Skip to main content
Ad (425x293)

Supreme Court Reviews Mississippi Death Penalty Case Over Alleged Jury Racial Bias

The Supreme Court is reviewing a Mississippi death penalty case involving alleged racial bias in jury selection by former prosecutor Doug Evans, who removed nearly all Black jurors during Terry Pitchford's 2006 trial.

·2 min read
a person walks on the steps outside a court building

Supreme Court Examines Racial Bias in Mississippi Death Penalty Jury Selection

The Supreme Court is hearing arguments on Tuesday concerning allegations of racial bias in jury selection in a Mississippi death penalty case.

Doug Evans, a former prosecutor who is now retired, removed all but one Black prospective juror during the trial of Terry Pitchford in 2006. Pitchford was convicted of capital murder. The trial judge, Joseph Loper, permitted these juror strikes, and Mississippi's supreme court upheld the conviction.

However, seven years ago, in a related case involving Evans, Judge Loper, and Mississippi's highest court, the supreme court overturned the death sentence and conviction of Curtis Flowers, a Black man who had been tried six times over more than two decades. At that time, seven of the nine justices currently serving were on the court. Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that Evans demonstrated a

"relentless, determined effort to rid the jury of Black individuals"
.

Ad (425x293)

Terry Pitchford, now 40 years old, was 18 at the time of the incident. He and another teenager, who was under 18 and thus ineligible for the death penalty, robbed a grocery store near Grenada in northern Mississippi. The other teen fired the fatal shots, but Pitchford was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death.

During jury selection, Evans struck multiple Black prospective jurors, leaving only one Black juror on the panel despite objections from defense attorneys that these dismissals were racially motivated. The trial judge allowed the strikes to stand.

Pitchford and his supporters have cited the precedent set by the Flowers ruling and argue that the court should rule similarly in his favor. The case currently before the Supreme Court has been progressing through the judicial system for decades.

This article was sourced from theguardian

Ad (425x293)

Related News