lb3 said:

---

If I read the charts correctly, the white juror conviction rates are very similar regardless of the ethnicity of the defendant. That is not true with juries of other ethnicities. Fo one conclusion might be that to get a fair trial you would need to exclude certain ethnicities from the jury pool.

---

At the very least, mind your manners in a county where you'd be in the minority.

RAB87 said:

---

Multiculturalism is the cause of most human problems. It is not biblical. It is not natural (in nature, zebras live among zebras and giraffes among giraffes). Multiculturalism is, in fact, a consequence of the natural human sentiment of jealousy. People have never migrated to achieve "diversity", but rather to take advantage of what others have. Whether it be Muslims to the west, or liberals to red states, it is the plague of the human condition.

---

I was with you until the last sentence. Sin, not multiculturalism, is the plague of the human condition. Christians can exist in a pseudo-multicultural state where a Polynesian Christian can adhere to appropriate levels of "modesty" with next to no clothing while a Victorian Christian violates her culture's standard when showing her ankle (to use a Lewis example). A love for Christ and pursuit of biblical truth should allow them to be morally compatible despite social incompatibility.

Aggie Infantry said:

---

If your jury was truly a "jury of your peers", then, if I were to be on trial, I would want males who own guns, attend church, and have a Ph.D.

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

Chart 1 shows that whites are non-bias (or far less bias) and non-whites are more bias.

This fits personal experience and reinforces my personal belief that whites are not the propagators of racism.

---

IMO, a big part of the problem is that a healthy number of whites have fostered racism amongst blacks for the benefit of their own agendas whether personal or political. There is power in division.

Juries and judges are biased! When the SCOTUS rules 6-3, everybody knows who the 3 are. Our system is terribly flawed because it frequently leaves both parties broke at the end. The primary ethics of most attorneys is TO COLLECT THE FEE!

Frankly, I think America would be better off if the 2 parties just had a duel with pistols at 50 paces! I mean it! Our system is designed to extract as much money out of litigants as possible! And it never gets fixed because Congress is full of lawyers that just want TO COLLECT THE FEE!

Sadly, hate > fair.

Until that is reversed, there will be no fix.

Wow. Those numbers don't look good for black jurors.

American Hardwood said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

Chart 1 shows that whites are non-bias (or far less bias) and non-whites are more bias.

This fits personal experience and reinforces my personal belief that whites are not the propagators of racism.

---

IMO, a big part of the problem is that a healthy number of whites have fostered racism amongst blacks for the benefit of their own agendas whether personal or political. There is power in division.

---

So you are blaming this on white people?

I don't know that the data presented says all that much about blacks in the UK. The nonwhite juries could be equally or more impacted by nonwhite Muslims (some of whom are black) than by blacks of African or Caribbean descent. Muslims outnumber blacks by about 1.5 MM in the UK.

Yes, we need to find another system. Another factor is we are becoming increasingly stupid

What would another system look like? I mean… I could agree on some sort of higher bar for voting rights and juries but I don't see what other system would be an improvement.

A jury of your peers means a jury of 12 people not smart enough to get out of jury duty.

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

Serious Lee said:

---

zephyr88 said:

---

Didn't we learn this 30 years ago when the 'trial by jury' rendered OJ innocent?

---

a new generation is about to learn this in the karmelo anthony trial next year

---

You think a Collin county jury won't be incentivized to bend over backwards to be fair to Karmelo?

---

Think he is saying that just like the OJ jury found him NG when he clearly was, blacks on Karmelo's jury will not vote NG even though he clearly is.

more likely for a hung jury in Texas than LA.

Dubursity is our stremf

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

---

Who determines these qualities?

AggieVictor10 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

---

Who determines these qualities?

---

I think it's just a general statement that a morally upright and predominantly religious Christian society is what our form of government was meant for. Crazy that his quote upsets so many people…usually limp wristed liberal secularists. For most of us it's a "no duh" kind of statement.

It's very clear that the places that depart most from this have the most chaos, lawlessness, violence and deviancy.

Meanwhile, heavily heavily armed rural and suburban predominantly Christian/conservative/traditional communities are some of the safest, most law abiding places on earth…where citizens lookout for each other.

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

AggieVictor10 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

---

Who determines these qualities?

---

I think it's just a general statement that a morally upright and predominantly religious Christian society is what our form of government was meant for. Crazy that his quote upsets so many people…usually limp wristed liberal secularists. For most of us it's a "no duh" kind of statement.

It's very clear that the places that depart most from this have the most chaos, lawlessness, violence and deviancy.

Meanwhile, heavily heavily armed rural and suburban predominantly Christian/conservative/traditional communities are some of the safest, most law abiding places on earth…where citizens lookout for each other.

---

Cool, so who determines these qualities, or rather, who fits the description? Is it by being law abiding, owning guns, or both?

I see a lot of bashing the "other" but I'm not sure there's an answer as to who decides if someone is moral and Christian.

ETA: more on topic, is the issue that non-white folks have a bias against whites? If so, any issues with a jury consisting of people in the same demographics as the accused, for people of each race/ethnicity?

Nothing will make you think twice about committing a crime than going in for jury duty and understanding who your "peers" are.

Is it flawed? Yep. Is there a better system? Not one that I've seen.

whytho987654 said:

---

Yes, we need to find another system. Another factor is we are becoming increasingly stupid

---

This made my laugh out loud. And that has not happened in the last 10 days.

And they have the right to given what our ancestors subjected their ancestors to

Birdwatcher said:

---

And they have the right to be given what our ancestors subjected their ancestors to

---

What is this trying to say exactly?

Aggie Infantry said:

---

If your jury was truly a "jury of your peers", then, if I were to be on trial, I would want males who own guns, attend church, and have a Ph.D.

---

I grew up in a small town in the oil fields of the Permian Basin. I'm a retired DA from west Texas.

I would want on my jury 12 guys who may or may not have gone to college, who wear cowboy hats, drive pickups and own their businesses. Or their wives. Of course, this is only if I did NOT commit the crime.

And when I was prosecuting someone, these are the same kind of people I wanted on my juries.

Three years ago I gave the eulogy at the funeral of a rancher from the town I grew up in. Someone took a picture of the crowd at the cemetery. It looked like we were at the San Angelo rodeo there were so many cowboy hats.

Those are my kind of people. Fair but tough as nails.

AggieVictor10 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

AggieVictor10 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

---

Who determines these qualities?

---

I think it's just a general statement that a morally upright and predominantly religious Christian society is what our form of government was meant for. Crazy that his quote upsets so many people…usually limp wristed liberal secularists. For most of us it's a "no duh" kind of statement.

It's very clear that the places that depart most from this have the most chaos, lawlessness, violence and deviancy.

Meanwhile, heavily heavily armed rural and suburban predominantly Christian/conservative/traditional communities are some of the safest, most law abiding places on earth…where citizens lookout for each other.

---

Cool, so who determines these qualities, or rather, who fits the description? Is it by being law abiding, owning guns, or both?

I see a lot of bashing the "other" but I'm not sure there's an answer as to who decides if someone is moral and Christian.

ETA: more on topic, is the issue that non-white folks have a bias against whites? If so, any issues with a jury consisting of people in the same demographics as the accused, for people of each race/ethnicity?

---

It was just a well intentioned warning. He wasn't saying churches or a state church should run the country. Or that there should be a moral police.

He was just warning that the system crashes when we become more depraved.

Birdwatcher said:

---

And they have the right to given what our ancestors subjected their ancestors to

---

My sons American ancestry is that of a Mexican American mother and a white father who's family (mom's side) were Irish immigrants in the north and German immigrants (dad's side) post Civil War.

That and the fact my kids were born in this century, makes your notion a pretty hard sell for them.

Birdwatcher said:

---

And they have the right to given what our ancestors subjected their ancestors to

---

Complete horse***** With this logic, years from now whites will be justified in purging blacks since blacks commit all of the crime.

Where does it end?

But at least you are admitting you are pro-racist scum.

Yes.

I have no peers.

This is a very disturbing statement. And not at all based on justice.

You are underscoring WHY our constitution was intended only for a moral and religious people. Revenge has no role in justice. With very few exceptions, there are no former slaves or slaveholders in this country.

cevans_40 said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

Chart 1 shows that whites are non-bias (or far less bias) and non-whites are more bias.

This fits personal experience and reinforces my personal belief that whites are not the propagators of racism.

---

IMO, a big part of the problem is that a healthy number of whites have fostered racism amongst blacks for the benefit of their own agendas whether personal or political. There is power in division.

---

So you are blaming this on white people?

---

Where did I say that? I said there are a portion of white people who are contributing to racial disharmony for their own benefit as a response to the post
that leaves the impression that whites are generally non participants in the race game. Whites can be race hustlers too

AggieVictor10 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

AggieVictor10 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

---

Who determines these qualities?

---

I think it's just a general statement that a morally upright and predominantly religious Christian society is what our form of government was meant for. Crazy that his quote upsets so many people…usually limp wristed liberal secularists. For most of us it's a "no duh" kind of statement.

It's very clear that the places that depart most from this have the most chaos, lawlessness, violence and deviancy.

Meanwhile, heavily heavily armed rural and suburban predominantly Christian/conservative/traditional communities are some of the safest, most law abiding places on earth…where citizens lookout for each other.

---

Cool, so who determines these qualities, or rather, who fits the description? Is it by being law abiding, owning guns, or both?

I see a lot of bashing the "other" but I'm not sure there's an answer as to who decides if someone is moral and Christian.

ETA: more on topic, is the issue that non-white folks have a bias against whites? If so, any issues with a jury consisting of people in the same demographics as the accused, for people of each race/ethnicity?

---

It seems to me the results of who is moral and religious in our society is pretty self evident if you examine their communities. Nobody needs to 'determine' anything.

JamesE4 said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

Serious Lee said:

---

zephyr88 said:

---

Didn't we learn this 30 years ago when the 'trial by jury' rendered OJ innocent?

---

a new generation is about to learn this in the karmelo anthony trial next year

---

You think a Collin county jury won't be incentivized to bend over backwards to be fair to Karmelo?

---

Think he is saying that just like the OJ jury found him NG when he clearly was, blacks on Karmelo's jury will not vote NG even though he clearly is.

more likely for a hung jury in Texas than LA.

---

The racial makeup of Collin County is predominantly White (61.5%), followed by Asian (16.6%), Black or African American (10.1%), and Hispanic or Latino (15.4%). The county has a significant and growing South Asian population, largely due to the presence of many tech companies and skilled job opportunities.

Birdwatcher said:

---

And they have the right to given what our ancestors subjected their ancestors to

---

The jury system in Texas used to work pretty well, back when the jury panel was drawn from the voter registration rolls. Then liberals forced a change in the law to draw the panel from driver's license rolls. The average IQ of the juror dropped about 30 points.

Birdwatcher said:

---

And they have the right to given what our ancestors subjected their ancestors to

---

What about what THEIR ancestors subjected THEIR ancestors to?

If we want to do this eye for an eye thing, where does it stop?