Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What irks me is that racists like you try to say things that are not so, then what makes happy is that you go crazy when called out.This is an outright lie: "we are constantly told that white people can't sit on jury because the accused is black . . .".
What you are trying to say is that blacks cannot be excluded from juries, and that makes you mad.
What makes you mad is to many white people in this country. You are afraid they might crush the pure racial proletariat that is composed of non-whites.
If you are a white nationalist, fine, but don't hide.
This guy never got called out for anything
and this is so not racist because he was a 'former' KKK member. They were all democrats so that means everyone is cool with it.
I smell dumb shit.I was thinking that in court cases that can set precedence about illegal immigration should we remove judges that are hispanic? This sounds kind of racist but we are constantly told that white people can't sit on jury because the accused is black so why can't we do the same thing for Hispanic judges?
Why can't Trump ask that the judge in Trump U case recurse himself because he is a member of La Raza which translates into 'the race'?
There are more than one Hispanic organizations that use the the term "La Raza".
Consider this a teaching moment.
Picking a jury is a hard-fought battle between opposing attorneys, and just like everything else in the U.S., whoever has the most money (or in the case of George Zimmerman, insider influence) not only wins the case but wins by being able to manipulate voir dire to their favor.
And no, Hispanic judges should not be RECUSED from an illegal immigration hearing because they are supposed to be following the law, not their heritage.
And that is true always? Why support the law when we know that the only thing that counts is Obama's will? Just obey Obama. That is the only law we need in this country.
You are NOT told that whites shouldn't sit on juries for cases involving blacks. It is noted that in certain regions of the country blacks have been excluded from juries to a level far below their proportion of the population and thus, in those regions, have had far more all-white juries sitting on black cases than we have had a representation of blacks on juries reflecting their proportion of the population. In such cases, the rate of conviction of blacks is far higher than otherwise.
What you are saying if there is a case where there are 12 white jurors some of them should be removed because the accused is black. That sounds like not allowing white people to be a juror in those cases.
What irks me is that racists like you try to say things that are not so, then what makes happy is that you go crazy when called out.This is an outright lie: "we are constantly told that white people can't sit on jury because the accused is black . . .".
What you are trying to say is that blacks cannot be excluded from juries, and that makes you mad.
What makes you mad is to many white people in this country. You are afraid they might crush the pure racial proletariat that is composed of non-whites.
If you are a white nationalist, fine, but don't hide.
This guy never got called out for anything
and this is so not racist because he was a 'former' KKK member. They were all democrats so that means everyone is cool with it.
Byrd denounced his KKK connection and publicly apologized for it. He also gave an impassioned speech to stop the invasion of Iraq in 2002.
At least Robert Byrd apologized. What’s your excuse, David Duke?
At least Robert Byrd apologized. What’s your excuse, David Duke?
What's your excuse, SuperD?
This guy never got called out for anything
and this is so not racist because he was a 'former' KKK member. They were all democrats so that means everyone is cool with it.
You are NOT told that whites shouldn't sit on juries for cases involving blacks. It is noted that in certain regions of the country blacks have been excluded from juries to a level far below their proportion of the population and thus, in those regions, have had far more all-white juries sitting on black cases than we have had a representation of blacks on juries reflecting their proportion of the population. In such cases, the rate of conviction of blacks is far higher than otherwise.
What you are saying if there is a case where there are 12 white jurors some of them should be removed because the accused is black. That sounds like not allowing white people to be a juror in those cases.
You're on the wrong side of the action. We should prevent lawyers from intentionally creating all white or all black juries in an attempt to create a jury biased in their client's favor. From a larger scale perspective, juries - purportedly "of our peers" - should reflect the demographic makeup of the accused's community.
You are asking such questions, super dem.
"You are stupid" is not the answer you were hoping for..
This guy never got called out for anything
and this is so not racist because he was a 'former' KKK member. They were all democrats so that means everyone is cool with it.
How about a link to some evidence supporting your charge that Byrd was Hillary's "mentor"
You are asking such questions, super dem.
"You are stupid" is not the answer you were hoping for..
We do have sentencing guidelines.You are NOT told that whites shouldn't sit on juries for cases involving blacks. It is noted that in certain regions of the country blacks have been excluded from juries to a level far below their proportion of the population and thus, in those regions, have had far more all-white juries sitting on black cases than we have had a representation of blacks on juries reflecting their proportion of the population. In such cases, the rate of conviction of blacks is far higher than otherwise.
What you are saying if there is a case where there are 12 white jurors some of them should be removed because the accused is black. That sounds like not allowing white people to be a juror in those cases.
You're on the wrong side of the action. We should prevent lawyers from intentionally creating all white or all black juries in an attempt to create a jury biased in their client's favor. From a larger scale perspective, juries - purportedly "of our peers" - should reflect the demographic makeup of the accused's community.
What if it is found that a black jury will give lighter sentences when the accused is black but heavier ones when the accused isn't black? I totally agree that their shouldn't be any racial bias at all but it seems like every strategy that is used to alleviate it seems to leave us exposed to it happening in another way?
I've kind of suggested that perhaps we should have standardized sentencing in order to alleviate this bias but absolutely no one would go for it in this country.
That you are not very well balanced emotionally is your issue not mine.You are asking such questions, super dem.
"You are stupid" is not the answer you were hoping for..
It would be an answer if someone asked me what is wrong with you.
This is not a fact, as you well know.This guy never got called out for anything
and this is so not racist because he was a 'former' KKK member. They were all democrats so that means everyone is cool with it.
How about a link to some evidence supporting your charge that Byrd was Hillary's "mentor"
I'm not going to waste any time proving this fact. You find it yourself since you were so curious about it.
The ignorance of this is exceeded only by its stupidity and bigotry.I was thinking that in court cases that can set precedence about illegal immigration should we remove judges that are hispanic? This sounds kind of racist but we are constantly told that white people can't sit on jury because the accused is black so why can't we do the same thing for Hispanic judges?
Why can't Trump ask that the judge in Trump U case recurse himself because he is a member of La Raza which translates into 'the race'?
There you go again. More dumb shit. Here, let me bitch slap your ignorant face with facts:I smell dumb shit.I was thinking that in court cases that can set precedence about illegal immigration should we remove judges that are hispanic? This sounds kind of racist but we are constantly told that white people can't sit on jury because the accused is black so why can't we do the same thing for Hispanic judges?
Why can't Trump ask that the judge in Trump U case recurse himself because he is a member of La Raza which translates into 'the race'?
There are more than one Hispanic organizations that use the the term "La Raza".
Consider this a teaching moment.
I'm you are smelling something but you are the only one there so what you smelling?
A bunch of white kids shave their heads bald and say things like white power. They then call themselves 'the race'. I'm sure there are those organizations.
An admirable aimI'm trying to make sure everyone gets a fair trial in this country.
Justice should be blind. It doesn't discriminate and just follows the law for everyone equally.
Why can't we ask the question of whether or not a hispanic judge should be removed from cases involving illegal immigration? If there is no evidence of bias then fine..let it continue. But if there is then why can't we remove those judges in those instances where it happens?
We do have sentencing guidelines.You are NOT told that whites shouldn't sit on juries for cases involving blacks. It is noted that in certain regions of the country blacks have been excluded from juries to a level far below their proportion of the population and thus, in those regions, have had far more all-white juries sitting on black cases than we have had a representation of blacks on juries reflecting their proportion of the population. In such cases, the rate of conviction of blacks is far higher than otherwise.
What you are saying if there is a case where there are 12 white jurors some of them should be removed because the accused is black. That sounds like not allowing white people to be a juror in those cases.
You're on the wrong side of the action. We should prevent lawyers from intentionally creating all white or all black juries in an attempt to create a jury biased in their client's favor. From a larger scale perspective, juries - purportedly "of our peers" - should reflect the demographic makeup of the accused's community.
What if it is found that a black jury will give lighter sentences when the accused is black but heavier ones when the accused isn't black? I totally agree that their shouldn't be any racial bias at all but it seems like every strategy that is used to alleviate it seems to leave us exposed to it happening in another way?
I've kind of suggested that perhaps we should have standardized sentencing in order to alleviate this bias but absolutely no one would go for it in this country.
We have had juries that sent innocent men and women to death because of their race.
We the American People are aware of all of this.
Your words are the silly words of a white nationalist, nothing more.We do have sentencing guidelines.You are NOT told that whites shouldn't sit on juries for cases involving blacks. It is noted that in certain regions of the country blacks have been excluded from juries to a level far below their proportion of the population and thus, in those regions, have had far more all-white juries sitting on black cases than we have had a representation of blacks on juries reflecting their proportion of the population. In such cases, the rate of conviction of blacks is far higher than otherwise.
What you are saying if there is a case where there are 12 white jurors some of them should be removed because the accused is black. That sounds like not allowing white people to be a juror in those cases.
You're on the wrong side of the action. We should prevent lawyers from intentionally creating all white or all black juries in an attempt to create a jury biased in their client's favor. From a larger scale perspective, juries - purportedly "of our peers" - should reflect the demographic makeup of the accused's community.
What if it is found that a black jury will give lighter sentences when the accused is black but heavier ones when the accused isn't black? I totally agree that their shouldn't be any racial bias at all but it seems like every strategy that is used to alleviate it seems to leave us exposed to it happening in another way?
I've kind of suggested that perhaps we should have standardized sentencing in order to alleviate this bias but absolutely no one would go for it in this country.
We have had juries that sent innocent men and women to death because of their race.
We the American People are aware of all of this.
Your point being...white America should be hung for its crimes.
