your jury is Lilly White.
Trust that you
will be convicted
Without Due Process.
- A jury of your peers means anyone
- in your peer group. Back when this was created
it meant that if you were a farmer your jury
would be
filled with farmers. If you were a peasant,
your jury would be full of peasants.
- Today, however,
it is a jury of your fellow citizens.
Anyone
filling a certain profile such as: If you
are charged
with robbery your lawyer would like your
peers
to be people who have not been robbed.
- Your peers can also mean
people of your skin
color, such as: An African-
American defendant
means his peers are fellow
African- Americans.
will be convicted
Without Due Process.
- A jury of your peers means anyone
- in your peer group. Back when this was created
it meant that if you were a farmer your jury
would be
filled with farmers. If you were a peasant,
your jury would be full of peasants.
- Today, however,
it is a jury of your fellow citizens.
Anyone
filling a certain profile such as: If you
are charged
with robbery your lawyer would like your
peers
to be people who have not been robbed.
- Your peers can also mean
people of your skin
color, such as: An African-
American defendant
means his peers are fellow
African- Americans.
prison university project.org
Beautiful Jail (Art and Poetry)
prison art is poetry
But imagine my surprise when I walked into the appointed classroom to argue the “con” side and was confronted by an all-black panel of my law school peers. (The law school had affirmative action but few black students.) Part of “my” argument (it didn’t originate with me) was that affirmative action “stigmatized” minorities who are accepted to law school, tarring all of them with the suspicion that they are not really qualified and were only admitted because of their race.
Maybe it was just me, but this argument didn’t seem to go over well with the panel.
Some part of me did feel betrayed.from
A Jury of My Peers
Repeal: A Jury of My Peers - Imagine, You are BlacK and your jury is Lilly White. Trust that you will be convicted Without Due Process.
A jury of your peers means anyone in your peer group. Back when this was created it meant that if you were a farmer your jury would be filled with farmers. If you were a peasant, your jury would be full of peasants.
Today, however, it is a jury of your fellow citizens. Anyone filling a certain profile such as: If you are charged with robbery your lawyer would like your peers to be people who have not been robbed.
Your peers can also mean people of your skin color, such as: An African- American defendant means his peers are fellow African- Americans.a petit jury, which is designed to determine guilt or innocence.
group of peers who determine whether a suspect should be formally charged (indicted) with a crime.
Before retiring from the bench, Justice Gregory Weeks of Fayetteville took on one last challenge: ruling on the first case to be heard under the state’s unprecedented—and highly controversial—statute aimed at eliminating racial bias from the criminal justice system. IF ONE can prove that race played a significant role in their sentencing. Under the ground-breaking aspect of law is that a defendant can rely on the use of statistics alone to show institutional racism. Weeks would serve as the first judge to interpret the act.
http://morallowground.com/2012/04/23/north-carolina-judge-greg-weeks-throws-out-marcus-robinson-death-sentence-under-states-racial-justice-act/
And on April 20, after months of deliberation, he found in favor of defendant Marcus Robinson. The evidence demonstrated, he said, that state prosecutors in North Carolina had systematically discriminated against black jurors in capital cases for decades, unfairly allowing racial bias to seep into the sentencing process. After handing down his landmark ruling, Weeks heralded what he saw to be an unprecedented—and much needed—step forward with regard to addressing the presence of racial bias in the criminal justice system.
“It is the hope of this Court,” Weeks told an overflowing courtroom, “that we now are at the beginning of the end of the struggle to end racial discrimination in our justice system.”
But only a few short weeks later, the NC General Assembly looks prepared to pass a new measure that would gut the statute. House Bill 416, which passed the House with a veto-proof 73-47 vote last Thursday, is expected to also clear the Senate over Democratic opposition. The Senate could consider the measure as soon as this week.
aclu-North Carolina House of
Representatives passed SB 416, a bill
that would rewrite North Carolina’s
historic Racial Justice Act.
reacts-racial-justice-act-repeal-bill
Representatives passed SB 416, a bill
that would rewrite North Carolina’s
historic Racial Justice Act.
reacts-racial-justice-act-repeal-bill
ACLU-NC Reacts to Racial Justice Act Repeal Bill’s Passage in NC House
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
JULY 2, 2012
Civil Rights Group Says SB 416 “Is a Giant Step in the Wrong Direction”
Self-Incrimination
Under the Fifth Amendment, you are also guaranteed the right
to not incriminate yourself in criminal cases. In other words, this
amendment protects your right to remain silent.
Due Process
Due process refers to your right to be tried fairly in a
manner that respects all of your legal rights. You have the right to
defend yourself from criminal charges and the right to plead your case
before a jury of your peers. Any procedure that takes away your liberty
unfairly or affords you with lesser treatment than other individuals is
a denial of due process.
In Hernandez v. Texas (1954) the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment protects those beyond the racial classes of white or "Negro" and extends to other racial and ethnic groups, such as Mexican Americans in this case. In the half century since Brown,
the Court has extended the reach of the Equal Protection Clause to
other historically disadvantaged groups, such as women and illegitimate
children, although it has applied a somewhat less stringent standard
than it has applied to governmental discrimination on the basis of race (United States v. Virginia, 1996; Levy v. Louisiana, 1968).[30]
The Court has also struck down redistricting plans in which race was a key consideration. In Shaw v. Reno
(1993), the Court prohibited a North Carolina plan aimed at creating
majority-black districts to balance historic underrepresentation in the
state's congressional delegations.[34] In League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry (2006), the Court ruled that Tom DeLay's Texas redistricting plan intentionally diluted the votes of Latinos and thus violated the Equal Protection Clause.
Before retiring from the bench this year, Justice Gregory Weeks of
Fayetteville took on one last challenge: ruling on the first case to be heard
under the state’s unprecedented—and highly controversial—statute aimed at
eliminating racial bias from the criminal justice system.
Known as the Racial Justice Act, the law provides death row inmates with the
opportunity to commute their sentences to life without the possibility of
parole if they can prove that race played a significant role in their
sentencing. But the ground-breaking aspect of law is that a defendant can rely
on the use of statistics alone to show institutional racism. Weeks would serve
as the first judge to interpret the act.
And on April 20, after months of deliberation, he found in favor of defendant
Marcus Robinson. The evidence demonstrated, he said, that state prosecutors in
North Carolina had systematically discriminated against black jurors in capital
cases for decades, unfairly allowing racial bias to seep into the sentencing
process. After handing down his landmark ruling, Weeks heralded what he saw to
be an unprecedented—and much needed—step forward with regard to addressing the
presence of racial bias in the criminal justice system.
“It is the hope of this Court,” Weeks told an overflowing courtroom, “that
we now are at the beginning of the end of the struggle to end racial
discrimination in our justice system.”
But only a few short weeks later, the NC General Assembly looks prepared to
pass a new measure that would gut the statute. House Bill 416, which passed the
House with a veto-proof 73-47 vote last Thursday, is expected to also clear the
Senate over Democratic opposition. The Senate could consider the measure as
soon as this week.
A
jury of your peers means anyone in your peer group. Back when this was created
it meant that if you were a farmer your jury would be filled with farmers. If
you were a peasant, your jury would be full of peasants.
Today, however, it is a jury of your fellow citizens. Anyone filling a certain
profile such as: If you are charged with robbery your lawyer would like your
peers to be people who have not been robbed.
Your peers can also mean people of your skin color, such as: An African-
American defendant means his peers are fellow African- Americans.
A Jury of My Peers
Norm Pattis asks
you to “imagine how you’d react if you walked into a courtroom to face a
jury of 12 souls with skins as dark as my client’s. Some part of you would feel
betrayed, I am sure of it.” (You are presumably white.)
I’m white. Back in law school at the University of Wisconsin I participated
in a moot court competition. The topic was the constitutionality of affirmative
action in law school admissions. We had to argue both the “pro” side in front
of one panel of three of our fellow law students and the “con” side in front of
another panel of three of our fellow law students. Personally, after examining
both sides, I had arrived at the opinion that if state-funded law school had a
legitimate purpose it was not primarily to provide an education for people who
wanted to be lawyers but to provide lawyers for the people, and that therefore
affirmative action in law school admissions was constitutional, for the same
reason that affirmative action in hiring correctional officers, to better
reflect the racial diversity of the people being “corrected,”
made all kinds of sense and was constitutional.
made all kinds of sense and was constitutional.
But imagine my surprise when I walked into the appointed classroom to argue
the “con” side and was confronted by an all-black panel of my law school peers.
(The law school had affirmative action but few black students.) Part of “my”
argument (it didn’t originate with me) was that affirmative action “stigmatized”
minorities who are accepted to law school, tarring all of them with the
suspicion that they are not really qualified and were only admitted because of
their race.
Maybe it was just me, but this argument didn’t seem to go over well with the
panel.
Some part of me did feel betrayed.
As a parent you have no constitutional right to be present at the questioning of your child. But you can advise your child that if he or she is ever arrested your child should:
When a minor asks for a parent
As a parent you have no constitutional right to be present at the questioning of your child. But you can advise your child that if he or she is ever arrested your child should:
- Be polite and not resist
- Give his or her name
- Ask for a parent
- Ask for a lawyer
- Don't write an "apology" letter
- Invoke the right to remain silent
- Remain calm and not panic
Also, please remember that cops are tricky. They are not your friend or your child's friend. If they suspect your juvenile child of a crime, their job is to build a case against the child.
Cops may have secret video and audio recording equipment in the interrogation room. Even if they let you have "time alone" with your child, such "time alone" could very well be monitored and anything communicated during it used against your child at trial.
All criminal cases are serious. But criminal cases involving confessions are particularly tricky and can have very serious consequences. To speak with a juvenile lawyer Contact:
Shouse Law Group
(888) 327-4652
When Police Interrogate Children
The case hinges on how far the police can exert their authority over grade-school students with the active cooperation of school officials but without the knowledge or consent of custodial adults. Specifically, are the rights of a school child violated if police interrogate him about criminal activity without a custodian or attorney present and without reading him his Miranda rights?
KNOW YOUR RIGHT to stay quiet and cooperative
(888) 327-4652
When Police Interrogate Children
The case hinges on how far the police can exert their authority over grade-school students with the active cooperation of school officials but without the knowledge or consent of custodial adults. Specifically, are the rights of a school child violated if police interrogate him about criminal activity without a custodian or attorney present and without reading him his Miranda rights?
KNOW YOUR RIGHT to stay quiet and cooperative
ALGEBRA OUR WAY TODAY http://bookstore.xlibris.com/Products/SKU-0112143017/Baby-Algebra-For-Baby-and-You.aspx
Introducing baby to algebra as early as the baby shower via algebra themed baby beginnings, such as:mobiles, room plaques, pacifiers and other baby algebra paraphernalia,we inundate baby with the message that algebra is important to baby and family tradition.Baby algebra uses pictures and key words to help Baby to generalize and grasp algebra concepts. Therefore we can think our way through the stepping stones called tests. Colors and images react . Colors with one side of the brain, images with the other side of the brain, together create and complete the learning process inherent at birth . WALLA! Baby does algebra.
No comments:
Post a Comment