NC Judge Invokes “Racial Justice Act,” Sets Aside Death Penalty

Full story here:

 http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/21/justice/north-carolina-death-revoked/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

The response from the North Carolina Association of District Attorneys is “interesting” and entirely predictable (sadly).

One response to “NC Judge Invokes “Racial Justice Act,” Sets Aside Death Penalty

  1. Docile Jim Brady – Columbus OH 43209

    Thank you Phil.

    At times , North Carolina , appears to have a vertical learning curve.

    To my knowledge , Brunson v. North Carolina, 333 U.S. 851 , is the shortest opinion of our Supreme Court. It was the single word “Reversed” and tucked in the back of Volume 333 .

    » As is shown by the record in this Court of Brunson v. North Carolina, 333 U.S. 851, tried in North Carolina in October, 1946, Forsyth County, with its large Negro population, at that time had a jury pool of 10,622 white and 255 colored citizens. At that time, a sheriff, then in office for 10 years, testified that he had summoned only about twelve Negroes for jury service in that time. In 1949, the jury box was purged. All those listing taxes and eligible were listed for jury service, with the result in this case shown above.

    » Discriminations against a race by barring or limiting citizens of that race from participation in jury service are odious to our thought and our Constitution. This has long been accepted as the law. Brunson v. North Carolina, 333 U.S. 851; Cassell v. Texas, 339 U. S. 282, 339 U. S. 286-

    Page 344 U. S. 471

    » 287; State v. Peoples, 131 N.C. 784, 42 S.E. 814. Such discrimination is forbidden by statute, 18 U.S.C. § 243, and has been treated as a denial of equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment to an accused, of the race against which such discrimination is directed. Neal v. Delaware, 103 U. S. 370. The discrimination forbidden is racial discrimination, however, directed to accomplish the result of eliminating or limiting the service of the proscribed race by statute or by practice. Smith v. Texas, 311 U. S. 128; Patton v. Mississippi, 332 U. S. 463. «

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s