No Jews or Black Women on Death Penalty Cases

[CBL4]

The California Supreme Court ordered the hearing in San Jose to investigate the sworn statement of John "Jack" Quatman, who said he and other lawyers in the Alameda County district attorney's office routinely used peremptory challenges to keep Jews and black women off juries in capital cases.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/21/jurors.ethnicity.ap/index.html

Jury challenges are one of the worst aspect of our judicial system. The goal of a jury of one's peers is to have a representative random sample of people. Biased people should be removed but, otherwise, everyone should get to sit on a jury.

If 20% of the people will never sentence someone to death, then it should be almost impossible to have a death sentence.

CBL

[Mycroft]

I wonder if they ask them if they're Jewish? Or do they just go by last name?

[Grammatron]

Can someone help me out with the connection these two groups have?

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Grammatron
Can someone help me out with the connection these two groups have?

Read the article. The prosecutor and the judge both felt that neither group "would send anyone to the gas chamber."

[American]

Probably did it on purpose knowing certain people would make a stink about it later.

[Bruce]

Originally posted by CBL4

If 20% of the people will never sentence someone to death, then it should be almost impossible to have a death sentence.

CBL

What a coincidence! Did you know that 80% of statistics are incorrect?

[gnome]

I had the concept of peremptory challenges explained to me once, and I get it.

Originally jurors could only be removed for cause, which led to extensive fighting over challenges that were basically fabricated in order to remove an undesirable juror. As a result, the system generally changed so that each side gets a certain number (3 usually) of "peremptory challenges" where they can remove a juror without stating a reason. Any challenges beyond that had to be for cause.

It's not perfect, but I see why it's preferable to the alternative.

[CBL4]

What a coincidence! Did you know that 80% of statistics are incorrect?I meant to used that figure as an example not as a real number. I should have said so. My mistake.

[Whoracle]

Thats what happens when you have a system more concerned over winning and losing than actual justice.

[CBL4]

I had the concept of peremptory challenges explained to me once, and I get it.First of all, I was not only talking about peremptory challenge. If a random selection of people feel that a law is too unjust to allow a certain verdict (e.g. death penalty or smoking pot), then I do not believe the the defendant should be found guilty. As long as their is no bias for or against the defendent, a random sample is appropriate.

As far as the peremptory challenges, I think the cure is worse than the problem. I think the judge should be the arbitor.

I have been in a jury where the prosecutor eliminated everyone who appeared to understand and willing to enforce the law. From what I could tell in the jury selection, the man was clearly guilty of not registering as a sex offender but it was unclear which state he had was living in at the time. Unless that was known, no state could convict him.

CBL