Mass. Jury’s Racial Attitudes Questioned
| AR Articles on Bizarre Racism Charges |
|---|
| Racism Everywhere (Aug. 2000) |
| More Phantom Racism? (Oct. 2000) |
| Search AmRen.com for Bizarre Racism Charges |
| More news stories on Bizarre Racism Charges |
One juror, a white woman, was trying to convince the others that the murder victim had been bruised during a struggle, not during consensual sex with the defendant. Bruises like those, the juror supposedly said, can happen “when a big black guy beats up on a small woman.”
Another juror, a black woman, took offense and accused her of racism. Things got so heated that the two women had to be separated.
Now, more than a year after the defendant, a black garbage man, was convicted of stabbing to death a white fashion writer on Cape Cod, the judge has taken the highly unusual step of summoning the entire jury back to court next week to testify publicly about whether racism infected the deliberations.
Depending on what he finds out, the judge could order a new trial.
Questioning jurors in open court about their deliberations after a verdict is extremely rare. Jury deliberations are considered almost sacrosanct.
“It’s extraordinary,” said Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, who warned that forcing jurors to testify could have a chilling effect.
“The jury system depends on jurors being open and frank in their views. We protect the sanctity of the jury room for that reason,” he said.
{snip}
(Posted on January 4, 2008)
Comments
Okay, two can play at this game. If a whole jury can be brought back in and questioned based on the racial statements of one of its members that might have influenced the other jurors to find him guilty, then prosecutors should be able to go back and do the same for black juries that acquitted black defendants, and have the judge declare a mistrial.
The problem with that is that in the legal system, any given not guilty verdict is the last word in a criminal proceeding. Perhaps this proposal could be pulled off with hung juries, but they result in a mistrial just for that alone.
Posted by St. Louis CofCC Blogmeister at 7:39 PM on January 4
So much for jurors’ freedom of inquiry. After all, being a racist is not a criminal offense in the U.S. (yet) anymore than, say, being a leftist or a smoker.
Posted by A Reader at 8:10 PM on January 4
Quote from the original article:
“McCowen, who was Worthington’s trash collector, claimed that he had consensual sex with her but that his friend killed her.”
Isn’t it amazing how many white women end up dead after consensual sex with black men? These guys just can’t get a break, they (sarcasm)?!
Also from the original:
“It’s based on an assumption — a false assumption — that a Vassar-educated 46-year-old, world-traveling, wealthy heiress could not possibly have had consensual sex with a black, uneducated, troubled garbage man,” George [killer’s attorney] said.
More likely, the cause of this is the universal delusion of troubled, uneducated, black men that all white women want to have sex with them and when the white women refuse it is taken by force and then a murder takes place to keep the victim quiet.
It can also be assumed that the victim, being a wealthy fashion writer, was a liberal who unfortunately acted overly friendly with a dumb black garbage man simply because he was black and that was interpreted by the imbecile as a sexual invitation.
Posted by Civilized Neighbor at 8:25 PM on January 4
“The jury system depends on jurors being open and frank in their views.
Not really. Jurors can hide their views and motivations as much as they want. The woman who was removed from the jury might have decided to let the defendant off because of his race, but she wouldn’t ever be required to reveal that fact. Will the judge probe her attitudes and beliefs also?
Posted by Reader-1 at 8:27 PM on January 4
“Now, more than a year after the defendant, a black garbage man, was convicted of stabbing to death a white fashion writer on Cape Cod, the judge has taken the highly unusual step of summoning the entire jury back to court next week to testify publicly about whether racism infected the deliberations.”
Yes racism is affecting the court system also. And it is the racist attacks against white people by black africans and their white racist left wing sidekicks. Thank God we are becoming more and more and more and more vocal in the continuing unequal actions of the court system against us. Many of the so-called “white judges” are white shysters who have no problems with oppressing other white people. They are the enemy within.
Posted by Elrey Jones at 10:32 PM on January 4
“Bruises like those, the juror supposedly said, can happen “when a big black guy beats up on a small woman.””
The argument was about their experience having sex with big black guys?
Posted by Mr Pibb at 12:06 AM on January 5
This is quite disturbing. It’s going to set a whole new precedent. Calling juries back after the fact and making them declare that racism had nothing to do with their decision is going to have quite a chilling effect on jurors. Excuse me, I mean WHITE jurors.
Posted by idareya at 1:58 AM on January 5
‘Racism’ is a pejorative term, with origins in leftist ideology.
It should have no standing in jurisprudence.
Posted by at 1:58 AM on January 5
This could actually be a good thing…..
Bring back the OJ Simpson jury to testify in open court how in God’s name they could possibly acquit a black, millionaire, celebrity of murdering his white wife and an innocent bystander with a butcher knife. Lemmie see, the jury was one elderly black male, ten black females, and a hispanic woman. Let’s see if there was any racism or racist remarks make in the jury room. Hmmmmm?
Posted by Don Reynolds at 2:05 AM on January 5
After fighting out over 350 jury trials in 35 years, I have become an expert about racism in our courts. This judge`s actions show what I have been saying for years, most judges do not trust juries and no government agent does.
In Federal court your sentence will be increased by 25% if you dare exercise your right to trial by jury and are found guilty. This one thing I have learned about racism and how it effects verdicts, the more racist you think you are the more you think and the more you think, the better juror you are. The most racist people on Earth are New York City retired policemen, black, white or purple. I have never lost a criminal case with an ex NY cop on the jury. They want to show off how they can make an individual ruling and rise above the reality of their expierence. I challenge any of the most extreme white man firsters on this blog to answer this question.
If you are on a jury and you believe based on the law and the evidence that the state hasn`t proved the case would you find an Arab, Black, Mexican, Jew, Homo-sexual, or Asian guilty of something you weren`t sure he did? The answer screams out from across 225 years of history. You may hate blacks, browns, Jews, Catholics or gays a great deal; however you love your country more.
That jury found that creep guilty because they thought he was, not because somebody hated blacks.
Charles B. Tiffany
Kissimmee, Florida
Posted by Charles B. Tiffany at 6:53 AM on January 5
Just who is on trial here?
The alleged murderer for what in today’s USA is the trivial matter of killing a White, or the jury for the grave and heinous offence of ‘racism’?
Posted by Kenelm Digby at 7:45 AM on January 5
The blacks are not stupid…..they know EXACTLY how to ‘play’ the system.
I know……..Ive been in prison(s) all over the wonderful state of Georgia. you people would be surprised how they feel…….how they think…..and what they want to do to you……..all because youre White…..(Ive been a productive member of society since 1996, before then it was drug offenses. I didnt violate others rights…just the laws mandated down from the government)
Posted by TattooedJohnDoe at 7:52 AM on January 5
Interesting. I was on a jury in California where a group of blacks claimed they were routinely denied access to a popular bar because of their color. It was held in civil court so the blacks needed only 9 of 12 votes from the jury to collect damages. The 2 black jurists voted along with the rest of us while we were in the jury room. When the judge announced our decisions the blacks’ lawyer asked for the jury to be polled. With the court watching the two blacks changed their votes from acquitting the white bar owner to voting for conviction. Gutless.
BigSteve
PS — Funny sidelight. The lawyer for the blacks in this case was familiar as a small player in the O.J. Simpson case. At one point he stood up at the lectern and said “I love Bill Clinton”. That lost himm 2 or 3 votes right there.
Posted by at 8:33 AM on January 5
I often tell people who call me racist, “I really don’t care if you think I’m a racist.” or “so all you do is call me names? You can’t even think of a good argument to refute what I just said?”
Posted by at 9:15 AM on January 5
Blacks almost always pull the race card. They seem to totally ignore the facts of a situation and blame everything on racism.
Posted by at 11:11 AM on January 5
if you’re white in america today the system is not on your side!
Posted by Chuck Hayes at 3:11 PM on January 5
I teach my children to never ever trust an african for they are racist to the core. I also teach them to keep their mouth shut and use what God has blessed them with - their intelligent minds.
Posted by Elrey Jones at 3:47 PM on January 5
I have a question…..are jurors names and addresses kept secret from the courtroom? I vote regularly but have never served on a jury. I suggest some of these jurors might be frightened to the point of aquittal because they are downright scared of the perp and his family and “bros” sitting there with the menacing glares as if to say “I know who you are, where you live and I’ll be seeing you soon!”
Just a thought
John from Arkansas
Posted by at 6:08 PM on January 5
The blacks play that race card and seems whites fall for it everytime…when will they wise up????
Posted by lydia at 10:56 PM on January 5
In the case of the OJ Simpson trial, in fact the jurors were mostly black, no whites.
The victims were white. Who on the jury was taking their point of view.
Obviously not the black jury!
Posted by at 12:19 AM on January 6
black garbage man, was convicted of stabbing to death a white fashion writer?
Hmmm…a small and delicate fashion writer having a consensual sex with a big garbage man? Even when taking the skin color out of the case it seems rather improbable…or maybe that fashion writer has had a very specific taste…
Posted by EW at 6:51 AM on January 6
Yet one more of the 20000 white women raped (and in this case also MURDERED) (plus 8000 gang raped) by black men EACH YEAR IN AMERICA TODAY. White on black rapes are nearly non-existent. This is part of a one sided race war being waged upon whites by blacks that has been going on for half a century now. (Part of the 1 million whites who are victims of violence at the hands of blacks each year, OVER TEN TIMES THE REVERSE.) And like in any war, women often take the brunt. Rape is often a tool of war. And these statistics understate the lopsided nature of this war, since whites, especially white women, avoid blacks and black neighborhoods in general. Blacks, on the other hand, have no hesitation to be in white neighborhoods. The statistics also understate the lopsidedness since much crime is within the family or between acquaintances (and thus within the race). But the most disturbing (because uncontrollable and because it takes away our freedoms and peace of mind) and serious and violence prone, is stranger on stranger. And the even more lopsided nature of black on white stranger on stranger violence (including rape) is somewhat hidden in the overall statistics.
There has been a long history of both white leftists and black racist writers celebrating the rape of white women by black men. (See, for instance, “Soul On Ice”.) And the media and academia are FILLED with white leftists and black racists doing all the can to encourage even more black on white racial hatred and even more violence.
White women are put in grave danger when they are brainwashed to think that if they take any precautions in the presence of blacks, they are being “racist”. We often hear the anecdote about a black man saying how oppressed he feels because when he approaches a car with a white woman, and he hears her activate the locks. Poor Baby!! Better she risk being another statistic than that his feelings be hurt. (15 year old white girl Ann Harrison in Kansas City Missouri, waiting for a school bus, was taught not to be racist, to be trusting, and when two black males drove up and motioned for her to come closer, instead of running like hell and hurting their feelings, she went up to their car to see what they wanted: Her lack of “racism” cost her her life. She was kidnapped, gang raped, tortured, and stabbed to death.)
There is a prominent black author with a book in the stores now in which he has the unmitigated gall to declare (with no basis but his own feverish racist imagination) that there is a one-sided WHITE ON BLACK race war!!! And I read a column by a female black writer in the newspaper declaring that she couldn’t look at a white man without seeing a rapist! Talk about inverting reality! Imagine the outcry if a white female columnist declared that she couldn’t look at a BLACK man without seeing a rapist!
During the Tawana Brawley hoax, many prominent blacks, like Bill Cosby, rallied around, putting up reward money, while bellowing “We won’t let this continue to happen to our black women!”. Didn’t matter that basically all black women who are raped are raped by black men. Blacks don’t care about those rapes. But let there be ONE hoax where a white is falsely accused of raping a black and watch the racial frenzy. We’re seeing this again in Durham. Imagine if after each and every one of the 20000 REAL rapes of white women by blacks (and after each and every one of the 8000 REAL black on white gang rapes), prominent WHITES rallied, declaring “We won’t let this continue to happen to OUR WHITE women”?
Blacks don’t give a damn about black on black or black on white incidents. Only the rare instances of alleged white on black. But any time there is yet ANOTHER of the RAMPANT black on white, whites are not supposed to be particularly outraged. No, that would be racist.
The rape of white women by black men is so rampant there are quite a number of prominent white women who have been viciously raped by blacks: singer Connie Francis ( http://www.geocities.com/sayswamp/connie.htm ), Democrat activist Susan Estrich, and the actress in “Top Gun” Kelly McGillis, to mention a few.
Now you’ll hear the black racists try to justify this by bringing up the myth of rampant rape of black women by white slave owners. First off, all those people are DEAD. NO ONE TODAY HAS A DAMN THING TO DO WITH IT. So it is completely IRRELEVANT. But aside from that, only 5% of the wealthiest SOUTHERNERS were slaveowners (and most whites were in the North were there were few blacks), and furthermore, slaves operated pretty autonomously on the plantations, and slave owners did not go around raping slave women because that would have completely disrupted the economic operation of the plantation and the products of such acts would have scandalized the family and the community (see Nobel prize winning author’s book “Time On the Cross” for instance).
Posted by at 9:32 PM on January 6
Black racist juries REGULARLY railroad innocent whites. But it is never made an issue. (Just look at what the black lynch mobs were wanting to do to those innocent white boys in Durham last year.) A good example was the Maurice Green case in Detroit where two innocent white cops were railroaded by black racists both in and out of the courtroom.
Posted by at 9:39 PM on January 6
Interesting post, Charles B Tiffany! I was on a NYC jury once, maybe three quarters white, where the prosecutor, who was a light skinned black woman, tried to convict a black man of attempted robbery. The accused looked like he was born to raise hell, looked like a pure devil, but the case against him just wasn’t good enough and we had no problem acquitting him. It was the case that mattered, not the individual.
Astrid
Posted by Astrid at 10:01 PM on January 6
Consensual sex does not end with stabbing. At the time of his arrest due to his DNA match with semen found on the victim, this garbage collector had served time for grand theft auto and burglery, had just been convicted of threatening to kill the mother of one of his two daughters, and had at least FIVE women pursuing restraining orders against him. He denied knowing her until the match, then claimed a friend had come with him and actually committed the murder. (The friend had an airtight alibi and was not charged).
Bruises like those, the juror supposedly said, can happen “when a big black guy beats up on a small woman.”
How is this a racist statement? IN CONTENT, they are discussing the guilt of whom? - A BIG BLACK MAN, for the murder of? A SMALL WOMAN. It is racist to assume that she might have STRUGGLED before being stabbed?
The big black man admitted to being present when she was murdered. It should be noted that the victim’s 1 1/2 year old daughter was left alone with her dead mother until discovered by a neighbor two days later.
Posted by at 12:06 AM on January 7
If white women would demonstrate self respect(most do) by not going with black men, a whole lot of things would be much clearer. Unfortunately with so many white women debasing themselves with mischegination and acting, talking black, the waters are muddied to begin with.
Posted by Petrarch at 10:53 PM on January 15