Wilfredo Hernandez Rivera Disparity in the jury selection process CJS/221 September 7 2015 Christopher Manning

In the United states of America talking about racism is something uncommon as a lot of if people know that they are laws that go against discrimination and racism, however this does not mean that thoughts and emotional racism feelings are involve in the daily life of a lot of people in the United States, therefore this discriminatory thoughts or ideas are always involve in all the system that are meant to serve and protect society, this would also include the same system that is meant to provide equality and justice in America, the court justice system. In this paper there will be some key points to study, such key points includes: An explanation of the process and cases that have helped to control the systemic discrimination of the courts in this process, a discussion of how jury nullification is used in relation to diversity, and a discussion of the use of peremptory challenges to jury selection and the impact on the jury composition.
Firs let’s start with how some processes have helped to control the systematic discrimination of courts in this process. One of the most common process to fight discrimination is the selection of a jury pool. There are different facts about the jury pool selection, this one’s includes “that all white jury has been a staple of the America criminal justice system for most of our history, The second fact is that the Supreme Court has long condemned discrimination jury selection, and third, race discrimination in jury selection remains a pervasive feature of our justice system to this day”(Cole, 1999).
However the corrupted system even found his way in the jury pool, since a lot of the jury pool that were selected either refused or did not accept the summoning for trial, it ended up with having a majority of white people which was the total opposite of the purpose of the jury pool. A techniques that some jurisdictions use is to send a disproportionate of summonses to geographic areas with bug populations of racial minorities. Another ways to select a jury pool could be used by subtracting the name of white prospective jurors until the quantities of the racial minorities match the numbers of the population. Albert AL Schuler, an outspoken advocate of racial quotas for juries, asserted that “few statements are more likely to evoke disturbing images of American criminal justice than this one: ‘the defendant was tried by an all-white jury.

The Jury Nullification is often to occur when “a juror believes that the evidence presented at trial establishes the defendant’s guilt but nonetheless vote to acquit” as stated in chapter six. This means that the jurors decisions could or may be motivated either by a idea or belief that the conditions or law that are been imply to the defendant are unfair or if the defendant decides to object against the application of any law. A good example given by the chapter is that “a juror might refuse to convict a defendant tried in federal court for possession of more than 50 grams of crack cocaine, based on her belief that the draconian penalties mandated by the law are unfair”
The peremptory challenge refers to a right in jury selection for the attorneys to reject a certain number of potential jurors without stating a reason. There is substantial evidence that prosecutors exercise peremptory challenges in a racially discriminatory manner. A study of challenges issued in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana, from 1976 to 1981, for example, found that prosecutors excused African American jurors at a disproportionately high rate (Turner, Lovell, Young, & Denny 1986, 61–69). Although the authors also found that defense attorneys tended to use their challenges to excuse whites, they concluded that “Because black prospective jurors are a minority in many jurisdictions, the exclusion of most black prospective jurors by prosecution can be accomplished more easily than the similar exclusion of Caucasian prospective jurors by defense” (Turner et al. 1986, 68; Hayden, Senna, & Seigel 1978).

The evidence of discriminatory acts throughout the years is more clears, there is nothing to hide as a lot of cases studies or researches have proven that the discriminatory acts exist. In the end it feels like there will be no ending for this discriminatory acts. The human nature is based in adapting and overcoming difficulties. This nature also apply to those with racist believes, they will always find a way to beat the system. Disparity in those who have the power to condemned is obviously seen in this scenarios of discrimination because no matter how many laws or amendments are created to avoid discrimination, they will study this same laws created to protect, to find a leak and use them to their favor.

References

David Cole, No Equal Justice: Race and Class in the American Criminal Justice System (New York: The New Press, 1999), p. 103. Alschuler, “Racial Quotas and the Jury,” p. 704. Butler, “Racially Based Jury Nullification,” p. 679.