Quantcast
Connect with us

Court denies convict’s claim that his jury was tainted by black woman claiming she was ‘human’

Published

on

A Connecticut man failed in his attempt to have his conviction for assaulting public safety personnel overturned because, he claimed, state prosecutors discriminated against a potential juror who answered she was part of the “human” race during jury selection.

According to appeal filed on behalf of Michael Anthony Edwards, both his and the juror’s right to equal protection was violated when the prosecutor dismissed her for her response to a question about her race on the confidential juror questionnaire.

ADVERTISEMENT

During jury selection, the prosecutor asked the African-America woman — identified as “C.D.” in court documents — whether there was “anything in your background that would make it difficult for you to sit in judgment of other people?”

“Besides being human?” C.D. replied. “No.”

“What is it about the fact that you’re human that would make it difficult, you think?” the prosecutor asked.

“I think that all human beings come into their court experience with unique experiences, in my particular case with more — maybe some more jury experience, but I think that having served…has convinced me of the need to withhold judgment until all the facts are in. I think my experience probably biases me that way.”

“Have you,” the prosecutor asked, “any other experiences unique to you that you think might influence the work you do as a juror here?”

ADVERTISEMENT

“No,” C.D. replied, “I wouldn’t think so.”

“One last thing,” the prosecutor said, “I did note on your questionnaire…when you wrote down race, you wrote ‘human.’ Why did you do that?”

“Because that is the race I belong to,” C.D. answered.

ADVERTISEMENT

According to the prosecutor, he exercised his right to a peremptory challenge — thereby excluding her from the jury — because he found her response of “human” to the question of her race “to be of concern.” It “seemed outside the norm of what one would expect to have placed in the questionnaire box, and I just found that to be disconcerting and didn’t that someone who would fill in…a line like that would necessarily be appropriate to serve as a juror.”

But a defense attorney said he would have answered the question the same way, and that the prosecutor’s line of questioning with C.D. was intended to be discriminatory.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Did the peremptory challenge against an otherwise qualified minority [C.D.] solely on the basis of her racial self-identification in the juror questionnaire deprive the defendant and [C.D.] of their rights to equal protection of the law?” the appeal asked. “And, in the exercise of its supervisory authority over the administration of justice, should this court disallow the use of racial self-identification in juror questionnaires as a ground for a peremptory challenge?”

The state supreme court acknowledged that the prosecutor had prodded C.D. about her answer to the question of her race, but that his line of questioning was “race neutral,” as it “had to do with an ‘unusual’ response to the juror questionnaire.”

“We agree with the state that the defendant’s and C.D.’s rights to equal protection of the law were not violated,” the court decided, “and the invocation of our supervisory powers is inappropriate in the present case.”

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

House Republicans have 3 key defenses of Trump’s Ukraine extortion campaign — and they’re all terrible

Published

on

To any halfway objective observer, the first day of public hearings in House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, which are ongoing as of this writing, have not gone well for Trump’s defenders.

Bill Taylor, the top US ambassador in Kyiv, and veteran State Department official George Kent came off as principled and non-partisan as they delivered damning testimony about the Trump regime’s multifaceted campaign to coerce the Ukrainian government to announce an investigation into fringe right-wing conspiracy theories designed to deflect blame for interfering in the 2016 election from Russia and onto Ukraine.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Progressives hilariously ridicule Donald Trump Jr.’s new book with their own Trump triggers #TriggerDonaldTrumpJr

Published

on

President Donald Trump's eldest child and namesake has published a book about liberals he says are "triggered" by conservatives. Ironically, it seems Donald Trump Jr. is the one who seems to be triggered by the reception he's getting from some on his book tour.

The hashtag, #TriggerDonaldTrumpJr has nothing to do with Jr's new book, rather it's progressives using his book title to mock the Trump child. Internet users were torn between mocking the young Trump for desperately trying to get his father's attention, scrambling to seem relevant, trying to launch his own political career, trying to make his own money and so much more.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

‘Blather and hysteria’: Conservative columnist explains why GOP anti-impeachment ‘antics’ just crashed and burned

Published

on

devin nunes defeat

Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, Rep. Devin Nunes of California and other House Republicans were clearly trying to rally the Trumpian base on Wednesday, when the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump offered its first public testimony. Jordan and Nunes aggressively tried to discredit the inquiry and the two witnesses who testified: diplomat William B. Taylor (U.S. ambassador to Ukraine) and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George P. Kent. But conservative Washington Post opinion writer Jennifer Rubin, in a Wednesday column, stressed that House Republicans — for all their “antics and conspiracy theories” — failed to show why Trump shouldn’t be impeached, while House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff and other House Democrats showed why he should.

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image