Supreme Court rules black death row inmate had unfair jury
The court ruled that black jurors were barred from his trial almost 30 years ago.
Click here for reuse options!The 7-1 verdict, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, reversed the conviction of Georgia inmate Timothy Foster for the murder of an elderly white woman and is likely to fuel contentions from death penalty opponents that capital punishment is racially discriminatory.
What brought Foster’s case back to court after three decades was a series of prosecution notes obtained by defense lawyers through an open-records request. While jurors were being picked, prosecutors had highlighted the names of African Americans, circled the word “black” on questionnaires, and added notations such as “B#1” and “B#2.” On a sheet labeled “definite NO’s,” they put the last five blacks in the jury pool on top. And they ranked them in case “it comes down to having to pick one of the black jurors.”
Copyright 2016 Liberaland
6 responses to Supreme Court rules black death row inmate had unfair jury
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hirightnow May 23rd, 2016 at 11:30
If their evidence wasn’t enough to convict the guy with a mixed-race jury, maybe their evidence wasn’t so good…
Nooooo.
No racism there.
mistlesuede May 23rd, 2016 at 13:18
Exactly.
anothertoothpick May 23rd, 2016 at 13:05
Justice Clarence Thomas, a conservative and the only black member of the court, was the sole dissenter.
OldLefty May 23rd, 2016 at 13:14
Trump said he wants more like him.
He said Thomas is underrated.
Trump specifically praised Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, the two most conservative justices on the Supreme Court. “Justice Thomas doesn’t get enough credit,” Trump said. “He’s a wonderful man, he’s a wonderful guy.”
After criticizing Chief Justice John Roberts as not being conservative enough, and attacking Ted Cruz for promoting his nomination, Trump said he would appoint “pro-life” justices who are “very conservative” and “like Judge Scalia.”
Perhaps he would replace Clinton’s Ginsberg with Pryor who believes that states should be allowed to criminalize homosexual activity.
That would REALLY stick it to the Clintons!!!
mistlesuede May 23rd, 2016 at 13:20
SMH
It boggles the mind.
bpollen May 23rd, 2016 at 16:10
7-1? That’s stunning (Thomas is an idiot without the savant part.) Though Scalia ain’t there… he’s the guy who said innocence was not a valid reason to overturn a conviction.