A Toadie Who H**es His Own More Than Others-A Sad,Troubled Man
May 23, 2016 22:10:14 #
Supreme Court Finds Racial Bias in Jury Se******n for Death Penalty Case
By ADAM LIPTAKMAY 23, 2016
Timothy T. Foster was sentenced to death by an all-white jury in Georgia in 1987 for k*****g an elderly white woman. Credit Georgia Department of Corrections
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that prosecutors in Georgia violated the Constitution by striking every black prospective juror in a death penalty case against a black defendant. The v**e was 7 to 1, with Justice Clarence Thomas dissenting.
The case, Foster v. Chatman, No. 14-8349, arose from the 1987 trial of Timothy T. Foster, an African-American facing the death penalty for k*****g Queen Madge White, an elderly white woman, when he was 18.
In notes that did not surface until decades later, prosecutors marked the names of black prospective jurors with a B and highlighted those names in green. They circled the word “black” where potential jurors had noted their race on questionnaires.
They ranked those prospective jurors in case “it comes down to having to pick one of the black jurors,” as the prosecution’s investigator put it in a draft affidavit at the time. In the end, prosecutors struck all four black potential jurors.
After Mr. Foster was convicted, Stephen Lanier, the lead prosecutor, urged the all-white jury to impose a death sentence to “deter other people out there in the projects.” The jury did so.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, said the prosecutors had violated a 1986 decision, Batson v. Kentucky, in which the Supreme Court ruled that race-based discrimination in jury se******n was unconstitutional and required lawyers accused of it to provide a nondiscriminatory explanation.
That is a forgiving standard. “All I have to do is have a race-neutral reason,” Mr. Lanier said at the time, “and all of these reasons that I have given the court are racially neutral.”
GRAPHIC
How a Vacancy on the Supreme Court Affects Cases in the 2015-16 Term
The empty seat left by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death leaves the court with two basic options for cases left on the docket this term if the justices are deadlocked at 4 to 4.
OPEN GRAPHIC
But Chief Justice Roberts rejected several of Mr. Lanier’s reasons, calling them pretextual. The chief justice focused on two prospective jurors, Marilyn Garrett and Eddie Hood.
Mr. Lanier had offered a list of 11 reasons for striking Ms. Garrett, including that she was too young.
“Yet Garrett was 34,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “and the state declined to strike eight white prospective jurors under the age of 36. Two of those white jurors served on the jury; one of those two was only 21 years old.”
Mr. Lanier also said Ms. Garrett was unfit to serve because she was divorced. But, the chief justice wrote, Mr. Lanier “declined to strike three out of the four prospective white jurors who were also divorced.”
Mr. Lanier gave eight reasons for striking a second prospective juror, Mr. Hood, including that his son was the same age as the defendant and had been convicted of a crime that was, he said, “basically the same thing that this defendant is charged with.”
Chief Justice Roberts called this “nonsense.”
“Hood’s son had received a 12-month suspended sentence for stealing hubcaps from a car in a mall parking lot five years earlier,” he wrote. “Foster was charged with capital murder of a 79-year-old widow after a brutal sexual assault.”
Mr. Lanier also said he doubted that Mr. Hood would impose the death penalty in light of his religious faith. “But the record persuades us that Hood’s race, and not his religious affiliation, was Lanier’s true motivation,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote.
Race/Related
Sign up here to join a deep and provocative exploration of race with a diverse group of New York Times journalists.
In sum, the chief justice wrote, “we are left with the firm conviction that the strikes of Garrett and Hood were motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent.”
The decision was narrowly focused on Mr. Foster’s jury se******n and is unlikely to have a broad impact. Evidence of the sort that surfaced in Mr. Foster’s case is rare, and the Batson decision is easy to evade.
Studies in Alabama, Louisiana and North Carolina have found that prosecutors use peremptory challenges two or three times more often to strike black potential jurors than to strike others.
Stephen B. Bright, a lawyer for Mr. Foster, now 48, said his client was “entitled to a new trial at which jurors are not excluded based on race.” But Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., in a concurrence, suggested that the state court in Georgia might still have a path to rule against Mr. Foster.
In dissent, Justice Thomas said the majority had not given enough deference to the trial judge’s assessment of the prospective jurors’ demeanor and of the prosecutors’ credibility.
For instance, Justice Thomas said, the judge determined that Mr. Hood had answered questions about the death penalty slowly and softly. Notes in the prosecutors’ files said the Church of Christ, of which Mr. Hood was a member, did not take a formal stand against capital punishment, Justice Thomas added.
“This new evidence supports the prosecution’s stated reason for striking Hood — that he, as a member of the Church of Christ, had taken an uncertain stance on capital punishment,” Justice Thomas wrote.
By ADAM LIPTAKMAY 23, 2016
Timothy T. Foster was sentenced to death by an all-white jury in Georgia in 1987 for k*****g an elderly white woman. Credit Georgia Department of Corrections
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that prosecutors in Georgia violated the Constitution by striking every black prospective juror in a death penalty case against a black defendant. The v**e was 7 to 1, with Justice Clarence Thomas dissenting.
The case, Foster v. Chatman, No. 14-8349, arose from the 1987 trial of Timothy T. Foster, an African-American facing the death penalty for k*****g Queen Madge White, an elderly white woman, when he was 18.
In notes that did not surface until decades later, prosecutors marked the names of black prospective jurors with a B and highlighted those names in green. They circled the word “black” where potential jurors had noted their race on questionnaires.
They ranked those prospective jurors in case “it comes down to having to pick one of the black jurors,” as the prosecution’s investigator put it in a draft affidavit at the time. In the end, prosecutors struck all four black potential jurors.
After Mr. Foster was convicted, Stephen Lanier, the lead prosecutor, urged the all-white jury to impose a death sentence to “deter other people out there in the projects.” The jury did so.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, said the prosecutors had violated a 1986 decision, Batson v. Kentucky, in which the Supreme Court ruled that race-based discrimination in jury se******n was unconstitutional and required lawyers accused of it to provide a nondiscriminatory explanation.
That is a forgiving standard. “All I have to do is have a race-neutral reason,” Mr. Lanier said at the time, “and all of these reasons that I have given the court are racially neutral.”
GRAPHIC
How a Vacancy on the Supreme Court Affects Cases in the 2015-16 Term
The empty seat left by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death leaves the court with two basic options for cases left on the docket this term if the justices are deadlocked at 4 to 4.
OPEN GRAPHIC
But Chief Justice Roberts rejected several of Mr. Lanier’s reasons, calling them pretextual. The chief justice focused on two prospective jurors, Marilyn Garrett and Eddie Hood.
Mr. Lanier had offered a list of 11 reasons for striking Ms. Garrett, including that she was too young.
“Yet Garrett was 34,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “and the state declined to strike eight white prospective jurors under the age of 36. Two of those white jurors served on the jury; one of those two was only 21 years old.”
Mr. Lanier also said Ms. Garrett was unfit to serve because she was divorced. But, the chief justice wrote, Mr. Lanier “declined to strike three out of the four prospective white jurors who were also divorced.”
Mr. Lanier gave eight reasons for striking a second prospective juror, Mr. Hood, including that his son was the same age as the defendant and had been convicted of a crime that was, he said, “basically the same thing that this defendant is charged with.”
Chief Justice Roberts called this “nonsense.”
“Hood’s son had received a 12-month suspended sentence for stealing hubcaps from a car in a mall parking lot five years earlier,” he wrote. “Foster was charged with capital murder of a 79-year-old widow after a brutal sexual assault.”
Mr. Lanier also said he doubted that Mr. Hood would impose the death penalty in light of his religious faith. “But the record persuades us that Hood’s race, and not his religious affiliation, was Lanier’s true motivation,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote.
Race/Related
Sign up here to join a deep and provocative exploration of race with a diverse group of New York Times journalists.
In sum, the chief justice wrote, “we are left with the firm conviction that the strikes of Garrett and Hood were motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent.”
The decision was narrowly focused on Mr. Foster’s jury se******n and is unlikely to have a broad impact. Evidence of the sort that surfaced in Mr. Foster’s case is rare, and the Batson decision is easy to evade.
Studies in Alabama, Louisiana and North Carolina have found that prosecutors use peremptory challenges two or three times more often to strike black potential jurors than to strike others.
Stephen B. Bright, a lawyer for Mr. Foster, now 48, said his client was “entitled to a new trial at which jurors are not excluded based on race.” But Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., in a concurrence, suggested that the state court in Georgia might still have a path to rule against Mr. Foster.
In dissent, Justice Thomas said the majority had not given enough deference to the trial judge’s assessment of the prospective jurors’ demeanor and of the prosecutors’ credibility.
For instance, Justice Thomas said, the judge determined that Mr. Hood had answered questions about the death penalty slowly and softly. Notes in the prosecutors’ files said the Church of Christ, of which Mr. Hood was a member, did not take a formal stand against capital punishment, Justice Thomas added.
“This new evidence supports the prosecution’s stated reason for striking Hood — that he, as a member of the Church of Christ, had taken an uncertain stance on capital punishment,” Justice Thomas wrote.
May 23, 2016 22:35:28 #
Boo_Boo
Loc: Jellystone
Are you saying because he had an all white jury that he did not commit the crime? You do know that he confessed and the stolen property was recovered from his house? "Timothy Tyrone Foster, 29, was sentenced to death in Floyd County in May 1987. Mr. Foster confessed that on the night of Aug. 27, 1986, he broke into the home of Queen Madge White, 79. Her jaw was broken, she had gashes on the top of her head and she had been sexually assaulted and strangled.
Mr. Foster had a juvenile record including armed robbery. In July 1991, his case was sent back to the trial court on the issue of mental r****dation.
This is a death-penalty case. Queen Madge White, a 79-year-old widow, lived by herself in Rome, Georgia. Early in the evening of August 27, 1986, a friend took White to choir practice, and brought her home at 8:30 p.m. White talked to her sister by telephone at 9:00 p.m. and everything was normal. However, when the sister stopped by early the next morning, she discovered that White's house had been broken into and ransacked.
The sister called the police, who found White's body lying on the floor in her bedroom covered to her chin by a blanket. Her face was coated with talcum powder. Her jaw was broken. She had a severe gash on the top of her head. She had been sexually molested with a salad-dressing bottle, and strangled to death. A number of her possessions were missing from her home.
The appellant, Timothy Tyrone Foster, was arrested for White's murder a month later when he threatened his live-in companion and she responded by turning him in. The victim's possessions were recovered from their home and from Foster's two sisters. Foster was interrogated and confessed. A jury convicted him of malice murder and burglary, and sentenced him to death."
Now that he has succeed in gaining a new trial, with a more "race favorable" jury, I wonder how long it will be until he is out on the streets and will he be a repeat offender..... And how will this ruling affect other trials, will we now have all white jury for white, all black for b****s, and so on?
Mr. Foster had a juvenile record including armed robbery. In July 1991, his case was sent back to the trial court on the issue of mental r****dation.
This is a death-penalty case. Queen Madge White, a 79-year-old widow, lived by herself in Rome, Georgia. Early in the evening of August 27, 1986, a friend took White to choir practice, and brought her home at 8:30 p.m. White talked to her sister by telephone at 9:00 p.m. and everything was normal. However, when the sister stopped by early the next morning, she discovered that White's house had been broken into and ransacked.
The sister called the police, who found White's body lying on the floor in her bedroom covered to her chin by a blanket. Her face was coated with talcum powder. Her jaw was broken. She had a severe gash on the top of her head. She had been sexually molested with a salad-dressing bottle, and strangled to death. A number of her possessions were missing from her home.
The appellant, Timothy Tyrone Foster, was arrested for White's murder a month later when he threatened his live-in companion and she responded by turning him in. The victim's possessions were recovered from their home and from Foster's two sisters. Foster was interrogated and confessed. A jury convicted him of malice murder and burglary, and sentenced him to death."
Now that he has succeed in gaining a new trial, with a more "race favorable" jury, I wonder how long it will be until he is out on the streets and will he be a repeat offender..... And how will this ruling affect other trials, will we now have all white jury for white, all black for b****s, and so on?
A Democrat In 2016 wrote:
Supreme Court Finds Racial Bias in Jury Se******n ... (show quote)
May 23, 2016 23:00:54 #
who said "all white" or "all black" except you. who mentioned "race favorable" besides you? Those are concepts you live by, not the premise of this article or court case..........it is like the other case where the guy's race was used in a r****t manner when not used the same way with others. r****ts have no principles and to call themselves Christians-they are the most unGodly based on the degree of malice they show based on the race involved.
May 23, 2016 23:51:54 #
Boo_Boo
Loc: Jellystone
I believe if you read the article, that the complaint was "an all white jury." This implies that b****s should have a black jury in order to get "fair" treatment. The message sent to lawyers is simply, "you must have b****s jurors when trying a black." No it is not written or said out loud, but that is the message. You can surmise this from the one quote "Courts should know it might be there and be more vigilant in finding it." What is going on in this nation is simple, it is a tool that controlling people have "always" used, it is called the guilt tool. It is a powerful weapon, when people allow this to happen they will do anything to avoid feeling guilty. This often results in giving up dissenting opinions or rights. It is too late for America, the damage is done.
In the case of Timothy Tyrone Foster, an admitted murderer of an elderly woman.... not just murdered by strangulation but raped with a bottle... he will get a new trail and will probably be out on the streets again.... my question is...will he be a repeat offender. Statistically, 71 percent of those released from prison who were in prison due to violent crime repeat the offenses and are arrested within 5 years. When he is released, would you welcome him to the neighborhood where your mother lives?
For your information, I am not a Christian. So, you can take that tool, which is belittling me because of your views on religion and stuff it. This is just another tool that controlling personality frequently use. I can't wait to see if you employ the other 18 control tactics.
In the case of Timothy Tyrone Foster, an admitted murderer of an elderly woman.... not just murdered by strangulation but raped with a bottle... he will get a new trail and will probably be out on the streets again.... my question is...will he be a repeat offender. Statistically, 71 percent of those released from prison who were in prison due to violent crime repeat the offenses and are arrested within 5 years. When he is released, would you welcome him to the neighborhood where your mother lives?
For your information, I am not a Christian. So, you can take that tool, which is belittling me because of your views on religion and stuff it. This is just another tool that controlling personality frequently use. I can't wait to see if you employ the other 18 control tactics.
A Democrat In 2016 wrote:
who said "all white" or "all black" except you. who mentioned "race favorable" besides you? Those are concepts you live by, not the premise of this article or court case..........it is like the other case where the guy's race was used in a r****t manner when not used the same way with others. r****ts have no principles and to call themselves Christians-they are the most unGodly based on the degree of malice they show based on the race involved.
May 24, 2016 00:09:55 #
Pennylynn wrote:
I believe if you read the article, that the compla... (show quote)
people should have a jury of their peers that resembles America.you're old enough to know the history of jury makeup in America. Older w****s know even more than me about the history of America.and I read a lot. A whole lot. so they cannot pretend to be uninformed millenials..
May 24, 2016 00:12:50 #
Justice in America is not about skirting procedures to attain your preferred outcomes in a particular case.. People talk a lot of self-righteous BS...but I see they are not guided by principles. fairness, morality or any of those other vainglorious things they like to espouse.......
May 24, 2016 02:45:38 #
Boo_Boo
Loc: Jellystone
Really? Putting some on trial is a waste of money and effort. Most police officers already recognize this. Not about skirting procedures... what a laugh, .. one only has to look at the recent history of r**ts. And look at Simpson....what a miscarriage of justice! I know that I would try almost anything to get out of jury duty if the accused is black. I would not want my city burned down because I tried to do the right thing.
So, now I see you are on to the next "control" method. So, you can stuff the name calling. Keep going, I want to see if you will use all the "methods" of a controlling personality.
So, now I see you are on to the next "control" method. So, you can stuff the name calling. Keep going, I want to see if you will use all the "methods" of a controlling personality.
A Democrat In 2016 wrote:
Justice in America is not about skirting procedures to attain your preferred outcomes in a particular case.. People talk a lot of self-righteous BS...but I see they are not guided by principles. fairness, morality or any of those other vainglorious things they like to espouse.......
May 24, 2016 03:02:35 #
Pennylynn wrote:
Really? Putting some on trial is a waste of money... (show quote)
I understand the kind of people I am dealing with-the laws as written can be skirted to attain your preferred outcomes. You people are going to your graves with your upbringing. I grew up post civil rights but I was very informed to what was actually going on. I see why laws had to be enacted..........your generation is part of a legacy..it is so apparent in your thinking, you probably don't know how inherent it is to you...there is no reason to even entertain the dialogue..........your mind is made up.........no name calling.just the fact of the matter.
May 24, 2016 03:18:50 #
Boo_Boo
Loc: Jellystone
You know nothing about me, so stop pretending that you do. And, why make this personal? Should this thread not focus on the realities of jury se******n? Why there are so few "qualified" and "willing" b****s for jury duty? And now that Timothy's verdict is overturned, what will be the consequences? How many more will use this as a means of escaping penalties of their actions? And how many more people will be k**led by those released?
'
Now that you have moved on to the next "control" effort.... you are getting close to using all of them. What will you do when you get to the end of the list, start over?
'
Now that you have moved on to the next "control" effort.... you are getting close to using all of them. What will you do when you get to the end of the list, start over?
A Democrat In 2016 wrote:
I understand the kind of people I am dealing with-... (show quote)
May 24, 2016 14:05:49 #
Pennylynn wrote:
You know nothing about me, so stop pretending that... (show quote)
Puleeze.....everyone knows your angle-but that is who you are-no big deal-better you than me. Go ahead and create wh**ever scenario pleases you. I've given up on you and logic long ago.
May 24, 2016 17:14:11 #
Pennylynn wrote:
Are you saying because he had an all white jury th... (show quote)
Excuse me sweetie but it was common practice to exclude b****s from juries
It couldn't be proven that race was involved. Unfortunately they slipped and left a paper trail. http://newrepublic.com/article/123284/supreme-court-takes-all-white-jury It will be amazing to watch the mental gymnastics that will be employed by r****ts.
May 24, 2016 17:37:46 #
Cool Breeze wrote:
Excuse me sweetie but it was common practice to exclude b****s from juries
It couldn't be proven that race was involved. Unfortunately they slipped and left a paper trail. http://newrepublic.com/article/123284/supreme-court-takes-all-white-jury It will be amazing to watch the mental gymnastics that will be employed by r****ts.
It couldn't be proven that race was involved. Unfortunately they slipped and left a paper trail. http://newrepublic.com/article/123284/supreme-court-takes-all-white-jury It will be amazing to watch the mental gymnastics that will be employed by r****ts.
mental gymnastics....cognitive dissonance....denial.....
May 24, 2016 18:57:11 #
Pennylynn wrote:
Really? Putting some on trial is a waste of money... (show quote)
Nonsense! The glove didn't fit. That toady Christopher Darden was fired after the trial was over and they didn't even tell him. He was window dressing. He got what he deserved.
May 24, 2016 19:56:46 #
Boo_Boo
Loc: Jellystone
You are excused. Perhaps prior to the Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U. S. 412, 424 (105 SC 844, 83 LE2d 841) (1985) and upheld in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U. S. 79 (106 SC 1712, 90 LE2d 69) (1986) you would be entirely correct. Both these cases established rulings regarding dismissal of jurors and specifically black jurors. And, it would seem from reading the court documents that timothy Tyrone Foster never claimed he did not commit the act of murder or theft. Mr. Foster confessed that on the night of Aug. 27, 1986, he broke into the home of Queen Madge White, 79. Her jaw was broken, she had gashes on the top of her head and she had been sexually assaulted and strangled. In reality this was a h**e crime, but to my knowledge no black has ever been charged with a "h**e crime." Even when he appealed his case (both times) he did not recant his confession, his first appeal rested on the dismissal of one black woman who was opposed to Capitol Punishment and six other prospective jurors who held the same views (all were dismissed for other reasons) but were not dismissed based on their views of Capitol Punishment. Then he appealed saying he is r****ded (court wording, not my own). After testing, his appeal was denied. Even in his original trial, he never said he did not murder this old woman and rape her with a bottle, while putting powder all over her.... his defense, he had a bad childhood and he was a drug addict.
Really, what does it matter? Our judicial system is in the "business" or has more interest in protecting murders than obtaining justice for the victim or their family. I still ask the question, when he is released will he be a repeat offender.
Really, what does it matter? Our judicial system is in the "business" or has more interest in protecting murders than obtaining justice for the victim or their family. I still ask the question, when he is released will he be a repeat offender.
Cool Breeze wrote:
Excuse me sweetie but it was common practice to exclude b****s from juries
It couldn't be proven that race was involved. Unfortunately they slipped and left a paper trail. http://newrepublic.com/article/123284/supreme-court-takes-all-white-jury It will be amazing to watch the mental gymnastics that will be employed by r****ts.
It couldn't be proven that race was involved. Unfortunately they slipped and left a paper trail. http://newrepublic.com/article/123284/supreme-court-takes-all-white-jury It will be amazing to watch the mental gymnastics that will be employed by r****ts.
May 24, 2016 20:39:47 #
Pennylynn wrote:
You are excused. Perhaps prior to the Wainwright ... (show quote)
"and it would seem", still dishonest I see. You people overlook protocol and procedure when you think it will get you your preferred outcome, otherwise you all will be whining about freedom and justice and all that patriotic BS.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.