Initial claims demonstrate why the law was so badly needed

Most Americans get their mental picture of the criminal justice system from their television sets. Bombarded as we are by an endless stream of police shows and courtroom dramas, we can't help but use such images in order to envision what goes on in the real world. Add in a dash of reality TV – usually from a high profile murder case with lots of expensive consultants and trial lawyers – and the package upon which most people base their opinions is pretty much complete.

But, of course, such a picture is tremendously distorted. Especially in states like North Carolina, most serious criminal trials do not take place in big urban courtrooms packed full of brilliant, good looking, Ivy League law school grads, high-priced experts and TV lights. Most such trials take place in run-of-the-mill towns, in modest courtrooms peopled with run-of-the-mill civil servants. Perhaps a young newspaper reporter will join them from time to time. As with so many other functions of modern government, most participants are overworked and doing their best to keep up with busy and stressful jobs. Some are in over their heads or even downright incompetent. A few value victory over justice.

Anyone who doubts this characterization of the real criminal justice system would do well to read some of the facts brought to light this week in the motions filed by five North Carolina death row inmates. These men are seeking to have their death sentences converted to life without the possibility of parole as the result of the ways in which race (their race, their victim's race, the race of the jurors and rejected jurors in their cases) played a huge and discriminatory role in contributing to their death sentences.

Here are some of the salient facts as reported in a press release from the Center for Death Penalty Litigation:

"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." 

In other words, each of these cases shows in the plainest terms why the TV version of criminal justice reality is so frequently inaccurate. These men were not convicted and sentenced to death in big city courthouses under the microscope of intense scrutiny provided by rows of TV cameras and teams of heroic lawyers and experts. Rather, each was sent to death row by a relatively narrow group of all-too-human individuals living in some modest-sized (and, in many ways, racially divided) communities. Each of their cases was and is fraught with huge problems that call into question the ultimate fairness of the judgments rendered.

This is where, thank goodness, the Racial Justice Act now has the chance to come into play. Thanks to the new law passed by state lawmakers last year, each of these men now has a chance to make a case and convince a judge that his sentence was the result of racial bias.

Of course, nothing is certain. Even if he prevails, each man still faces the prospect of life in prison without the possibility of parole. Moreover, once each man has made his case, state prosecutors will have the chance to disprove it.

What the new law does help to make sure, however, is that an extra and vitally important measure of scrutiny will now be brought to some of the most important decisions we make as a society.

After all, one thing that is the same on TV and in the real world criminal justice systems is this: At the end of the day, a group of imperfect humans will attempt to decide what is "just" for a criminal defendant. In some cases they will decide whether he or she will live or die.

Since society cannot turn every such real world trial into an episode of "Law and Order," it seems like the least we can do is to make sure that no one is put to death in all of our names because of his or the victim's race.