Race and Minorities in the Jury Box - Assignment Example

Race and Minorities in the Jury Box Abstract This paper looks at the process of selecting members of a jury and the occasions of inclusion, or non-inclusion, of minorities and races in the jury composition. In research, it is shown that the South in the United States, tends to have more Whites on a jury than in other states, thus setting the stage for accusations of racial and minority discrimination. The idea of setting aside a certain amount of seats to be filled by minorities, is one potential solution of avoiding those accusations. Ultimately, the system as it stands now, gives lawyers a chance to choose after hearing people answer questions and getting a feel for who these people are. The selection is most difficult when it is a high-profile case and everyone has heard of the defendant. Introduction In 2006, it was estimated through the United States Bureau of Justice statistics, that over 1.1 million adults were convicted of felonies and, of this amount, 38% were Black. Most of these cases were handled in state courts and, those who had been arrested and remained in jail, had their cases handled more quickly than others did. Mainly this was due to the fact that most could not hire a lawyer or post bail (Gabbidon & Greene, 2013). There are several processes in how cases move forward to a trial, but once it does, and the case requires a jury, then there will be a session where members of the public are requested to appear for potential selection to act as a juror in the case. This paper concerns the process of jury selection and how it can be biased by race and minority composition, or lack of it (Gabbidon & Greene, 2013). When it comes to jury selection, there has been considerable discourse about the make-up of jurors and whether jurors should be the same race as the defendant, or not the same race as the defendant, or a mixture (AP, 2008). If it is to be a mixture, then determining what percentage of each race or minority should it be, is usually the crux of the problem (EJI, 2010). As a person has the right to be judged by a jury of his or her peers, according to the United States Constitution (Gabbidon & Greene, 2013), then the question might be whether it should be the same race, gender, social standing or economic standing. If it is a foreigner on trial, then should the court system find 12 people from the defendant’s country who have become United States citizens? 1.When determining suitable jurors for a trial, it is never made publicly clear why lawyers might choose one juror over another. However, some policymakers and legal scholars have now proposed reforms to ensure that there is sufficient variety of racial minorities on any given jury. While the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was created to eliminate racial discrimination in jury selection, yet it still does exist, and it happens more often in Southern states (EJI, 2010). Some counties have excluded almost 80% of qualified Blacks in selecting juries in counties that have a majority population of Blacks, citing obscure reasons such as being single, married, too old, too young, for having attended black colleges, or not having attended college, having an out-of-wedlock child, and even for how they walk (EJI, 2010). It can also be a case of religious views or tendencies to not want to send someone to jail (AP, 2008). How this detailed information was obtained is unclear unless it was through interviews or surveys with lawyers. In justifying reforms for the composition of a jury, the primary factor that should hold sway is that any prospective juror must demonstrate an understanding of the legal process, and a willingness to not be biased. 2. The jury composition should be made of all races, not just all White or all Black, or all Hispanic (EJI, 2010). Lawyers should make a reasonable attempt at including all races and minorities, when possible. Yet, as lawyers are also responsible for making their cases, then it also stands to reason that they would want to have jurors who have an intelligence of understanding what is expected of them in a legal capacity and that they would pick those, regardless of race or other factors, to be on the jury (Fukurai, 2013). As not all people are Black or White, wealthy or poor, male or female, married or single, and so on, the intelligence to understand the process of the court is the most important part. If the jury pool for jury selection is not satisfactory for the purposes of the lawyers involved, then a new pool of potential jurors should be called. If racial determination is the biggest factor, then it might be best to just randomly select jurors from names put into a bowl and choose them like a lottery. In the O.J. Simpson trial on robbery and kidnapping charges in 2008, an all-White jury was selected and defense lawyers claimed that Blacks were being purposely excluded from the jury composition, although two alternate jurors were black (AP, 2008). The judge refused to release the juror questionnaires, citing a promise that she would not release them. District Attorney David Roger gave his reason for excluding two female Black women from the main jury panel, say that one had declared she had strong religious views and the other was unlikely to convict anyone, no matter what. Simpson’s defense attorneys, who were both Black, moved to have the jury dismissed and to start the selection process over again (AP, 2008). It was denied by the Judge. On October 4, 2008, Simpson and co-defendant, Clarence Stewart, were found guilty on 12 charges of armed robbery and kidnapping (Vercammen, 2008). As a side note, the Simpson murder trial, in 1995, had a predominantly Black composition and it acquitted Simpson of murder charges (AP, 2008). On the face of it, both cases had juries which may have been biased, yet that would be hard to prove. It also proves inherently, in cases of famous people, such as O.J. Simpson, it may be hard to find a jury that is unbiased in one way or another (EJI, 2010). Yet, that is the make-up of the general American population and ultimately, the burden of guilt must be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. 3.In retrospect, lawyers should have the right to pick their jurors and that would include both sides of the case (EJI, 2010). One side could pick six people and the other side picks six people. Yet, if it is truly shown that there is a severe racial and minority divide, particularly on a consistent basis in a specific county, then, perhaps the lottery process should be used, but even this is flawed. By this process, the jurors selected, arrive at the courthouse, sign in and then they have their names put into a bowl. The lawyers on both sides pick out six names each. This would be the way to ensure total fairness in selection but does not give the lawyers a chance to find out if someone is biased a certain way and therefore, likely to vote a certain way, regardless of the evidence. This might invite a preponderance of hung juries and more defendants would have to have another trial, or else go free, merely on a technicality (Fukarai, 2013). In the case of selecting a number of seats to be filled by minorities, for example, 3 out of 12, then, perhaps this is one way to ensure the equality of the jury (EJI, 2010). It would have to be tried yet the fact is that this can still be a biased procedure as minorities could be selected on how nice they are and most likely to accede to the general vote. Conclusion The system of selecting a jury is probably the best one we can come up with at the present time. When jurors are asked to answer questions in front of a crowd in the process of voir dire, it gives the lawyers and the judge a chance to see who the people are (Bennett, n.d.). It also ensures that jurors are picked who are able to sit on the jury rather than possibly acquiring some jurors who, physically or mentally, cannot handle the process (Bennett, n.d.). The six choices given to each side through voir dire seems the most likely to succeed at this time. Resources AP. (2008). Jury selected in O.J. Simpson robbery trial, but no blacks in main panel, Fox News Online. Available from May 20, 2013. Bennett, C.E. (n.d.). Voir Dire questions. Cathy E. Bennett & Associates, Inc. Available from May 20, 2013. EJI. (2010). Illegal racial discrimination in jury selection: A continuing legacy. Equal Justice Initiative, Montgomery, AL. Available from May 20, 2013. Fukurai, H. (2013). Social de-construction of race and affirmative action in jury selection. Berkeley Journal of African-American Law & Policy, 4(1). Available from May 20, 2013. Gabbidon, S.L., & Greene, H.T. (2013). Race and Crime (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. Vercammen, P. (2008). O.J. Simpson guilty of armed robbery, kidnapping, CNN News Online. Available from May 20, 2013. Read More