

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
In hundreds of trials over 10 years, prosecutors in a Louisiana county rejected potential black jurors three times as often as they rejected potential jurors of other races--a trend which is reflected in court systems around the country, new reporting published Monday has found.
Blackstrikes: A Study of the Racially Disparate Use of Peremptory Challenges by the Caddo Parish District Attorney's Office (pdf), published by Reprieve Australia, analyzed 332 trials between 2003 and 2012.
While the report focuses on one region of Louisiana, additional research by the New York Times connects those statistics to others from nationwide courts.
In the U.S., peremptory challenges allow attorneys to reject jurors without giving a reason. However, if those dismissals are disputed based on race or gender, prosecutors must give a "neutral" excuse for the decision. According to the Times, such reasons include having long hair, wearing a beard, living in a low-income neighborhood, failing to meet eye contact, having a hyphenated last name, or displaying bad posture, among others. In Caddo, the study found that prosecutors rejected 46 percent of potential black jurors on peremptory grounds.
"Not one defendant was acquitted in a trial where there were two or fewer black jurors," writes Ursula Noye, vice president of Reprieve Australia and the study's author. "The acquittal rate in the 49 trials where the number of black jurors was three or more was 12 [percent]. In trials with five or more black jurors, defendants are acquitted 19 [percent] of the time."
Out of 8,318 potential jurors analyzed during those 10 years, only 35 percent were black--though Caddo's population is 48 percent black. The reasons for that discrepancy, according to Northwestern University School of Law professor Shari Diamond, could themselves be influenced by other racially skewed elements of the American justice system.
Diamond told the Times that "[b]lacks may be less likely to be on jury lists drawn from voter registration records, less likely to appear when called, more likely to qualify for hardship exemptions and more likely to be disqualified for felony convictions."
However, of those 35 percent, prosecutors rejected nearly half through peremptory challenges, while only 15 percent of other potential jurors were rejected on similar grounds.
According to the report:
A statistical analysis of this disparity shows that the difference is significant. Some individual prosecutors struck black prospective jurors at rates of 4.5 and 5 times the rate they struck those who are not black.
While a disparity in the rate of strikes between prospective jurors who are black and not black may be subject to innocent explanation, the consistently high blackstrikes rate across 332 trials over ten years indicates otherwise. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the pattern disclosed in this study strongly suggests that race has played a role in the exercise of peremptory challenges by the Caddo Parish District Attorney's office.
As part of the national trend, the Times reports:
[I]n Alabama, Louisiana and North Carolina...prosecutors struck black jurors at double or triple the rates of others.
In Georgia, prosecutors excluded every black prospective juror in a death penalty case against a black defendant, which the Supreme Court has agreed to review this fall.
"If you repeatedly see all-white juries convict African-Americans, what does that do to public confidence in the criminal justice system?" asked Elisabeth A. Semel, the director of the death penalty clinic at the law school at the University of California, Berkeley.
In a 1987 death penalty case in Georgia, a 34-year-old black woman was excluded from the jury for being too close in age to the defendant, a 19-year-old black man. However, the prosecutors did not challenge the eight potential white jurors who were 35 or younger.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear Foster v. Chatman later this year. The Times writes that the Court's decision may change the jury selection process.
Recent human rights protests around the country have highlighted deep-seated institutional racism in the American judicial system, such as the New York Police Department's racial profiling policies, the criminalization of poverty found in Ferguson, Missouri, or decades of off-the-books torture carried out against majority-black detainees on secret sites in Chicago. However, Noye's report exposes the extent those systems can reach. "Next to voting," she told the Times, serving on a jury is "perhaps the most important civil right."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
In hundreds of trials over 10 years, prosecutors in a Louisiana county rejected potential black jurors three times as often as they rejected potential jurors of other races--a trend which is reflected in court systems around the country, new reporting published Monday has found.
Blackstrikes: A Study of the Racially Disparate Use of Peremptory Challenges by the Caddo Parish District Attorney's Office (pdf), published by Reprieve Australia, analyzed 332 trials between 2003 and 2012.
While the report focuses on one region of Louisiana, additional research by the New York Times connects those statistics to others from nationwide courts.
In the U.S., peremptory challenges allow attorneys to reject jurors without giving a reason. However, if those dismissals are disputed based on race or gender, prosecutors must give a "neutral" excuse for the decision. According to the Times, such reasons include having long hair, wearing a beard, living in a low-income neighborhood, failing to meet eye contact, having a hyphenated last name, or displaying bad posture, among others. In Caddo, the study found that prosecutors rejected 46 percent of potential black jurors on peremptory grounds.
"Not one defendant was acquitted in a trial where there were two or fewer black jurors," writes Ursula Noye, vice president of Reprieve Australia and the study's author. "The acquittal rate in the 49 trials where the number of black jurors was three or more was 12 [percent]. In trials with five or more black jurors, defendants are acquitted 19 [percent] of the time."
Out of 8,318 potential jurors analyzed during those 10 years, only 35 percent were black--though Caddo's population is 48 percent black. The reasons for that discrepancy, according to Northwestern University School of Law professor Shari Diamond, could themselves be influenced by other racially skewed elements of the American justice system.
Diamond told the Times that "[b]lacks may be less likely to be on jury lists drawn from voter registration records, less likely to appear when called, more likely to qualify for hardship exemptions and more likely to be disqualified for felony convictions."
However, of those 35 percent, prosecutors rejected nearly half through peremptory challenges, while only 15 percent of other potential jurors were rejected on similar grounds.
According to the report:
A statistical analysis of this disparity shows that the difference is significant. Some individual prosecutors struck black prospective jurors at rates of 4.5 and 5 times the rate they struck those who are not black.
While a disparity in the rate of strikes between prospective jurors who are black and not black may be subject to innocent explanation, the consistently high blackstrikes rate across 332 trials over ten years indicates otherwise. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the pattern disclosed in this study strongly suggests that race has played a role in the exercise of peremptory challenges by the Caddo Parish District Attorney's office.
As part of the national trend, the Times reports:
[I]n Alabama, Louisiana and North Carolina...prosecutors struck black jurors at double or triple the rates of others.
In Georgia, prosecutors excluded every black prospective juror in a death penalty case against a black defendant, which the Supreme Court has agreed to review this fall.
"If you repeatedly see all-white juries convict African-Americans, what does that do to public confidence in the criminal justice system?" asked Elisabeth A. Semel, the director of the death penalty clinic at the law school at the University of California, Berkeley.
In a 1987 death penalty case in Georgia, a 34-year-old black woman was excluded from the jury for being too close in age to the defendant, a 19-year-old black man. However, the prosecutors did not challenge the eight potential white jurors who were 35 or younger.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear Foster v. Chatman later this year. The Times writes that the Court's decision may change the jury selection process.
Recent human rights protests around the country have highlighted deep-seated institutional racism in the American judicial system, such as the New York Police Department's racial profiling policies, the criminalization of poverty found in Ferguson, Missouri, or decades of off-the-books torture carried out against majority-black detainees on secret sites in Chicago. However, Noye's report exposes the extent those systems can reach. "Next to voting," she told the Times, serving on a jury is "perhaps the most important civil right."
In hundreds of trials over 10 years, prosecutors in a Louisiana county rejected potential black jurors three times as often as they rejected potential jurors of other races--a trend which is reflected in court systems around the country, new reporting published Monday has found.
Blackstrikes: A Study of the Racially Disparate Use of Peremptory Challenges by the Caddo Parish District Attorney's Office (pdf), published by Reprieve Australia, analyzed 332 trials between 2003 and 2012.
While the report focuses on one region of Louisiana, additional research by the New York Times connects those statistics to others from nationwide courts.
In the U.S., peremptory challenges allow attorneys to reject jurors without giving a reason. However, if those dismissals are disputed based on race or gender, prosecutors must give a "neutral" excuse for the decision. According to the Times, such reasons include having long hair, wearing a beard, living in a low-income neighborhood, failing to meet eye contact, having a hyphenated last name, or displaying bad posture, among others. In Caddo, the study found that prosecutors rejected 46 percent of potential black jurors on peremptory grounds.
"Not one defendant was acquitted in a trial where there were two or fewer black jurors," writes Ursula Noye, vice president of Reprieve Australia and the study's author. "The acquittal rate in the 49 trials where the number of black jurors was three or more was 12 [percent]. In trials with five or more black jurors, defendants are acquitted 19 [percent] of the time."
Out of 8,318 potential jurors analyzed during those 10 years, only 35 percent were black--though Caddo's population is 48 percent black. The reasons for that discrepancy, according to Northwestern University School of Law professor Shari Diamond, could themselves be influenced by other racially skewed elements of the American justice system.
Diamond told the Times that "[b]lacks may be less likely to be on jury lists drawn from voter registration records, less likely to appear when called, more likely to qualify for hardship exemptions and more likely to be disqualified for felony convictions."
However, of those 35 percent, prosecutors rejected nearly half through peremptory challenges, while only 15 percent of other potential jurors were rejected on similar grounds.
According to the report:
A statistical analysis of this disparity shows that the difference is significant. Some individual prosecutors struck black prospective jurors at rates of 4.5 and 5 times the rate they struck those who are not black.
While a disparity in the rate of strikes between prospective jurors who are black and not black may be subject to innocent explanation, the consistently high blackstrikes rate across 332 trials over ten years indicates otherwise. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the pattern disclosed in this study strongly suggests that race has played a role in the exercise of peremptory challenges by the Caddo Parish District Attorney's office.
As part of the national trend, the Times reports:
[I]n Alabama, Louisiana and North Carolina...prosecutors struck black jurors at double or triple the rates of others.
In Georgia, prosecutors excluded every black prospective juror in a death penalty case against a black defendant, which the Supreme Court has agreed to review this fall.
"If you repeatedly see all-white juries convict African-Americans, what does that do to public confidence in the criminal justice system?" asked Elisabeth A. Semel, the director of the death penalty clinic at the law school at the University of California, Berkeley.
In a 1987 death penalty case in Georgia, a 34-year-old black woman was excluded from the jury for being too close in age to the defendant, a 19-year-old black man. However, the prosecutors did not challenge the eight potential white jurors who were 35 or younger.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear Foster v. Chatman later this year. The Times writes that the Court's decision may change the jury selection process.
Recent human rights protests around the country have highlighted deep-seated institutional racism in the American judicial system, such as the New York Police Department's racial profiling policies, the criminalization of poverty found in Ferguson, Missouri, or decades of off-the-books torture carried out against majority-black detainees on secret sites in Chicago. However, Noye's report exposes the extent those systems can reach. "Next to voting," she told the Times, serving on a jury is "perhaps the most important civil right."