Supreme Courtroom rejects problem to dying sentence over racially prejudiced jurors

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Courtroom on Tuesday turned away a Black dying row inmate’s attraction over claims he didn’t obtain a good trial as a result of a number of jurors had expressed opposition to interracial relationships.

The conservative majority court docket’s determination to not hear the case, over the dissent of the court docket’s three liberal justices, leaves in place Andre Thomas’s conviction and dying sentence.

“No jury deciding whether or not to suggest a dying sentence needs to be tainted by potential racial biases that would infect its deliberation or determination, significantly the place the case concerned an interracial crime,” wrote liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor. She was joined by fellow liberals Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The court docket has a 6-3 conservative majority.

In 2004 Thomas murdered his estranged spouse, Laura Boren, who was white; their 4-year-old son Andre Boren; and his 13-month-old step-daughter Leyha Hughes in Sherman, Texas. He stabbed all three to dying and tried to take away their hearts, saying later he hoped to “set them free from evil,” in response to court docket filings. He additionally tried suicide.

Dying-row inmate Andre Thomas, from Texoma, Texas. Texas Division of Prison Justice / through AP file

Thomas, now 39, later turned himself in and confessed. Whereas awaiting trial for the homicide of Leyha Hughes, during which he claimed he was not responsible by motive of madness, Thomas gouged out certainly one of his eyeballs after studying a passage within the Bible, the filings stated. Years later he eliminated his different eye and ate it.

Prosecutors agreed that Thomas was in a psychotic state when he dedicated the murders however countered that it was attributable to Thomas’ actions in ingesting a cough drugs that may trigger irrational habits.

On the 2005 trial for the homicide of Leyha Hughes, the all-white jury discovered that Thomas was responsible and sentenced him to dying.

In contesting his conviction, Thomas’ attorneys argued that the jury was tainted as a result of three members through the choice course of had expressed opposition to folks of various races marrying or having kids, which was pertinent to the information of the case due to Thomas’ marriage to Boren.

One juror stated that he opposed interracial relationships as a result of it was “in opposition to God’s will,” in response to court docket filings. One other stated “we must always keep inside our blood line” when requested the identical query. The third juror stated interracial relationships are dangerous to kids as a result of “they don’t have a particular race to belong to.”

On the trial, the prosecutor additionally requested the jury, “Are you going to take the chance about him asking your daughter out or your granddaughter out?” Thomas’ attorneys stated the assertion appealed to the jury’s biases.

Thomas says his proper to a good trial underneath the Structure’s Sixth Modification was violated on two counts: that he was not tried by an neutral jury and that his lawyer was ineffective for failing to object to the jurors being chosen.

The state’s attorneys argue partially that each one three jurors stated they’d observe the legislation as instructed and will ship an neutral verdict.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.