Center for Death Penalty Litigation Inc.
Suite 301, 201 West Main Street
Durham, North Carolina 27701
Telephone: 919-956-9545
Facsimile: 919-956-9547
For Immediate Release: August 3, 2010
For more information contact:
Malcolm Hunter, Executive Director CDPL 919-956-9545 or 919-971-0466
Ken Rose, Staff Attorney CDPL 919-956-9545 or 919-286-7653
NC Racial Justice Act: First Five Death Row Defendants
File Motions Citing Strong Evidence of Racial Bias
Durham, NC — One year ago, the North Carolina General Assembly took the trailblazing step of passing the Racial Justice Act, a guarantee that no person would be put to death because of racial bias in our state’s justice system.
This week, the law is finally being put to the test. Five death row inmates have asked the courts to convert their death sentences to life imprisonment without parole. All can prove that race played a key role in their trials.
The cases were filed today in Stanly, Randolph, Martin, Forsyth and Davie counties.
“Race still plays a part in determining who lives and dies in our justice system, and that is unacceptable,” said Center for Death Penalty Litigation Executive Director Malcolm R. Hunter. “We are proud that North Carolina is honestly confronting this legacy of injustice.”
North Carolina’s handling of the cases will be watched around the country, as it is the first state to undertake a comprehensive effort to sever the historical ties between race and the death penalty. The Racial Justice Act cements North Carolina’s long history of leadership in efforts to promote racial equality.
The cases are supported by three new comprehensive studies of the death penalty in North Carolina.
“We would like to live and practice in a system where race does not matter,” said Ken Rose, staff attorney at CDPL. “But the results show that white victims are valued more highly than black ones, and that black jurors are being denied their right to serve. This evidence of racial bias cannot be ignored.”
One of the new studies, from Michigan State University, shows that prosecutors in capital trials used peremptory strikes to exclude eligible blacks from juries at more than twice the rate that they excluded whites. Of the 159 inmates now on death row in North Carolina, 31 were sentenced by all-white juries, and another 38 had only one minority on their sentencing juries.
Two more studies, one from Michigan State University and one from the University of Colorado, show that those who kill whites are more likely to get the death penalty than those who kill blacks. The MSU study found that a defendant is 2.6 times more likely to get the death penalty if the victim is white. The UC study found that a defendant’s odds of getting the death penalty increase by 2.96 times if the victim is white.
The findings echo those of previous studies in North Carolina and around the country.
The MSU study also found that in some districts, minority defendants were more likely to be sentenced to death than white defendants.
The five cases presented to the courts today reveal these problems in stark relief.
In all five cases, the victims were white and the defendants were minorities, and prosecutors struck eligible blacks from the juries at far greater rates than eligible whites. In several cases, prosecutors rejected eligible black jurors even while accepting similar white jurors.
Three of the defendants were sentenced by all-white juries. In the other cases, only one or two minorities sat on the juries — even in Martin County, where nearly half the population was black.
In the Randolph County case, one member of the all-white jury admitted after the fact that “bigotry” influenced his decision to vote for the execution of a black defendant. In Union County, the defendant was referred to as a “n—–” during testimony.
“We don’t condone the crimes these men committed, and even if they win their cases under the Racial Justice Act, they will remain in prison for life,” said Hunter. “But we cannot, in good conscience, execute people who received death sentences because of the color of their skin, or their victims’ skin.”
The Racial Justice Act went into effect on August 11, 2009. Kentucky is the only other state with similar, but less comprehensive, legislation.
North Carolina Gov. Beverly Perdue said when she signed the act that it “ensures that when North Carolina hands down our state’s harshest punishment to our most heinous criminals, the decision is based on the facts and the law, not racial prejudice.”
The Racial Justice Act is exceptional because — much like civil rights laws — it allows the use of statewide or regional statistical evidence to prove racial bias, and it specifies that even unintentional bias is grounds for reexamining a death sentence. Those provisions were included with the understanding that racial bias is very rarely openly admitted, and evidence of trends is often the only way to prove it.
Inmates on death row were given until August 10, 2010 to file claims under the act.
As the deadline approaches, North Carolina begins a challenging new chapter in its history — one in which the state has an opportunity to acknowledge the fact of continuing racial bias and scrub it away from the courtrooms that decide matters of life and death.
Fact sheet:
The Racial Justice Act
The NC Racial Justice Act was signed into law on August 11, 2009. The Act allows defendants facing the death penalty to present evidence of racial bias, including statistics, in court. Anyone on death row who files a claim must do so by August 10.
If a death row inmate proves discrimination at the time of his charging or sentencing, he will be resentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
The Act was passed after the wrongful convictions and subsequent recent exonerations of three black defendants. One of the exonerees was sentenced by an all-white jury and the other two had only one black juror on each of their juries. In all three cases, at least one of the victims was white.
Five Death Row Inmates File Motions
On August 3, 2010, five of the first death row defendants filed their motions in superior court in the counties where they were tried.
Central to these motions are results of a new comprehensive study of North Carolina capital sentencing that shows for the 159 people currently on North Carolina’s death row, 31 of those defendants had all-white juries and 38 of them had only one person of color on their jury. In other words, more than 40% of the defendants on North Carolina’s death row were sentenced to death by a jury that included either one or zero persons of color.
The study, which was conducted by researchers at Michigan State University, finds that statewide, prosecutors struck qualified black jurors at more than twice the rate at which they struck white jurors.
In addition, the MSU study finds that in cases with at least one white victim, a defendant is 2.6 times more likely to be sentenced to death than if the case does not involve a white victim. This finding is consistent with a study by Radelet and Pierce released in late July showing that the odds of receiving the death penalty increase by 2.96 times for defendants convicted of killing white victims.
The inmates who filed motions today argue that death penalty practices in their districts and individual cases corroborate the MSU study and show that race was a significant factor placing them on death row.
Kenneth Rouse, Randolph County, 1992
Black defendant, white victim
All-white jury
Prosecution struck 100% of qualified black jurors, 34% of qualified white jurors
One juror claimed after the trial that “blacks do not care about living as much as whites do.” The juror routinely referred to blacks as “n—–s,” and stated that “bigotry” was influential in his decision to vote for death. No federal court considered Rouse’s claim of race discrimination because his lawyers filed his appeal one day late. Rouse is one of five death row prisoners sentenced to death by an all-white jury in Randolph County. The prosecutor in Rouse’s case has a history of striking black potential jurors. Even the US Supreme Court has taken notice of the problem and sent yet another Randolph County capital case back for an inquiry into whether the prosecutor struck jurors in a racially discriminatory manner.
Guy LeGrande, Stanly County, 1996
Black defendant, white victim.
All-white jury
Prosecution struck 100% of the qualified black jurors, 26% of qualified white jurors
LeGrande’s white co-defendant, who was the mastermind of the murder, was allowed to plead to second degree murder. In testimony at his trial, LeGrande was referred to as a “n—– from Wadesboro.” LeGrande, who is severely mentally ill, was allowed to represent himself at trial. The district attorney in his case regularly wore a noose lapel pin, a racially charged symbol of lynching, in the courtroom. He gave noose pins to his assistant district attorneys as “morale boosters” when they obtained a death sentence. One of the three recent exonerees, yet another black defendant who was sentenced by an all-white jury, was prosecuted by the same district attorney. His exoneration came after the revelation that the prosecutor hid favorable evidence from the defendant.
Shawn Bonnett, Martin County, 1996
Black defendant, white victim
Two black jurors
Prosecution struck 78% of the qualified black jurors, 6% of qualified white jurors
Bonnett and three other men were charged with the robbery and murder of a white store owner. It was not contested that Bonnett was not the shooter or the mastermind in the case, and none of his three co-defendants were sentenced to death. The prosecution in Bonnett’s trial used their peremptory strikes to exclude 78% of the qualified black potential jurors, while accepting 94% of the white jurors. At the time of the trial, the population of Martin County was 45% black.
Jeremy Murrell, Forsyth County, 2006
Black defendant, white victim
One black juror
Prosecution struck 80% of the qualified black jurors, 26% of qualified white jurors
Prosecutors in Murrell’s trial used their peremptory strikes to exclude a large proportion of qualified black prospective jurors from jury service. Meanwhile, prosecutors removed very few prospective white jurors from the panel. When asked to explain why they had cut nearly all the blacks from the jury, prosecutors claimed to have done so because those prospective jurors were close in age to the defendant, had failed to reveal their criminal records, or had a family history of mental illness. However, the prosecution gave its approval to white prospective jurors who were the exact same age as the defendant, had failed to reveal the exact same criminal charges as the struck black jurors, and also reported family histories of mental illness.
Jathiyah Al-Bayyinah, Davie County (Iredell County jury), 1999, again in 2003
(granted a new trial, re-sentenced to death)
Black defendant, white victim
Two all-white juries
1999 case – prosecution struck 100% of the qualified black jurors, 24% of qualified white jurors
2003 case – prosecution struck 67% of the qualified black jurors, 21% of qualified white jurors
On appeal, Al-Bayyinah, who is Muslim, presented evidence that his trial attorneys were ineffective in failing to present mitigating evidence of racial violence and tension in Statesville at the time he was growing up. In rejecting his claim, the court specifically cited as reasons why the claim was being denied that he became a Muslim, and the “the peaceful murder victim was an elderly white man.” One of the investigating officers in his case manufactured a fraudulent statement incriminating to the defendant and altered computer files to conceal the deception, and another later pled guilty to embezzlement from the sheriff’s department. Of the seven defendants currently on death row from that prosecutorial district, four were sentenced by all-white juries.
Michigan State University Study
In response to the passage of the Act, researchers at Michigan State University are conducting a detailed, comprehensive study on race and the death penalty in North Carolina. The study examines 5,800 cases that were eligible for the death penalty for the years 1990 through 2009. The data are analyzed at the statewide, judicial division, prosecutorial district and county levels.
The study examines jury selection, as well as three different approaches to charging and sentencing: looking at the numbers of people charged and sentenced based on race of defendant and victim to see if there are disparities, looking at those same numbers while also looking at the impact of statutory aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and looking at the numbers while trying to measure the impact of about 200 different factors or variables. These three approaches all show that race plays an improper role in the death penalty in North Carolina. The study results are entirely consistent with numerous studies across the country, including the July 2010 Radelet and Pierce study, which shows significant discrimination in the administration of capital punishment.
The MSU study finds that statewide, prosecutors struck qualified black jurors at more than twice the rate at which they struck white jurors.
In a death penalty case the judge must excuse a juror for “cause” when that juror is not qualified to serve. Judges excuse all jurors who are not able or willing to vote for the death penalty. The MSU study looked at “peremptory” strikes, which prosecutors use to exclude potential jurors who have already been qualified to serve. Prosecutors do not need a reason to exercise a peremptory strike, though they are not supposed to strike a juror based on race, gender or religious affiliation.
The MSU study findings are consistent with other studies done on jury strikes. The Alabama-based Equal Justice Initiative released a report this summer that found that in eight Southern states (not including NC), eligible black jurors are being dismissed from jury service at much higher rates than whites. The Dallas Morning News conducted a two-year investigation of non-capital felony cases tried in Dallas County in 2002. They, too, found that qualified black jurors were being struck at significantly higher rates. Other studies revealed the same trends.
In addition, the MSU study finds that in cases with at least one white victim, a defendant is 2.6 times more likely to be sentenced to death than if the case does not involve a white victim.
The MSU study findings are consistent with multiple prior studies in North Carolina that found in cases with white victims, the defendant was significantly more likely to receive a death sentence. Radelet and Pierce released a study on July 22, 2010, that concluded a defendant’s odds of getting the death penalty increase by 2.96 times if the victim is white. Similar findings are observed in a 2001 UNC-CH study by Unah and Boger, a 1990 report by the US General Accounting Office, and many others.
http://ncmoratorium.org/siteres.aspx?resid=e66d6959-7dc7-4e7c-a800-e777bb661f12
www.ncmoratorium.org
One year ago, the North Carolina General Assembly took the trailblazing step of passing the Racial Justice Act, a guarantee that no person would be put to death because of racial bias in our state’s justice system.
This week, the law is finally being put to the test. Five death row inmates have asked the courts to convert their death sentences to life imprisonment without parole. All can prove that race played a key role in their trials.
The cases were filed today in Stanly, Randolph, Martin, Forsyth and Davie counties.
"Race still plays a part in determining who lives and dies in our justice system, and that is unacceptable," said Center for Death Penalty Litigation Executive Director Malcolm R. Hunter. "We are proud that North Carolina is honestly confronting this legacy of injustice."
North Carolina’s handling of the cases will be watched around the country, as it is the first state to undertake a comprehensive effort to sever the historical ties between race and the death penalty. The Racial Justice Act cements North Carolina’s long history of leadership in efforts to promote racial equality.
The cases are supported by three new comprehensive studies of the death penalty in North Carolina.
"We would like to live and practice in a system where race does not matter," said Ken Rose, staff attorney at CDPL. "But the results show that white victims are valued more highly than black ones, and that black jurors are being denied their right to serve. This evidence of racial bias cannot be ignored."
One of the new studies, from Michigan State University, shows that prosecutors in capital trials used peremptory strikes to exclude eligible blacks from juries at more than twice the rate that they excluded whites. Of the 159 inmates now on death row in North Carolina, 31 were sentenced by all-white juries, and another 38 had only one minority on their sentencing juries.
Two more studies, one from Michigan State University and one from the University of Colorado, show that those who kill whites are more likely to get the death penalty than those who kill blacks. The MSU study found that a defendant is 2.6 times more likely to get the death penalty if the victim is white. The UC study found that a defendant’s odds of getting the death penalty increase by 2.96 times if the victim is white.
The findings echo those of previous studies in North Carolina and around the country.
The MSU study also found that in some districts, minority defendants were more likely to be sentenced to death than white defendants.
The five cases presented to the courts today reveal these problems in stark relief.
In all five cases, the victims were white and the defendants were minorities, and prosecutors struck eligible blacks from the juries at far greater rates than eligible whites. In several cases, prosecutors rejected eligible black jurors even while accepting similar white jurors.
Three of the defendants were sentenced by all-white juries. In the other cases, only one or two minorities sat on the juries – even in Martin County, where nearly half the population was black.
In the Randolph County case, one member of the all-white jury admitted after the fact that "bigotry" influenced his decision to vote for the execution of a black defendant. In Union County, the defendant was referred to as a "n—–" during testimony.
"We don’t condone the crimes these men committed, and even if they win their cases under the Racial Justice Act, they will remain in prison for life," said Hunter. "But we cannot, in good conscience, execute people who received death sentences because of the color of their skin, or their victims’ skin."
The Racial Justice Act went into effect on August 11, 2009. Kentucky is the only other state with similar, but less comprehensive, legislation.
N
orth Carolina Gov. Beverly Perdue said when she signed the act that it "ensures that when North Carolina hands down our state’s harshest punishment to our most heinous criminals, the decision is based on the facts and the law, not racial prejudice."
The Racial Justice Act is exceptional because – much like civil rights laws – it allows the use of statewide or regional statistical evidence to prove racial bias, and it specifies that even unintentional bias is grounds for reexamining a death sentence. Those provisions were included with the understanding that racial bias is very rarely openly admitted, and evidence of trends is often the only way to prove it.
Inmates on death row were given until August 10, 2010 to file claims under the act.
As the deadline approaches, North Carolina begins a challenging new chapter in its history – one in which the state has an opportunity to acknowledge the fact of continuing racial bias and scrub it away from the courtrooms that decide matters of life and death.
Want to Learn More about the NC Racial Justice Act?
–
Rev. Dr. William J. Barber, II, President
Mrs. Amina Josey Turner, Exec Dir
NC NAACP
P O Box 335
Durham, NC 27702
919-682-4700 V 919-682-4711 F
1-866-NC-NAACP
