Leave a comment

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled for the first time Monday that reports of racial bias among jurors may lead to discarding verdicts and holding new trials, reports the Los Angeles Times.

From Los Angeles Times:

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, announcing the court’s decision Monday, wrote that the “imperative to purge racial prejudice from the administration of justice” requires setting aside the traditional rule that bars judges from second-guessing what went on in the jury room.

The 5-3 decision announced a limited exception to that rule against second-guessing juries. The new rule covers cases in which “one or more jurors made statements exhibiting overt racial bias that cast serious doubt on the fairness and impartiality of the jury’s deliberations and resulting verdict.”

Kennedy did not say exactly what should happen in such cases, other than that the trial judge should look into the matter, question the former jurors and then decide whether a new trial is called for.

Kennedy also added that racial bias is “a familiar and recurring evil that, if left unaddressed, would risk systemic injury to the administration of justice,” reports NPR.

SOURCE: Los Angeles TimesNPR


Supreme Court Takes A Stand Against Racial Bias During Jury Trials was originally published on

7 thoughts on “Supreme Court Takes A Stand Against Racial Bias During Jury Trials

  1. Mark Collier on said:

    Dr. Larry: you obviously know nothing of the personal history the black race has with the police. Blacks are often presumed guilty without proof of any kind. The fact that Scott was “running away” without any visible weapon of any kind, indicates that he was NOT a threat to the officer. The planting of evidence near Scott’s body is proof of guilt – not on Scott, but on the officer. Slager had several options available to him, including calling for back up, pursuing Scott on foot or in his vehicle, tasering Scott, or using the bean bag gun. To shoot him in the back, multiple times, is nothing short of manslaughter. To have a juror oppose a guilty verdict for Slager simply because “Scott ran” is plain and simple malicious racism. To suggest anything else is simply insane bias.

  2. Just saying on said:

    @ I wish I was a Dr. Larry, if Slager was in the right as a police officer, and it was a clean shoot, there wouldn’t be any need for him to plant evidence and lie in the reports. Only cowards shoot people in the back. You really should stop trolling. You show your stupidity with every comment, and really need to show some adult behavior if you’re going to keep commenting.

    • Dr. Larry on said:

      If you engage an officer in a struggle for his weapon, don’t cry foul if you get shot. Does anyone want to debate that Mr. Scott was attempting to take Officer Slager’s weapon? He played a stupid game and lost. Why must we try to deflect blame from that simple fact. Trying to argue otherwise is the true meaning of stupidity, just sayin’.

    • specialt757 on said:

      Help me remember, Michael Slager is the racists SC cop who gunned down Walter Scott and tried to plant evidence next to his body right? So the racist juror is the one that said he was not guilty, that hung the jury?
      And probably because black folks are never given the benefit of the doubt on sight, we’re assumed guilty solely because we’re black. Yeah this ruling is way overdue. Now lets see what happens going forward.
      SN: And our resident token C. Thomas is probably 1 of the 3 who ruled against it.

Add Your Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

&pubUrl=[PAGE_URL_ENCODED]&x=[WIDTH]&y=[HEIGHT]&vp_content=plembeddf3ixunshlvk&vp_template=3854" ]