![]() |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
We need some conservative nominees to balance this liberal court.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
THis was apparently a very conservative decision. Due process still is in the consitution.
Perhaps the three other judges should heed the proposed Senate apologies on lynchings. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The State of Texas is 11.5% black.
The jury was 8.33% black. Yet they suggest that the jury was unfair. You don't have a right to be judged by your preferred selected subgroup of society. The Supreme Court made a bad decision. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It is not the percentages of black and white in the state or on the jury. It is the process by which that jury was arrived at. It seems pretty clear that the prosecutors not only struck blacks from the jury pool based on race, but 'shuffled' the jury pool as well. This is another of those quaint technicalities of due process.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
It is not the percentages of black and white in the state or on the jury. It is the process by which that jury was arrived at. It seems pretty clear that the prosecutors not only struck blacks from the jury pool based on race, but 'shuffled' the jury pool as well. This is another of those quaint technicalities of due process. [/ QUOTE ] This suggestion of prosecutorial conduct is not clear at all. In our system it is legitimate to exclude people who are knee-jerk against the death penalty in death penalty cases. The prosecution can't be faulted for potential jurors who exclude themselves. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
No doubt the supreme court thinks the defendant should have had the fair and impartial jury OJ had.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
This suggestion of prosecutorial (mis-)conduct is not clear at all. [/ QUOTE ] You did not say that there was no evidence of prosecutorial mis-conduct. If it is not clear then the court made the correct "Conservative" decision to provide the defendant due process. Celebrate the court that strictly interprets the constitution. Put aside petty partisanship - can you? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
as some who opposes abortion and the death penalty, the supreme court is looking good. they may even reach the right answer in my lifetime. wow.
fim |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] This suggestion of prosecutorial (mis-)conduct is not clear at all. [/ QUOTE ] You did not say that there was no evidence of prosecutorial mis-conduct. If it is not clear then the court made the correct "Conservative" decision to provide the defendant due process. Celebrate the court that strictly interprets the constitution. Put aside petty partisanship - can you? [/ QUOTE ] Due process does not mean "perfection of process." The Rehnquist court has been good in defining what are reasonable imperfections and what are not. In this case, it appears that it is the liberals general dislike of the death penalty, rather than the due process concerns that led them to rule as they did. Note, that they did not throw out the case and order the release of the prisoner onto the streets of Texas. It was results oriented decision making, inconsistent with the reasonable standards of imperfections in the due process of trials, that makes it a bad decision. And there was no prosecutorial misconduct, just innuendo. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|