Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!cord!hudson!bentley!ihnp1!ihnp4!ucbvax!csanders
From: csanders@ucbvax.ARPA (Craig S. Anderson)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.flame
Subject: Re: American Hostages
Message-ID: <10250@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 31-Aug-85 07:17:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.10250
Posted: Sat Aug 31 07:17:51 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Sep-85 06:26:14 EDT
References: <1042@ihlpg.UUCP> <185@pyuxii.UUCP> <11045@rochester.UUCP>
Reply-To: csanders@ucbvax.UUCP (Craig S. Anderson)
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 40
Xref: watmath net.politics:10763 net.flame:11766

In article <1755@psuvax1.UUCP> berman@psuvax1.UUCP (Piotr Berman) writes:
>> >  Piotr Berman
>     
>
>I admit that I put some slick rhetoric into my reply.  My opinions about
>American justice changed because of Greensboro saga, but the change was
>from "very good" to "good".  I have not felt ashamed and naive.  I agree
>that America may serve as an example of overcoming injustices toward
>minorities.  I agree with Bill that to change the system, one should 
>play the game according to the existing rules.  Yes, the success is
>visible, it is a better place.  Yes, I know that the disparities
>between NC and MA are just a side effect of an intricate political
>system, designed to hold different parts together.
>
>However, Greensboro was an eye opener for me.  I started to read 
>newspapers more carefully.  Here is what I noticed:
>
>1.  To a surprizing degree it is better to be black than white.
>    As a small example, the routine practice of removing all
>    blacks from juries is still valid.

Not in California anymore.  This week, the state Supreme Court declared
that the practice is illegal.  One bit of clarification:  in any jury trial,
each attorney may use two types of 'challenges' to remove someone from a jury.
One type is the challenge 'for cause'.  The atorney (be it defense or
prosecution) must show the judge that the potential juror would be biased
against his/her client.  If the judge finds there is cause, the juror is
excused.  The fact that the juror is black WOULD NOT be sufficient cause.
The other type of challenge is the pre-emptive challenge.  An attorney may
object to a juror without showing cause using this challenge, and the juror
is automatically excused.  While an attorney may challenge for cause as much
as he/she wishes, the lawyer get only a certain amount of pre-emptive
challenges.  The Supreme Court ruled that an attorney may not use the
pre-emptive challenge to systematically exclude blacks from the jury.
>
>Piotr Berman
>

Craig Anderson
csanders@ucbvax.ARPA