Judge calls prosecutor's rejection of gay juror 'shocking'

[jimmy olsen]

I'd have to read the transcripts to make a decision on this I think.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/02/11504106-judge-calls-prosecutors-rejection-of-gay-juror-shocking?lite

A judge in San Diego has dismissed an entire jury panel in a case involving same-sex marriage activists, saying the prosecutors' rejection of a possible juror because of his sexual orientation violated the defendants' rights to a representative jury, local media reports say.

Superior Court Judge Joan Weber issued the ruling Tuesday after lawyers for the group of activists, known as the "Equality 9," challenged the rejection of the juror, who was gay and had protested in support of gay rights in the past, The San Diego Union-Tribune reported.

Defense attorneys said the juror's dismissal violated their clients' rights to a fair trial. But prosecutors said answers given on a questionnaire by the potential juror, including the past protest, were the reasons why he was let go, according to the Tribune. Assistant City Attorney Andrew Jones said the case was focused on the actions of the activists.

"That's all that this is about," Jones said. "It has nothing to do with same-sex marriage."

The judge said the prosecutors' actions were "shocking" and she was "heartbroken," according to the Tribune and NBCSanDiego.com.

Weber's decision to dismiss an entire jury panel was "fairly rare" and "doesn't happen every day," Scott Burns, executive director of the National District Attorneys Association, told msnbc.com.

He thought the prosecutors did not overstep their bounds.

"People get removed from juries all the time for all kinds of reasons," he said. "There was nothing shocking about them removing somebody who they believed could not be fair and impartial."

Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) President Herndon Graddick disagreed.

"Attempting to exclude a group of people from participating in the legal process is un-American," he said, adding that many states -- though not California -- lack protections for gay jurors.

David Loy, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego & Imperial Counties, said "the judge clearly did the right thing."

"Jurors should not be excluded from service because of their sexual orientation any more so than they can be excluded because of race or gender," he told msnbc.com.

The group of defendants -- originally nine, but now six -- were charged with refusing to disperse and interfering with the business of a public agency for holding a long, sit-down protest in a hallway outside the county clerk's office on August 19, 2010, according to NBCSanDiego.com.

They had been protesting in support of a couple who had made an appointment to marry after U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Prop. 8, California's same-sex marriage ban, and said the marriages could begin Aug. 18 of that year.

However, the county clerk would not certify same-sex marriages because Walker's ruling was set aside pending appellate review.

Of the nine protesters, three accepted a deal from the city attorney's office to plead no contest to an infraction, according to the Tribune. The lawyers will be in court early Wednesday to talk about the next steps in the case of the remaining six.

[11B4V]

Gay= a crime against God in some folks eyes.

[Martinus]

I hope next time, when the defendant is a Christian, any Christian juror is dismissed for bias.

[11B4V]

I hope next time, when the defendant is a Christian, any Christian juror is dismissed for bias.

Agreed

[Scipio]

This was not a dismissal for cause, this was one of several available dismissals each side gets for whatever reason they want.  We call those peremptory.  I'm not aware of whether CA's constitution prohibits discrimination against the gay (although we all know it does, per Prop 8), and the only illegal reasons for dismissing someone on a peremptory challenge are racial, so this Judge went way off the rails.

[Neil]

I hope next time, when the defendant is a Christian, any Christian juror is dismissed for bias.

Wouldn't make sense.  Christians are more capable of rational thinking than gays.

[CountDeMoney]

I'd have to read the transcripts to make a decision on this I think.

You do that, Judge Timmay.

[Admiral Yi]

This was not a dismissal for cause, this was one of several available dismissals each side gets for whatever reason they want.  We call those peremptory.  I'm not aware of whether CA's constitution prohibits discrimination against the gay (although we all know it does, per Prop 8), and the only illegal reasons for dismissing someone on a peremptory challenge are racial, so this Judge went way off the rails.

The prosecutor claims the juror was dismissed for taking part in protests.  Wouldn't that be for cause?

[CountDeMoney]

"There was nothing shocking about them removing somebody who they believed could not be fair and impartial."

This.  He wasn't removed because of the cock in his mouth, he was removed because he was an activist and protester for the issue at hand.

Sorry, but a protester/activist saying he'd be impartial in the jury box is a hard sell.  Heh, I said "hard", lulz

[Valmy]

I don't think we are getting the whole story here or something.  The Prosecutors reasons for dismissing the jurors seems reasonable and ordinary and not interesting at all.  Yet the Judge was shocked by it and people are suing about it.  How...what...is there evidence of some sort of systematic discrimination against Gays in this district or something?  Surely not wanting activists on an issue where the defendents are activists is a reasonable position for a prosecutor to take.  Why is this a story?

[Valmy]

Gay= a crime against God in some folks eyes.

Nice Marty bait.

[Barrister]

I don't think we are getting the whole story here or something.  The Prosecutors reasons for dismissing the jurors seems reasonable and ordinary and not interesting at all.  Yet the Judge was shocked by it and people are suing about it.  How...what...is there evidence of some sort of systematic discrimination against Gays in this district or something?  Surely not wanting activists on an issue where the defendents are activists is a reasonable position for a prosecutor to take.  Why is this a story?

Because a minority of judges love to tell prosecutors how to do their job, and certain news outlets love to play any story they can find about persecuting gays.

A pre-emptory challenge is a challenge either side can use for any reason.  They do not have to justify it, and the judge does not have any say in whether it is valid or not.  You typically only have a limited number of pre-emptory challenges however (as opposed to challenges for cause, which you have an unlimited number, but you have to provide a reason, and someone else has to decide whetehr that is valid or not).

[CountDeMoney]

I don't think we are getting the whole story here or something.  The Prosecutors reasons for dismissing the jurors seems reasonable and ordinary and not interesting at all.  Yet the Judge was shocked by it and people are suing about it.  How...what...is there evidence of some sort of systematic discrimination against Gays in this district or something?  Surely not wanting activists on an issue where the defendents are activists is a reasonable position for a prosecutor to take.  Why is this a story?

Because a minority of judges love to tell prosecutors how to do their job, and certain news outlets love to play any story they can find about persecuting gays.

I was just going to type that;  sometimes, judges hate certain prosecutors.

And for every judge that is "shocked" by something like this, there's a judge that tells rape victims they should just lie back and relax.  The black robe isn't a disqualifier for being a jerk.

[derspiess]

I'd have to read the transcripts to make a decision on this I think.

You do that, Judge Timmay.

[crazy canuck]

I hope next time, when the defendant is a Christian, any Christian juror is dismissed for bias.

More astounding legal analysis.