maysie.web.net

No good can come of my reading the paper. Everyone who knows me, knows this.

I yell at the paper, I read particularly obnoxious quotes out loud, thus subjecting my innocent friends/victims to hearing my snarky analysis and comments, I throw the paper across the room.

It's not a pretty sight.

But tonight I'm in Kincardine. There are free copies of the Toronto Star in the lobby, and I have nothing to do.

Again, nothing good can come from this situation.

So, the article.

"An Ontario Superior Court judge says it is time to scrap the practice of routinely asking jurors in Toronto and the surrounding area if their ability to render an impartial verdict could be affected by the fact the accused is black." 

I know the goddamn revolution hasn't happened. I brace myself.

"We live in the world of Spike Lee – not that portrayed by Harper Lee," said Justice John Murray in refusing to permit such language, which singles out black people, while challenging jurors for bias at an assault trial of a man in Milton. 

Excuse me?

I mean: EX-FUCKING-cuse ME?!?!

"We live in the world of Spike Lee"?????

He suggested jurors be asked in more generic terms whether they would be able to judge the case "without regard to the race of the accused." 

"Without regard". As if race is a sweater that we simply put on, and can be removed, so the case can be judged "objectively". Oh right. He's a judge. I forgot who I was talking about for a moment.

Now, to be fair, on the one hand, racism in the courtroom affects more than  just black folks. But on the other, pajillions of studies have shown a particular bias towards harsher treatments for black folks, particularly black men. Time and time again this happens.

There's something systemic going on methinks.

So yes, open up the terminology, sure, but not like this! 

"without regard to the race of the accused."

ARGHHHH!!!  

The questions suggest there is a recognition "embedded" in the justice system that society consists of "Us" (whites) and "Them" (black persons) and that one particular form of prejudice, anti-black racism, is more pervasive and pernicious than any other, he said in a written decision Wednesday.

The Ontario Court of Appeal opened the door to race-based challenges of prospective jurors nearly 16 years ago in a groundbreaking ruling known as the Parks decision, saying anti-black racism is a notorious fact that must be confronted.

In that case, the accused, Carlton Parks, a former drug dealer charged in connection with a 1988 stabbing death in Regent Park, was black. The victim was white.

But "in 2009 we live in a different time and in a different place than we did in 1993, when the Parks questions were approved by the Court of Appeal. Our communities have changed and continue to change," Murray wrote in his decision. 

Really, 2009 is so much more different than 1993? Live in the real world much, doofus?

Instead of focusing on a particular form of prejudice, Murray said questions designed to weed out prejudice should be asked in a "generic" form.

He approved a more broadly worded question to be put to jurors at the trial of Ishmael Jahmar Sinclair in Milton.

After being advised a juror must judge the evidence without bias, prejudice or partiality, potential jury members will be asked whether they will "be able to judge the evidence in this manner without regard to the race of the accused." 

smh

Frank Addario, president of the Criminal Lawyers Association, called Murray's ruling and remarks gutsy.

"The courts have an important role to play in making a litigant feel that they are going to get fair treatment, and here is a very courageous decision to confront the known prejudices in our community and to address them directly," Addario said.

"What he has done," he added, "is to start a conversation about how judges and juries understand racialism as a phenomenon that affects decision-making."

 Let's read that last paragraph again:

 "What he has done," he added, "is to start a conversation about how judges and juries understand racialism as a phenomenon that affects decision-making.

I don't even know what the hell Addario is saying.

I'm continually amazed at the lengths people will go to NOT say the word "racism".

"Racialism"? What the fucking hell fuck is racialism?

I need to lie down now.