SCOTUS Throws Out Murder Conviction....Racial Discrimination

Seems so to me.

If, after 6 tries, you can't get a conviction that isn't underpinned by racism, you're probably not very good at your job.

iluvatar5150 said:

If, after 6 tries, you can't get a conviction that isn't underpinned by racism, you're probably not very good at your job.

Click to expand...

The state seems to be very determined to convict this guy.

JackRT said:

The state seems to be very determined to convict this guy.

Click to expand...

Well, the one prosecutor does...

Hank77 said:

In a remarkable case, the Supreme Court on Friday threw out the murder conviction of a Mississippi man on death row who had alleged deep-seated racial bias in jury selection cost him a fair trial.
Curtis Flowers has already been tried an extraordinary six times, ....
Writing for the court's 7-2 majority, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said "all of the relevant and facts circumstances taken together establish that the trial court committed clear error" in ruling.....
....
Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
After blacks kicked off juries, Mississippi death row inmate wins at Supreme Court

Did Justice Kavanaugh get this one right? imo, he did.

Click to expand...

I gotta say....for as much as I hated him as a SCOTUS pick, I haven't disagreed with him much.

I agree with SCOTUS. Retry the alleged killer a seventh time with a fairly picked jury and let it decide.

JacobKStarkey said:

I agree with SCOTUS. Retry the alleged killer a seventh time with a fairly picked jury and let it decide.

Click to expand...

So has been said at the end of the previous 5 trials I’m sure. At which point does it become crucial and unusual? 22 years in prison, 6 failed trials.

Or even cruel and unusual!(spellcheck)

Although I am not familiar with the facts of the case, I'm not sure why this is a federal case?

In my lifetime, I've seen the courts usurp power, becoming an oligarch, with arbitrary power. Consider this: the prosector has reason to belief the State could not get a fair trial with Blacks on the jury. Why is racism only seen to hurt Blacks but not help? See Smollet Case & Affirmative Action.

Is there no upper limit on how many times a case can be retried?

Desk trauma said:

Is there no upper limit on how many times a case can be retried?

Click to expand...

Obviously not. It does feel cruel and unusual, I wonder whether there are any Supreme Court ruling on it?

Wrangler said:

Although I am not familiar with the facts of the case, I'm not sure why this is a federal case?

In my lifetime, I've seen the courts usurp power, becoming an oligarch, with arbitrary power. Consider this: the prosector has reason to belief the State could not get a fair trial with Blacks on the jury. Why is racism only seen to hurt Blacks but not help? See Smollet Case & Affirmative Action.

Click to expand...

It's a federal case because preventing somebody from serving on a jury because of race, sex, or religion is a violation of the 14th amendment.

Goonie said:

Obviously not. It does feel cruel and unusual, I wonder whether there are any Supreme Court ruling on it?

Click to expand...

IMO, absent significant new information or a a mistrial declared (not including a simple hung jury, there needs to be done sort of impropriety or procedural issue), prosecutors should get one additional shot at a conviction if there is a hung jury.

Goonie said:

So has been said at the end of the previous 5 trials I’m sure. At which point does it become crucial and unusual? 22 years in prison, 6 failed trials.

Click to expand...

The process ends when the accused gets a fair trial not before.

JacobKStarkey said:

The process ends when the accused gets a fair trial not before.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but jailing someone for over 2 decades because the state cannot provide a fair trial, as demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt by 6 failed trials, is cruel and unusual.

If the state cannot provide a fair trial as this case has demonstrated, are you arguing that he should be imprisoned until death?

Nope, Goonie, that has nothing to do with the law. The evidence points straight at the accused for four murders, for which accountability is required. Get a fair trial and end the process.

Had a cat just like your avatar, splotched nose and all. One of the most dog-like cats I have ever known.

JacobKStarkey said:

Nope, Goonie, that has nothing to do with the law. The evidence points straight at the accused for four murders, for which accountability is required. Get a fair trial and end the process.

Had a cat just like your avatar, splotched nose and all. One of the most dog-like cats I have ever known.

Click to expand...

You seem to be conflating "fair trial" with a trial that finds him guilty.

Arcangl86 said:

You seem to be conflating "fair trial" with a trial that finds him guilty.

Click to expand...

Not at all. The murders of four people require that needs of the dead, prosecution, and defense all be met. If the new jury finds him "not guilty", it ends there.

When I first read this story I thought that something must be wrong. Six trials, Prosecutors never found a murder weapon or any physical evidence tying him to the scene. There were no witnesses, this just didn’t seem right or make any sense. But then I saw a picture of this cold blooded murder, you can see it in his eyes; he is as guilty as can be. Let the President decide and spare the State of Mississippi of another costly trial to keep this dangerous person off our streets.