about is blatantly racist. Also the suggestion that the significant number of cases of this happening isn't racist in any way is quite frankly laughable, especially considering THE SOUTH.

Of course I just skimmed the headline of the article that I read thoroughly and posted, so what do I know?
 

Firestorm

I did my best, I have no regrets!
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Deck Knight, don't display your contempt for race-bait then try to counter it with statements like this:

Speaking of the racist south, Harvard Law Dean (and Obama Supreme Court Nominee) Elena Kagan apparently doesn't like to hire minorities. You have an interesting narrative, but quite frankly the Northeast has always been just as racist, if not moreso, than the South.
 
Even assuming for an instant these people are racist, so what? Voire dire allows the right for varying quantities of jurors to be dismissed for reasons as arbitrary as colour, or for no reason at all. That means no bitching. If these people want to waste what should be (don't infer any approval from me) a method of ensuring innocent men have the best chance possible on petty spite, who cares?

EDIT: yes, I'm aware this can block black defendants getting largely-black juries. So what? In a system where "justice" is being manipulated in such a fashion, fix the system, don't try to force people to think differently.
 

az

toddmoding
is a Community Contributoris an Artist Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
actually i agree with deck knight here - sure the odds don't look good, but there's nothing in that article to say out-right that racism was at work, and if you really wanted to display that racism is "alive and well" i'm sure there are better ways to go about it than citing an ambiguous report on juror selection
 

Raj

CAP Playtesting Expert
I would like to point out that the article was written by Shaila Dewan, a black name if I ever saw one. Anyway, if this was written by a black person, than I declare this article null and void. Not because she's black, not because I'm racist, but because the writer is a racist and wants to be tricksy and point fingers. A black mechanism if you ask me...

All joking aside, all this really is is someone pointing fingers and the suspect pointing right back. It's really ridiculous. I wouldn't even call this racism, because it's entirely plausible and likely that these stereotypes made were valid.

Put it this way; in Ancient Greece, we'll use Sparta and Athens. The Athenians did commerce and shit while the Spartans fought an shit. They both did shit, but you wouldn't want the Spartans weaving your baskets because they're strong fuckers and they'll crush your whicker. Now, at the same time, you don't want the Athenians to fight because they're a bunch of pussies.

Put all that together and I'm sure you can find my justification for why there's nothing wrong with this.
 

Chill Murray

get well soon jacoby..
The analyst, he said, “did not appear to be sophisticated to us in her questionnaire, in that she spelled Wal-Mart, as one of her previous employers, as Wal-marts.”
Call me an elitist but I'd say that this is a perfectly acceptable reason to prevent someone from being involved in determining whether another human being lives or dies.

The Batson ruling is complete bullshit, though. It reeks of the same kind of "equality" that was provided under the Plessy v. Ferguson ruling.
 
I would like to point out that the article was written by Shaila Dewan, a black name if I ever saw one. Anyway, if this was written by a black person, than I declare this article null and void. Not because she's black, not because I'm racist, but because the writer is a racist and wants to be tricksy and point fingers. A black mechanism if you ask me...

All joking aside, all this really is is someone pointing fingers and the suspect pointing right back. It's really ridiculous. I wouldn't even call this racism, because it's entirely plausible and likely that these stereotypes made were valid.

Put it this way; in Ancient Greece, we'll use Sparta and Athens. The Athenians did commerce and shit while the Spartans fought an shit. They both did shit, but you wouldn't want the Spartans weaving your baskets because they're strong fuckers and they'll crush your whicker. Now, at the same time, you don't want the Athenians to fight because they're a bunch of pussies.

Put all that together and I'm sure you can find my justification for why there's nothing wrong with this.
If that article is null and void because she's black then surely your response is also null and void.

I don't know how you can say it is plausible that the stereotypes were made valid! Are you saying that it is enough to end somebody's life due to stereotypes?

You're argument about Sparta and Athens is completely stupid and I don't see how it applies at all to your argument. Unless of course you are saying that you should hire a diverse jury as they are less likely to make errors. Not to mention that Athens and Sparta had many civil wars and there is a reason the Athens retained the title of capital. The fact that you were using prejudices conjured up by other people and not actually looking at fact further disproves your argument as you came to the wrong conclusion.

I personally think that when you are deciding something as delicate as whether somebody lives or dies it is blatantly wrong to let it be decided by something as baseless as racism.
 
Deck Knight is correct.

Blacks are predominantly liberal (95%+).
Liberals are less likely to sentence somebody to death, therefore prosecutors are more likely to use their strikes on somebody who they are reasonably sure are liberal.

Don't get your panties in a twist.
 
But, we have a black president guys? :x

Racism still exists yes, but hey, at least its not as bad as it used to be. Progress progresses slowly.
 

Raj

CAP Playtesting Expert
Sce, that's my point; anything can be turned around.

And by the way, this isn't really racism, it's observations. More black people commit crimes so it would be concluded that these people that seem to fit the sterotype wouldn't be great suitors.

I dunno, that makes perfect sense to me. Eliminate all possible biases, but in the end it'll look biased because you removed the bias, which brings up my first point.
 
There's this group of racist sophomores at the high school I'll be attending next year that live in my neighborhood. Whenever I'm with my friend John (who I assume is a part of this group, but I'm not entirely sure) he always seems to find room for some racist comment. Once I was getting home from the store and I saw him and a bunch of other people shooting at one of their black "friends" from John's front steps, with some stupid fucking pellet gun. I probably should have said something to him/them but by the time I got out there they were gone.

I tell him it's really stupid all the time and ask him why he is racist towards anyone who isn't white, but he usually just ignores the question. It's not even that he's that bad of a guy; he's plenty nice, and good company, too, and a really reliable friend. He just tries too hard to fit in sometimes, because I've seen him go through phases like this for the past six years.

As far as the article goes, I have to agree with this:
Call me an elitist but I'd say that this is a perfectly acceptable reason to prevent someone from being involved in determining whether another human being lives or dies.

The Batson ruling is complete bullshit, though. It reeks of the same kind of "equality" that was provided under the Plessy v. Ferguson ruling.
Even though it's obvious that racism still exists, it's nowhere near as bad as it once was, and we are making progress. I don't think racism will really ever stop, but again, it's not as bad as it was.

Sorry if this thread is considered too old to bump.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top