Jury selection in the #AhmaudArbery trial: 🧵
It was reported today that the judge presiding over the trial of 3 white men accused of murdering Ahmaud Arbery "found that there appears to be intentional discrimination" by the defense attorneys in their exclusion of black jurors.
It was reported today that the judge presiding over the trial of 3 white men accused of murdering Ahmaud Arbery "found that there appears to be intentional discrimination" by the defense attorneys in their exclusion of black jurors.
The result was that the jury that will hear this case is composed of 11 whites and 1 black member.
How did this happen?
During jury selection, both the prosecution and the defense attorneys can use what are known as peremptory challenges, meaning they can strike prospective ...
How did this happen?
During jury selection, both the prosecution and the defense attorneys can use what are known as peremptory challenges, meaning they can strike prospective ...
... jurors for any reason or no reason at all. But they can't strike jurors based on their race. In Batson v. Kentucky (1985), the US SCt ruled that striking jurors on the basis of race is unconstitutional. If one party challenges the other party's strikes as racially...
...motivated, the party making the strikes needs to offer a race-neutral reason. The judge must then decide whether the race-neutral reason is credible, or whether the real reason for the strikes was racially motivated.
In this case, the defense attorneys struck eight prospective jurors who were black. The prosecutors challenged this patterns of strikes, arguing that it was unconstitutionally based on race.
According to press reports, the judge here seemed to believe that all the defense...
According to press reports, the judge here seemed to believe that all the defense...
...attorneys needed to do was articulate a race-neutral reason. If the reporting is correct, the judge misunderstood the law. Articulating a race-neutral reason doesn't end the analysis. Once such a reason is articulated, the judge must determine whether it is credible.
The press reporting suggests that the judge missed that last step.
P.S. Batson was a case involving race-based peremptory strikes by the prosecution. The SCt extended the same principle to defense attorneys in the case of Georgia v. McCollum (1992).
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
