T*********I 发帖数: 10729 | 1 最高法院23日推翻喬治亞州一名非裔男子死刑判決,因為檢方違反憲法,將決定該男子
命叩呐銓弳T,刻意剔除非裔,全由白人擔任。
涉嫌殺害白人婦女的弗斯特(Timothy Tyrone Foster)1987年定罪後,陪審團以七票
對一票裁決判他死刑,但被告律師取得檢方所寫便條,暴露將非裔排除在該案陪審團的
做法。最高法院此項裁決,在對抗陪審員挑選時存在種族歧視的努力上並非創舉,但突
顯出30年前最高法院針對將少數族裔排除在陪審團之外做法的裁決的重要性。
目前48歲的弗斯特,在1986年18歲時,涉嫌殺死79歲退休女教師昆恩‧梅吉
8231;懷特(Queen Madge White)。雖然他的死刑判決被高院推翻,檢方仍可要求重新
開審該案。
非裔在美國死囚中所占比率偏高,反死刑人士認為,美國犯罪司法系統歧視非裔被告。
在挑選弗斯特案陪審員時,有四名非裔被檢察官「刷掉」,但檢方未提出充分理由解釋
他們何以被剔除。
撰擬最高法院裁決的首席大法官羅伯茲寫道,檢方便條證明該案陪審員的挑選,明顯不
符該州聲稱挑選陪審員不論膚色的原則。檢方便條顯示,檢察官在非裔待選陪審員的名
字旁附註「B」字母,並以綠筆凸顯,同時在問卷中圈出詢問族裔問題的答案「black」
一字。
檢方解釋這些非裔被剔除的理由包括,提問時「他們不敢直視提問人」、「茫然無措」
、「有敵意」、「防衛性太過」、「緊張」、「魯莽」。羅伯茲在裁決書寫道,其中兩
名非裔人選被剔除在陪審團之外,反映檢察官明顯考慮的是種族因素,而這兩人因種族
原因被刷掉,為「憲法所不容」。最高法院在1986年曾裁決,挑選陪審員將種族因素納
入考慮是違憲行為。
檢方指出,弗斯特在深夜闖入懷特家中,擊碎她的下顎,並對她性侵、毆打、勒頸,還
從屋內竊取財物,弗斯特之後對罪行坦承不諱。 |
v*******e 发帖数: 11604 | |
g****n 发帖数: 7494 | |
T*********I 发帖数: 10729 | 4 高院那几个也是一样的。美国是真死了。三体赢了。
【在 g****n 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 奥驴真是把pc推到极致了
|
g****n 发帖数: 7494 | 5 trump上来搞个保守大法官这关重要啊
【在 T*********I 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 高院那几个也是一样的。美国是真死了。三体赢了。
|
h*******u 发帖数: 15326 | 6 一定要有黑人是赤裸裸的种族歧视
从这个意义上,川普攻击劳模法官一点问题都没有
【在 T*********I 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 最高法院23日推翻喬治亞州一名非裔男子死刑判決,因為檢方違反憲法,將決定該男子 : 命叩呐銓弳T,刻意剔除非裔,全由白人擔任。 : 涉嫌殺害白人婦女的弗斯特(Timothy Tyrone Foster)1987年定罪後,陪審團以七票 : 對一票裁決判他死刑,但被告律師取得檢方所寫便條,暴露將非裔排除在該案陪審團的 : 做法。最高法院此項裁決,在對抗陪審員挑選時存在種族歧視的努力上並非創舉,但突 : 顯出30年前最高法院針對將少數族裔排除在陪審團之外做法的裁決的重要性。 : 目前48歲的弗斯特,在1986年18歲時,涉嫌殺死79歲退休女教師昆恩‧梅吉 : 8231;懷特(Queen Madge White)。雖然他的死刑判決被高院推翻,檢方仍可要求重新 : 開審該案。 : 非裔在美國死囚中所占比率偏高,反死刑人士認為,美國犯罪司法系統歧視非裔被告。
|
C**********a 发帖数: 1472 | |
g*****1 发帖数: 666 | |
t**********r 发帖数: 882 | 9 司法系统的独立公正是保证每个公民权利的重要基础。不知道你觉得高院的做法那里有
问题?
【在 T*********I 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 高院那几个也是一样的。美国是真死了。三体赢了。
|
c*******o 发帖数: 8869 | 10 "羅伯茲在裁決書寫道,其中兩名非裔人選被剔除在陪審團之外,反映檢察官明顯考慮
的是種族因素,而這兩人因種族原因被刷掉,為「憲法所不容」"
you did not even read the ruling before opening your big mouth. According to
Chief justice, black juries were removed because their skin color. DA
ruined his case because he is possibly a racist.
"一定要有黑人是赤裸裸的种族歧视", "there must be no blacks" is also 赤裸裸的种
族歧视.
【在 h*******u 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 一定要有黑人是赤裸裸的种族歧视 : 从这个意义上,川普攻击劳模法官一点问题都没有
|
|
|
T*********I 发帖数: 10729 | 11 独立很好,但是不够公正。
你看高院裁决中“其中兩名非裔人選被剔除在陪審團之外,反映檢察官明顯考慮的是種
族因素”的反映两字。因为剔除了黑人陪审员,高院就直接拍屁股认定了检察官一定是
明显考虑了种族因素。因此推翻。
这个推理非常含糊,站不住脚。
这个判例拿到下面去执行,最后下面一定要优先保证种族。既,
黑人罪犯,一定要有黑人陪审员。
穆斯林罪犯,一定要有穆斯林陪审员。
老莫,一定要有老莫陪审员。
黑人受害者,一定要有黑人陪审员。
你觉得公正吗?
【在 t**********r 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 司法系统的独立公正是保证每个公民权利的重要基础。不知道你觉得高院的做法那里有 : 问题?
|
c*******o 发帖数: 8869 | 12 "撰擬最高法院裁決的首席大法官羅伯茲寫道,檢方便條證明該案陪審員的挑選,明顯
不符該州聲稱挑選陪審員不論膚色的原則。檢方便條顯示,檢察官在非裔待選陪審員的
名字旁附註「B」字母,並以綠筆凸顯,同時在問卷中圈出詢問族裔問題的答案「black
」一字。"
this is so egregious. No wonder even Alito sided with liberal justices.
【在 T*********I 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 独立很好,但是不够公正。 : 你看高院裁决中“其中兩名非裔人選被剔除在陪審團之外,反映檢察官明顯考慮的是種 : 族因素”的反映两字。因为剔除了黑人陪审员,高院就直接拍屁股认定了检察官一定是 : 明显考虑了种族因素。因此推翻。 : 这个推理非常含糊,站不住脚。 : 这个判例拿到下面去执行,最后下面一定要优先保证种族。既, : 黑人罪犯,一定要有黑人陪审员。 : 穆斯林罪犯,一定要有穆斯林陪审员。 : 老莫,一定要有老莫陪审员。 : 黑人受害者,一定要有黑人陪审员。
|
T*********I 发帖数: 10729 | 13 black这词用了就是种族主义了。
政府申请表里明摆着要问你种族。
如果政府对申请表里问种族的辩解是为了保证少数民族没有被种族歧视。检察官完全可
以说,我写上B是为了保证我主观上没有对少数民族陪审员候选人有任何种族歧视。
现在可好,白人一提B,就是种族主义。深挖灵魂深处善念。
过分了!
black
【在 c*******o 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : "撰擬最高法院裁決的首席大法官羅伯茲寫道,檢方便條證明該案陪審員的挑選,明顯 : 不符該州聲稱挑選陪審員不論膚色的原則。檢方便條顯示,檢察官在非裔待選陪審員的 : 名字旁附註「B」字母,並以綠筆凸顯,同時在問卷中圈出詢問族裔問題的答案「black : 」一字。" : this is so egregious. No wonder even Alito sided with liberal justices.
|
c*******o 发帖数: 8869 | 14 if you are even questioning Justice Samuel Alito's conservative credential,
I have nothing more to say...
【在 T*********I 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : black这词用了就是种族主义了。 : 政府申请表里明摆着要问你种族。 : 如果政府对申请表里问种族的辩解是为了保证少数民族没有被种族歧视。检察官完全可 : 以说,我写上B是为了保证我主观上没有对少数民族陪审员候选人有任何种族歧视。 : 现在可好,白人一提B,就是种族主义。深挖灵魂深处善念。 : 过分了! : : black
|
v*******e 发帖数: 11604 | 15
second this. 美国建国的几大支柱都完了,因为人变了。想想穆斯林占多数以后的样
子。这只是极端的例子。人变了美国的支柱就完了。
【在 C**********a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : Super court is over.
|
T*********I 发帖数: 10729 | 16 Justice ALITO是保守我没问题。
但是这个案例里,高院整体对一个检察官的内心深处的推断过于武断,过于想当然。完
全没有公正好言。体现不出高院应有的思想水平。
美国支柱完了。我们警醒一些。自求多福。
,
【在 c*******o 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : if you are even questioning Justice Samuel Alito's conservative credential, : I have nothing more to say...
|
r**********f 发帖数: 2808 | 17 If crooked, dirty, greedy Hillary is elected, we'll get another progressive
(now means 左逼) judge, constitution will be rewritten, and US will become
EU. |
T*********I 发帖数: 10729 | 18 从高院判决书里的“想当然”来看,司法的“独立”是很难的。
如果他们考虑的”民意“。怕自己的判决民意理解不了影响高院在人民心中的名声。那
我只能说,系统保证了高院法官的终身制,还是未能保证他们独立性。
【在 t**********r 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 司法系统的独立公正是保证每个公民权利的重要基础。不知道你觉得高院的做法那里有 : 问题?
|
t**********r 发帖数: 882 | 19 判决书里面完全没有“想当然”的字眼。不知道你这个信息是哪里来的
【在 T*********I 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 从高院判决书里的“想当然”来看,司法的“独立”是很难的。 : 如果他们考虑的”民意“。怕自己的判决民意理解不了影响高院在人民心中的名声。那 : 我只能说,系统保证了高院法官的终身制,还是未能保证他们独立性。
|
T*********I 发帖数: 10729 | 20 (高院不具备挖掘新证据的能力。一般来说只能根据现有证据复查),
从高院得到的证据来看,完全没有任何证据提到“种族歧视”的字眼,不知道高院是怎
样认定检察官“种族歧视”。
你说是不是想当然?
【在 t**********r 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 判决书里面完全没有“想当然”的字眼。不知道你这个信息是哪里来的
|
|
|
t**********r 发帖数: 882 | 21 高院的判决里面说的很清楚,就是说淘汰juror 的标准没有统一的实施。从一开始就依
据种族设定了淘汰的list。然后在具体淘汰的过程唯一的解释因素就是种族。如果根据
这些不能确定是种族因素的话,那你觉得还需要哪些进一步的证据呢?
【在 T*********I 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : (高院不具备挖掘新证据的能力。一般来说只能根据现有证据复查), : 从高院得到的证据来看,完全没有任何证据提到“种族歧视”的字眼,不知道高院是怎 : 样认定检察官“种族歧视”。 : 你说是不是想当然?
|
T*********I 发帖数: 10729 | 22 “但檢方未提出充分理由解釋他們何以被剔除。”
“檢方解釋這些非裔被剔除的理由包括,提問時「他們不敢直視提問人」、「茫然無措
」、「有敵意」、「防衛性太過」、「緊張」、「魯莽」。”
你觉得高院如何断定检方“淘汰的过程唯一的解释因素就是种族”?
【在 t**********r 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 高院的判决里面说的很清楚,就是说淘汰juror 的标准没有统一的实施。从一开始就依 : 据种族设定了淘汰的list。然后在具体淘汰的过程唯一的解释因素就是种族。如果根据 : 这些不能确定是种族因素的话,那你觉得还需要哪些进一步的证据呢?
|
T*********I 发帖数: 10729 | 23 当年是18岁的小天使的弗斯特(Timothy Tyrone Foster)1987年
杀死79歲退休女教師(Queen Madge White)。
杀死之前是痛苦的历程。
强奸了79岁的老太太
打碎了老太太的下颌
用刀(或者玻璃什么的)在老太太的脸上划下了多处刀伤。
老太太的下体用沙拉酱瓶子塞住了。
窒息死亡。
天使离开房子前顺手拿走值钱东西若干
到了2016年,仍然没有死刑。天要亡美啊。 |
T*********I 发帖数: 10729 | 24 老太太的下体用沙拉酱瓶子塞住了
这是他妈怎样的人渣啊。
一人一票。左逼等好吧。 |
f*****q 发帖数: 22 | 25 是不是一个社会富裕时间长了这种过度宽容就会出现?
左臂就不承认没有爱感化不了的恶人
【在 T*********I 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 老太太的下体用沙拉酱瓶子塞住了 : 这是他妈怎样的人渣啊。 : 一人一票。左逼等好吧。
|
t**********r 发帖数: 882 | 26 下面是从supreme court opinion 里面摘出来的,大家可以自己看看。link在这里。
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/14-8349_6k47.pdf
(a) Batson provides a three-step process for adjudicating claims such as
Foster’s. “First, a defendant must make a prima facie showing that a
preemptory challenge has been exercised on the basis of race; second, if
that showing has been made, the prosecution must offer a race-neutral basis
for striking the juror in question; and third, in light of the parties’
submissions, the trial court must determine whether the defendant has shown
purposeful discrimination.” Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U. S. 472, 477 (
internal quotation marks and brackets omitted). Only Batson’s third step is
at issue here. That step turns on factual findings made by the lower courts
, and this Court will defer to those findings unless they are clearly
erroneous. See ibid. Pp. 9–10.
(b) Foster established purposeful discrimination in the State’s strikes
of two black prospective jurors: Marilyn Garrett and Eddie Hood. Though the
trial court accepted the prosecution’s justifications for both strikes, the
record belies much of the prosecution’s reasoning. Pp. 10–22. (i) The
prosecution explained to the trial court that it made a last-minute decision
to strike Garrett only after another juror, Shirley Powell, was excused for
cause on the morning that the strikes were exercised. That explanation is
flatly contradicted by evidence showing that Garrett’s name appeared on the
prosecution’s list of “[D]efinite NO’s”—the six prospective jurors
whom the prosecution was intent on striking from the outset. The record also
refutes several of the reasons the prosecution gave for striking Garrett
instead of Arlene Blackmon, a white prospective juror. For example, while
the State told the trial court that it struck Garrett because the defense
did not ask her for her thoughts about such pertinent trial issues as
insanity, alcohol, or pre-trial publicity, the record reveals that the
defense asked Garrett multiple questions on each topic. And though the State
gave other facially reasonable justifications for striking Garrett, those
are difficult to credit because of the State’s willingness to accept white
jurors with the same characteristics. For example, the prosecution claims
that it struck Garrett because she was divorced and, at age 34, too young,
but three out of four divorced white prospective jurors and eight white
prospective jurors under age 36 were allowed to serve. Pp. 11–17. (ii) With
regard to prospective juror Hood, the record similarly undermines the
justifications proffered by the State to the trial court for the strike. For
example, the prosecution alleged in response to Foster’s pretrial Batson
challenge that its only concern with Hood was the fact that his son was the
same age as the defendant. But then, at a subsequent hearing, the State told
the court that its chief concern was with Hood’s membership in the Church
of Christ. In the end, neither of those reasons for striking Hood withstands
scrutiny. As to the age of Hood’s son, the prosecution allowed white
prospective jurors with sons of similar age to serve, including one who, in
contrast to Hood, equivocated when asked whether Foster’s age would be a
factor at sentencing. And as to Hood’s religion, the prosecution
erroneously claimed that three white Church of Christ members were excused
for cause because of their opposition to the death penalty, when in fact the
record shows that those jurors were excused for reasons unrelated to their
views on the death penalty. Moreover, a document acquired from the State’s
file contains a handwritten note stating, “NO. NO Black Church,” while
asserting that the Church of Christ does not take a stand on the death
penalty. Other justifications for striking Hood fail to withstand scrutiny
because no concerns were expressed with regard to similar white prospective
jurors. Pp. 17–23.
(c) Evidence that a prosecutor’s reasons for striking a black
prospective juror apply equally to an otherwise similar nonblack prospective
juror who is allowed to serve tends to suggest purposeful discrimination.
Miller-El v. Dretke, 545 U. S. 231, 241. Such evidence is compelling with
respect to Garrett and Hood and, along with the prosecution’s shifting
explanations, misrepresentations of the record, and persistent focus on race
, leads to the conclusion that the striking of those prospective jurors was
“motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent.” Snyder, 552 U. S
., at 485. P. 23.
(d) Because Batson was decided only months before Foster’s trial, the
State asserts that the focus on black prospective jurors in the prosecution
’s file was an effort to develop and maintain a detailed account should the
prosecution need a defense against any suggestion that its reasons were
pretextual. That argument, having never before been raised in the 30 years
since Foster’s trial, “reeks of afterthought.” Miller-El, 545 U. S., at
246. And the focus on race in the prosecution’s file plainly demonstrates a
concerted effort to keep black prospective jurors off the jury. Pp. 23–25.
【在 T*********I 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : “但檢方未提出充分理由解釋他們何以被剔除。” : “檢方解釋這些非裔被剔除的理由包括,提問時「他們不敢直視提問人」、「茫然無措 : 」、「有敵意」、「防衛性太過」、「緊張」、「魯莽」。” : 你觉得高院如何断定检方“淘汰的过程唯一的解释因素就是种族”?
|
T*********I 发帖数: 10729 | 27 "tends to suggest purposeful discrimination"
这还不是想当然给检方定罪?
从你贴出的若干点,我看到的是鸡蛋里面挑骨头。看看高院碰到黑人种族就放大镜找裂
痕,一定要找到全方位各个角度都对黑人有利,实在让人难以服众。这不是人民的法院
,是黑人的法院。
Justice THOMAS的dissent
we do not know who wrote most of the notes that Foster now relies
upon as proof of the prosecutors’ ra
ce-based motivations. We do know, however, that both pr
osecutors averred that theydid not make any of the highlighted
marks on the jury venire list” and “did not instruct anyone to make the
green 。。。
他继续说道,
But the Court today invites state prisoners to go search-
ing for new “evidence” by demanding the files of the prose-
cutors who long ago convicted them
这就是我上面说的,拿放大镜找,一直到所有情况都对黑人有利。这不是人民的法院,
是作弊的黑人的法院。
Today, without first seeking clarification from Georgia’s
highest court that it decided a federal question, the Court
affords a death-row inmate another opportunity to relitigate his long
-final conviction. In few other circumstances could I imagine the Court
spilling so much ink over a factbound claim arising from a state
postconviction proceeding. It was the trial court that observed
the veniremen firsthand and heard them
answer the prosecution’s questions, and its evaluation of the
prosecution’s credibil-
ity on this point is certainly far better than this Court’s
nearly 30 years later.
as
basis
shown
is
【在 t**********r 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 下面是从supreme court opinion 里面摘出来的,大家可以自己看看。link在这里。 : http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/14-8349_6k47.pdf : (a) Batson provides a three-step process for adjudicating claims such as : Foster’s. “First, a defendant must make a prima facie showing that a : preemptory challenge has been exercised on the basis of race; second, if : that showing has been made, the prosecution must offer a race-neutral basis : for striking the juror in question; and third, in light of the parties’ : submissions, the trial court must determine whether the defendant has shown : purposeful discrimination.” Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U. S. 472, 477 ( : internal quotation marks and brackets omitted). Only Batson’s third step is
|