Posted on 05/14/2007 9:00:33 AM PDT by AmericaOutloud
The California Supreme Court, in a rare move, finally got involved in the war of words over the county's demographics. Earlier this week, it halted the proceedings in a double homicide case and agreed to review Hanlon's request for a change of venue, based on the "racial imbalance" of overwhelmingly white Lake County -- a land where dirt roads and double-wides coexist with wine country aspirations.
(Excerpt) Read more at americaoutloud.org ...
From: http://www.americaoutloud.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1514
I knew this would happen one day. Whenever the standard is that a minority population has to match the national percentage, you will never have a perfectly even pool to draw from which to draw.
Indeed, they must view this from the opposite perspective and ask if a member of a majority could object to a predominantly minority jury.
I change of venue on these grounds is probably against the constitution. It’s simply a wrong decision, but who is going to challege the California Supreme Court on this, not the prosecutors, I’m sure. This is just another case of post modern restorative justice. The poor Blacks have been mistreated by whites in the US forever and so they should be given every advantage that the court system has to offer.
What about Asians and Latinos and Indians?........This could get really silly real quick........
WOW! I didn't know California was part of the Confederacy!.......
Is there a “black view” on the appropriateness of armed robbery and murder of a drug dealer that would otherwise not be represented on the jury? ;)
Why yes, haven’t you heard?
The proper “black view” is that all whites and republicans are guilty. All democrats are innocent. Only whites are racist.
Nifong made that arguement recently didn’t he?
Had a similar situation here where a Black, deaf woman killed her lesbian lover’s girlfriend and hacked her body into pieces with a chainsaw. There were attempts to declare a mistrial because the randomly selected jury pool did not include Blacks(less than 1% of the population in the area)or the hearing impaired. Motions for a mistrial were denied and the 11 woman 1 man jury convicted her of murder.
Oh, according the leftist meta narrative, all white men are guilty of abusing the Blacks, mentally if not in actuallity. All whites have created a system which is designed to prop up the whites and hold down the Blacks, so they (the leftists) think that the court system should be bent in favor of the Blacks to make up for past injustices.
Get it? No, I didn’t think that you would because it doesn’t make any real sense, but that is what we are experiencing in case after case, all around the country. They are tearing the constitution apart and rebuilding it in the image of socialist Europe.
What you said; it cuts both ways.
Lawyers for medical lawsuits like inner-city juries. Will defendants be able to demand change of venue if this happens?
It is a problem, the divide between city and suburban courts. Maybe the thing to do is merge the city courts into the surrounding counties?
I know, not likely.
Here’s an interesting thought ... declare that justice is truly blind and that there is no relief to be had from complaining about the demographics of the jury pool. Commit the crime in an area where you are a minority (black, white, male, female, martian ...), and your fate will rest in the hands of your “peers” from that locale. Go forth and sin no more!
Race isn't the only demographic, though it is in this case.
What about too few Muslims? They see things differently since the koran instructs them. And of course, that leads to a slippery slope even quicker.
Or what about gay defendants? Will we have to find an all gay jury? Deliberations might take weeks, months even...........
Just drop the word “Case” and you’ve got something!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.