The claim is when a black man is accused of raping a white woman, the victim will be identifying you under oath as the person who raped and attack her, what chance do you have when the jury is made up of 10 white women, and two white men. I personality as a lawyer defending the accused would remove myself from the case, your already guilty, you don’t need me.
Your entitled to a fair trial with a jury of your peers, name one black man who believes being accused of raping a white women, that ten white women, and two white men in the totality are his peers. What a laugh. If I was accused of raping a black women as a white man, you think I want twelve black women deciding if she is lying or not when she is crying, and sobbing on the stand testifying about the traumatic attack how I step by step without a doubt in her mind raped her, “ it was him sitting right there, he did this to me” then breakdown on the stand crying again, screaming!! WHY, WHY, WHY.. WHY YOU RAPE ME, why did you do this to me.. Why, why.. You finished. In the case of Frederick Daye, accused, and convicted of raping a white woman, with an all white jury presiding. The victim identified Daye as the man who raped her. Daye had 13 witnesses placing him somewhere else the time of the crime, convicted, and served 10 years, later cleared through DNA. It was very evident even in the original investigation and trial he never committed the crime.
The DA uses racial jury profiling for their convictions, there is not one case in United States history where an all black jury decided the fait of a white man accused of raping a black woman.
Last Edit: Apr 2, 2010 19:24:47 GMT -5 by alanthony
The death sentence, your in a trial where the outcome of twelve people deciding the facts decides if you will be found guilty, and sentenced to death, isolation incarceration while you appeal, but what people do not release is.. You do not get a jury of your peers, or a jury of your racial choosing. The case of Robert Fratta, he wanted an all black jury deciding if he should live or die, if he murdered or not, in a system that claims is fair, and. AND can be judged by a jury of your peers, is in fact not true, or is not available. It is that simple.
Last Edit: Apr 2, 2010 19:29:17 GMT -5 by alanthony
If your DNA is up someone bum, and you have alibi witnesses placing you somewhere else, would the jury believe on suggestion that perhaps the lab is working with police, most likely not.. But on the same token in this scenario is true, who would believe you without actual facts… would Jim, the Scottish Hen, a rape victim, not a chance, but there are people that could be convinced of this fact on suggestion, the black community, because predominately they themselves are the victim of this trick, that most likely sent their, brother, sister, father, mother, uncle, ant, love one, or someone they know was in fact innocent, not the white blue collar man, and woman who believes the system works, and is a system of integrity, not a system out to convict anyone who fit the frame, other wise know as the profile.
There Jim, there is are little talk over beers. Later dude
Jennifer Thompson white woman positively identified Ronald Cotton a black man as the man who raped her, that a predominately all white jury of Cottons peers evaluated. Ms. Thompson said after the exoneration through DNA, " I pick out Ronald because in my mind he resembled the photo, which resembled the composite, which resembled the attacker. All the images became enmeshed to one that became Ron the police suspect, and Ron now became my attacker." Cotton served 10.5 years in prison on the wrongful conviction.
Last Edit: Apr 3, 2010 18:10:48 GMT -5 by alanthony
Chain of Rocks Bridge rape and murders. The original suspect a white man confessed to the murders, that confession was replaced with a group of black men, and one white man. The white man in the group implicates all the black men to the crime, that they all confess to as being involved, one of the black men on a deal to save his life. The only white man involved, that admitted to being a party to the crime is walking a free man today in society. The black men are either executed already, received death sentencing, or will send the rest of their lives in prison. Is it possible the original white suspect actually committed the crime, and that a group of black men makes for a better conviction, such as in the Central Park Jogger case were the police got a group of five teen to falsely confess to a raping a women. The question is, is it possible the police got a false confession from the group of black men on the Chain of Rocks Bridge rape and murders, those confessions were validated through two white men, one the original prime suspect, the other on a deal to walk a free man. Two of the black men convicted stated they falsely confessed, and one Marlin Grey was not on the Bridge when the crime occurred in both case scenarios, who is executed already.
Last Edit: Apr 4, 2010 12:16:13 GMT -5 by alanthony
The case of Troy Davis, a group a black men, one murdered a white police officer, Davis was in the area, the police appointed Davis as the man who committed the murder, validated with witness testimony, all white jury, convicted and sentenced to death on nothing but testimony. The witnesses, all nine recanted their original testimony as being forced against their will by white police officers. The only witness that never recanted was the police original prime suspect. A white judges rules in appeal the witnesses testimony is more reliable under oath in trial, than in a worn affidavit off police coercion after the fact. That statement means, they are lying now, not then, and the ruling is validated with absolutely nothing considered reasonable. There was absolutely no physical evidence in the Davis case. If a black judge wants to rule the above ruling as his ruling as well, then ok I will believe this lunacy. It is white man justice, with an all white jury.
The police wanted to nail OJ Simpson, so they charged him with something, make deals with witnesses, and bring in an all white Jury of Simpson peers to seal the deal on the conviction. We the jury find the defendant Mr. Simpson guilty as charged... well really, i knew that before the trial started, here is a hint, all white jury, the accused Simpson a black man. could there have been any other verdict other than guilty, if your answer is yes, your white, not right.
Last Edit: Apr 4, 2010 14:29:24 GMT -5 by alanthony
Rubin Carter (black man) was a professional middleweight boxer from 1961 to 1966 and a member of the New Jersey Boxing Hall of Fame. Charged with murder, all white jury, convicted. A motion to dismiss was granted, effectively dropping all charges, served around 20 years in prison.
Yes 100% of the time, because the victim, a white woman, who was raped by a black man.. says so, Yes to an all white jury, it is a fact in a United Stated courtroom the defendant will be, and is found guilty everytime Yes, didn’t you know that till now.
Just wondering since you seem to have done so much research into this subject. How many convictions for rape have stood up under DNA evidence? I would like to see the exonerated versus confirmed statistics.
The justice system in the past had flaws. If a woman is raped and accuses someone of the attack then I would say the jury did the best they could with the facts presented. But it sounds like you want to say all whites are racist and would not even consider the facts of the case. You have also posted cases which had "predominately white" jurors, which means that there were minorities also involved in juror process. That means that they also considered the suspect guilty or the jury would of hung up on the conviction and the case would have to be retried.
Now we have DNA evidence and better science to help find criminals and convict those that are guilty. The days of wrongful convictions are in the mostly in the past and there will be less wrongful conviction cases. Once again remember not every "white person" is racist!
Racist is your label based on your perspective based on the posts posted. I was just posting definitive facts, you do not need to be a racist to know what to sell a jury. I’m a white man, and posted these posts for a black man to read.
The cases I posted were all White jury members, the defendant Black. If there is no racism in the jury selection in United States, post where an all Black jury decided the fate of a white man accused of the rape of a black woman, its never happened, and if and when it ever does, whether there is DNA or not, that person will be found guilty, that is just the way it works, those are the facts.
In the Hood case, white man. The DA is going to suggest he disrespects women, and accuse him of committing rape in his double murder trial, though not true, based on the fact, you do not want any women on your jury, Black or White. Robert Fratta wanted an all Black Jury, though he is a white man. I truly believe without any doubt the reason he was found guilty is because he had a predominately all white jury, if he had all Black, he would be a free man today in my opinion, but we will never know. It come down to this, if the DA does not have a jury plant, so let exclude this, as in Hood, and Routier where I know they were jury plants, still under investigation the jury is the most important aspect of your trial.
I personally would have a black women, or man on my Jury depending on the charged accused. If it was raping a black woman, then I would want no black women on my jury, second no black man, or anyone who is married to a black person or close associate. If I was accused of raping a white woman. I would not want any white women on the Jury. In fact I would take black women in that circumstance, and try and exclude all white people with minorities.
That is what a person life comes down to. If a person, man in the case scenario was accused of murdering another man, though the circumstances was the victim raped his girlfriend of wife, yet he tries a self defense plea, predominately an all woman jury would find the accuse not guilty whether he committed the crime or not based on the evidence produced, justified through the conformed subconscious the victim deserved what he had coming to him.
In the Henderson case, if there is a new trial, the case comes down to science, and Pathology, so wouldn’t it make sense to have twelve Pathologists on the jury deciding the fait based on the evidence over twelve housewife, that all they know about Pathology is from the soap opera General Hospital.
Last Edit: May 15, 2011 16:27:15 GMT -5 by alanthony
Post by shellshocker66 on May 16, 2011 17:50:11 GMT -5
Sorry I just don't buy it. Maybe because I have a thinking mind that will not allow me to judge a person by their race. I give credit to most people that they will not allow the race of the person to drive their motivations in how they vote on a jury.
But like I asked before I would like to see research that would also include those convictions post DNA testing. What was the percentage of exoneration versus confirmed convictions?
And sorry but anyway you spin it when you make claims that an all white jury will convict a black man of rape is a racist claim!
Joyce Gilchrist is a former forensic chemist who had participated in over 3,000 criminal cases in 21 years while working for the Oklahoma City police department, and who was accused of falsifying evidence Her evidence led in part to 23 people being sentenced to death, 11 of whom have been executed.
Jeffrey Todd Pierce, who had been convicted of rape in 1986 largely based on Gilchrist's evidence despite a clean record and good alibi, was exonerated based on additional DNA evidence. Pierce, a husband and the father of two infant children, was misidentified in a police line-up and after voluntarily giving hair and blood samples to the police investigators hoping to clear his name, was arrested and charged with the rape after Gilchrist claimed his hair samples were "microscopically consistent" with the hairs found at the crime scene.
Now in the Routier case involving the black hat, where she is still on death row fighting for DNA testing there were two hair identified as microscopically consistent with the murder victim, her son, placing the ownership of the hat to the victim, NOT a possible intruder as she claims, then the States witness goes on to state it was an child’s size hat, as the victim was a child, Yet the manufactures of the hat never produced children size hats. I brought this up to the people here on the forum, they in turn stated I was crazy.
Another case is that of Curtis McCarty, who was released in 2007 after spending nearly 20 years on death row. The courts found that Gilchrist acted to either alter or intentionally lose evidence.
So to answer you question I would say out of 3,000 criminal cases in 21 years that Joyce Gilchrist was involved 11 people that were executed were in fact innocent of the charged. 12 are still on death row falsely convicted through forensic evidence, and the other 2977 other people convicted in this fares may be innocent as well, but on a statistic were convicted on forensic testing, and evidence. You can add Routier to that statistic as well, and Charles Hood, both on Texas death row claiming innocence of the conviction backed by forensic testing, expert witnesses, and testimonies.
And you can call the facts about an all White jury anything you wish in reference to the above posts. I don’t really care if it sounds like a racist statement or not, there is only one way to state the fact that is clear and definitive, that is what I did.
I would not want a rape victim whom never reported the crime to be on anyone jury, but that person would agree to go on the jury of an accused, accused of rape, so doing a behavioural profile on her to weed her out of the jury, is the same ideology as getting easily expectable people off a jury based on a racial profiling, or on the jury depending on what side of the fence your on victim or accused.
I could go on forever on this subject though I will not, if you cant get it by now, you never will.
Last Edit: May 17, 2011 2:03:10 GMT -5 by alanthony
thats just proving that 'they all look alike' ;> LOL Sorry, being funny here because this is a silly topic. Lots of people are convicted falsely, not about color...about victims not remembering exactly what the perp looks like...most people do not recall enough to give adequate descriptions about vehicles, etc. Not understanding the POINT of your prattling...
JimSneak: Ronnie James Dio what it be like dude? I used to be a member here with more posts then even you, lol...
Apr 29, 2019 20:38:20 GMT -5
festus: You responders seem to be a little bit low on the evolution tree of brains....
May 4, 2019 9:39:03 GMT -5
puppylover54: im ted bundys daughter
May 11, 2019 19:46:15 GMT -5
May 11, 2019 19:46:24 GMT -5
bundyobsessed: What is Bundy's daughter's new name?
May 22, 2019 19:36:21 GMT -5
beanybags: no way to know since both sites are gone
Jun 16, 2019 17:16:23 GMT -5
seriously: Regarding your comment that Charles Ng comes from a "wealthy family", a "GOOD FAMILY"; since when does being wealthy equate to good? They are two entirely different things; and, frankly, some of the worst criminals are in fact wealthy. Con't in next post.
Sept 1, 2019 20:16:46 GMT -5
seriously: Consider the Clinton's: Bill has oral "isn't sex" in the White House, now virtually every kinder. knows what oral sex is. Then there's Hillary first deriding the women who came forward about her husband; then she deleting files to hide her activities.
Sept 1, 2019 20:19:48 GMT -5
seriously: Oh, and let's not forget Bill Clinton "didn't inhale" when he smoked pot...yeah, right! At a time when America's young men are being drafted for the Vietnam war, Bill & Hillary choose to take a trip to Russia and conveniently miss the draft all together.
Sept 1, 2019 20:22:46 GMT -5
seriously: Remember Hillary is for women & children; yet she only had one child and she doesn't even bake cookies...oh my! She defames her opponents with accusations of womanizing hoping we forget about her husband IN THE OVAL OFFICE! Not happening honey!
Sept 1, 2019 20:26:48 GMT -5
seriously: Then there's the BIG BANK BAIL-OUT; the banker's show up in Washington D.C. to get WELFARE (OUR tax dollars) by flying there in a LEAR JET...really! Even Obama was shocked at that move! But they're GOOD because they're WEALTHY? I think not!
Sept 1, 2019 20:33:22 GMT -5
seriously: I think Obama should have made them liquidate all their assets both business AND PERSONAL so they could climb over their own pile of s***; instead of expecting the American tax payers to do it.
Sept 1, 2019 20:35:38 GMT -5
seriously: Wake up people! Don't you realize that WE THE PEOPLE don't need the rich, THEY NEED US...to do the work that makes them richer so they don't have to clean their own toilets; and all we get is industrialized meats and crops, GMO's, antibiotic resistance.
Sept 1, 2019 20:38:53 GMT -5
seriously: Patented seed crops, running small farmer's out of business, toxic waste, poisoned water, dirty air, deforestation, global warming. By the way, who even wants to live in a GLOBAL GOVERNMENT world with a GLOBAL ECONOMY?
Sept 1, 2019 20:41:57 GMT -5
seriously: America should be more like Switzerland, fix our own 'broken wagon' and let the rest of the world fix theirs...it's not an U.S.A. problem. Screw oil, it pollutes the earth...GO SOLAR, WIND, WATER POWER! Screw the utility companies!
Sept 1, 2019 20:48:33 GMT -5
seriously: That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. Best way to topple the rich...eliminate money and go back to the barter system; let the rich wipe their own bums and clean their own toilets...for a change! No more "Groom of the stool" for them.
Sept 1, 2019 20:51:50 GMT -5
seriously: Then banks and wall street can crash all they want; why should we be dragged down with them.
Sept 1, 2019 20:53:16 GMT -5