Court decides if gay juror can be taken off case

[The Minsky Moment]

Then what's the point?

That still leaves a lot: age, socio-economic status, family status, profession, political affilation, regional origin, physical appearance unrealted to race, even (probably) religious affiliation.

[Malthus]

Situations like this always confuse me - if you can toss someone off a jury because you think they look like an asshole, how on earth can it ever be demonstrated you tossed them because of their race?

[Ideologue]

If you think the four black people in your jury pool all look like assholes.

[The Minsky Moment]

Situations like this always confuse me - if you can toss someone off a jury because you think they look like an asshole, how on earth can it ever be demonstrated you tossed them because of their race?

See ideologue posts above.  Sometimes it may be pretty clear, but other times it is a mess.

[crazy canuck]

Situations like this always confuse me - if you can toss someone off a jury because you think they look like an asshole, how on earth can it ever be demonstrated you tossed them because of their race?

Sometimes it may be pretty clear, but other times it is a mess.

Somewhere in there the rights of the parties seems to have been lost.  How unbiased is a juror going to be if they were preemptorily challenged and then reinstated because of some evidence  racism (or some other impermissable ground) played a role in the decision.

[The Minsky Moment]

Somewhere in there the rights of the parties seems to have been lost.  How unbiased is a juror going to be if they were preemptorily challenged and then reinstated because of some evidence  racism (or some other impermissable ground) played a role in the decision.

The original idea behind the Batson challenge was to deal with the practice of prosecutors systematically striking black veniremen in cases brought vs. black defendants.  In fact, that was the fact pattern of Batson; the prosecutors used preemptories to knock all non-whites off the panel.   So there the rights of the parties were in play.  (jury of one's peers).

[Barrister]

Somewhere in there the rights of the parties seems to have been lost.  How unbiased is a juror going to be if they were preemptorily challenged and then reinstated because of some evidence  racism (or some other impermissable ground) played a role in the decision.

The original idea behind the Batson challenge was to deal with the practice of prosecutors systematically striking black veniremen in cases brought vs. black defendants.  In fact, that was the fact pattern of Batson; the prosecutors used preemptories to knock all non-whites off the panel.   So there the rights of the parties were in play.  (jury of one's peers).

Man, sometimes I wonder about US prosecutors.  I try my hardest to make sure there are racial minorities on my jury, precisely because I don't want the accused or the public at large to think at the end of the day "he was only convicted because it was an all-white jury".

[crazy canuck]

Somewhere in there the rights of the parties seems to have been lost.  How unbiased is a juror going to be if they were preemptorily challenged and then reinstated because of some evidence  racism (or some other impermissable ground) played a role in the decision.

The original idea behind the Batson challenge was to deal with the practice of prosecutors systematically striking black veniremen in cases brought vs. black defendants.  In fact, that was the fact pattern of Batson; the prosecutors used preemptories to knock all non-whites off the panel.   So there the rights of the parties were in play.  (jury of one's peers).

Hard facts make bad law.  Rather than creating this difficult process of challenging the challenge wouldnt it make more sense to move the trial to a location where the defendant could be tried by their peers and if the court comes to the conclusion, based on these sorts of tactics by prosecutor, that a fair trial is impossible, simply dismiss the case?

[crazy canuck]

Somewhere in there the rights of the parties seems to have been lost.  How unbiased is a juror going to be if they were preemptorily challenged and then reinstated because of some evidence  racism (or some other impermissable ground) played a role in the decision.

The original idea behind the Batson challenge was to deal with the practice of prosecutors systematically striking black veniremen in cases brought vs. black defendants.  In fact, that was the fact pattern of Batson; the prosecutors used preemptories to knock all non-whites off the panel.   So there the rights of the parties were in play.  (jury of one's peers).

Man, sometimes I wonder about US prosecutors.  I try my hardest to make sure there are racial minorities on my jury, precisely because I don't want the accused or the public at large to think at the end of the day "he was only convicted because it was an all-white jury".

You are not elected and so you need not pander to the lowest common denominator.

[Eddie Teach]

Iirc, Justice Marshall (who concurred with the decision in Batson) just thought peremptory strikes ought to be done away with.

But then the devil would have no use for Keanu Reeves.

[The Brain]

Then what's the point?

That still leaves a lot: age, socio-economic status, family status, profession, political affilation, regional origin, physical appearance unrealted to race, even (probably) religious affiliation.

Get off my case.

[garbon]

Iirc, Justice Marshall (who concurred with the decision in Batson) just thought peremptory strikes ought to be done away with.

But then the devil would have no use for Keanu Reeves.

Who?

[garbon]

Then what's the point?

That still leaves a lot: age, socio-economic status, family status, profession, political affilation, regional origin, physical appearance unrealted to race, even (probably) religious affiliation.

Get off my case.

Was he a potential juror or your lawyer?

[Ideologue]

See ideologue posts above.  Sometimes it may be pretty clear, but other times it is a mess.

[Eddie Teach]

Iirc, Justice Marshall (who concurred with the decision in Batson) just thought peremptory strikes ought to be done away with.

But then the devil would have no use for Keanu Reeves.

Who?