Two white popular high school football players acquitted in killing of illegal alien

[panader0]

In Pottsville, Pennsylvania, Brandon Piekarsky, 17 and Derrick Donchak, 19, were acquitted of murder and ethnic intimidation in the killing of Luis Ramirez, 25, by an all-white jury. "There's been a complete failure of justice," said Gladys Limon, staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund. "It's just outrageous and very difficult to understand how any juror could have had reasonable doubt."
Associated Press

More at: www.azstarnet.com

[BlooInBloo]

1. It's ok. Race clearly had nothing to do with this....

I know this because white folks tell me so.

[Joe the Revelator]

2. Resonable doubt seems to be prelavant in this case

Its bad what happened here, but there was a group of teens involved and the prosecution didn't do a good enough job of pinning on the two guys who got acquitted..

[panader0]

7. In spite of my user name, I am quite white.

7/8 Irish-English, 1/8 Crow Indian

[EFerrari]

39. No. There were witnesses and it was clearly a race crime.

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/7/24/friend_of_mexican_immigrant_beaten_to

[HopeHoops]

3. I've followed this very closely since it happened.

Pottsville is a coal mining region, or at least it used to be. The immigrants, legal and not, arrived to fill in the labor needs much in the way that the Chinese did with the railroads heading west. Most of the mines have shut down.

The "all white" jury didn't shock me with their verdict. I think it was predetermined. They cited "conflicting testimony" as the excuse for acquitting these two. The third kid involved ADMITTED they had killed him. The "conflicting testimony" came from the accused who were drunk off of their asses at the time. When I am that drunk, I'M conflicting testimony! There was no dispute that they kicked him in the head when he was on the ground, or that they instigated the confrontation by messing with his girlfriend, OR that they used racially charged language to taunt him into a fight. And it was one guy against three.

I do NOT consider this to be a legitimate resolution of the matter. I'm white by the way - I just believe in equality and justice.

[tbyg52]

4. No *way* that should have been tried with an all-white jury. nt

[LisaL]

6. Have you ever heard "jury of your peers." If you are on trial

you will be tried by the people representative of your community.

[TommyO]

9. So that means that a white person needs to be tried

only by a white jury? That's absolute bullshit. Justice was not served in this case

[LisaL]

11. No it doesn't mean that.

Don't twist my words.

[Richard Steele]

12. Then why don't you explain to us just what it DOES mean.

[LisaL]

13. Do I really have to explain it? O'key, here goes.

The jury is picked from the community, and it's racial makeup is going to represent the community.
Thus if the community is 96.6% white, there is a good chance the jury is going to be all white. No matter the race of the defendant, that defendant is going to get all white (or close to it) jury in that community.

[Joe the Revelator]

24. How can you say justice was not served? Were you on the jury???

From everything I read, the prosecutor could not prove beyond a resonable doubt that the two teens (out of a large group who took part in the attack) actually murdered the gentleman.

Unless you were on the jury, you're blood lust is just as bad as those on the RW who wrap their arms tightly around the death penalty.

[tbyg52]

10. So it's an all-white community?

Edited to add that that was a reductio ad absurdum rhetorical question to which I'm pretty sure I already know the answer, and that yes, I am familiar with the term "jury of your peers." Got any more insulting questions that (apparently) assume I'm an uneducated moran?

[tbyg52]

14. Whoa. I guess maybe it is (almost)

http://zipskinny.com/index.php?zip=17901

One thing I'll say for where I live (former DeLay land), it's about as ethnically diverse as it gets. (Leading one to guess that perhaps the reason it keeps electing idiot Republicans may be a turnout issue.....)

Edited to add that there's not much that makes me happy to live in DeLay land, but looking at those demographics for 17901 almost does.....

[MajorChode]

21. It wasn't that poor of an assumption...

considering your statement that there was no way "that should have been tried with an all-white jury."

Obviously you're making the assumption that an all white jury can't possibly be objective, so why do you take such offense when someone makes an assumption about you?

[tbyg52]

52. Nope, I was making the assumption that an all-white jury probably wouldn't be

a "jury of their peers," much in the way that all-white juries were not such in the South in the past.

As a resident of the South for lo, these many years, I have plenty of memories of juries being pretty much all white, period, regardless of the ethnic makeup of the area. And coming to some pretty funny conclusions upon occasion.

I must admit to having jumped to the conclusion that such might still be the case in some places. And, for all I know, it might be. But that particular place *is* awfully white. But apparently some people can still find non-whites to beat up.....

[WillParkinson]

5. Sorry, that website is too crammed...

It's difficult to find the article you mentioned since the link takes you to the main page.

[panader0]

8. I'm sorry. It's in the Sunday paper and I don't know how else to link

to it.

[NYC_SKP]

43. LINK here:

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7014993273

[bobburgster]

15. Great Lawyers ????

I can't believe the whole freakin jury pool was white....what's up with the prosecution during jury selection? They must have not been trying to hard for a conviction. Jury selection is the key to a trial, whether criminal or civil IMO.

[LisaL]

16. Oh for crying out loud.

That community is almost a 100 % white. It would not be possible to select any diverse jury in those conditions. How difficult is that to understand?

[blueclown]

22. They could have requested a change of venue.

That is well within their rights.

[dustbunnie]

23. Why would they? The community wasn't up in arms against them.

[Joe the Revelator]

25. You don't understand how that works apparently

Why would the defense request a change of venue? Why would it be fair for the prosecution to request one? The crime was committed in the community in which it was tried. That is how its suppose to work.

[LisaL]

28. Who could have requested a change of venue?

Defense? Usually defense requests a change of venue if it feels the defendant can not get a fair trial in that particular community. Why would the defense request a change of venue in this case?

[bluestateguy]

17. The law has spoken

And they are not guilty.

The jury has seen and heard evidence that all of you are not privy to and they made up their mind to find the defendants not guilty.

You will need real proof that their decision was based on racial prejudice and not just accusations and assumptions.

[Richard Steele]

18. Go there sometime.

Take a 10-minute walk down the street, and you'll have
all the proof you need to know that the verdict
was SERIOUSLY influenced by racial predjudice.

[konnichi wa]

33. You have one of those Magic Eight Balls?

:eyes:

[EFerrari]

40. The WITNESSES reported that the beating to death was accompanied

by racial slurs. Do YOU need an Magic Eight Ball to do the math?

[MajorChode]

46. The subject is the jury, not the perps

In order to believe the jury was racially biased, one would have to assume all 12 of them were or else you just wind up with a hung jury. It doesn't pass the sniff test.

[EFerrari]

49. No. The post you replied to was about the community, not the jury.

And this verdict doesn't pass the smell test. It will not stand. This was a hate crime and I cannot believe anyone here is defending this verdict. That's just disgusting.

[MajorChode]

50. Obviously, which is why I replied. Try going back to post #17

You're the only one talking about anything other than the jury.

As far as the verdict goes, I suppose it never crossed your mind that the police charged the wrong people. Nope, you're going to pretend to be omnipotent instead.

[dustbunnie]

26. From what I read, the jury took great pains to understand the charges.

Asked the judge several times for clarification. Juries are supposed to weigh the evidence as presented in court, and sadly, I'll bet they had no access to all the experts on DU.

Maybe the prosecution just sucked at their job, or because it was basically a late night drunken brawl, the evidence was hard to piece together properly.

[Raineyb]

42. Oh please!

How stupid do we have to believe to believe that load of crap?

This is the same shit different year.

[burning rain]

45. At the state level, yes; at the federal level, no.

On the face of it it looks to me like federal civil rights charges are warranted -- I would say the same in any case where defendants of whatever ethnicity or identity had been acquitted where there was strong evidence of their guilt.

[AllentownJake]

19. I knew this was going to be the result

I live in a neighboring county and my mother was born there. That area is very poor and very white. A combination that leads to racism.

[cbc5g]

20. And here I thought all white juries were illegal ..guess i'm wrong

justice wasn't served there.

[LisaL]

27. Are you for real?

You thought all white juries are illegal?
Will the wonders ever cease?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

29. The demographics there are very very white, it was a representative panel

[ProgressiveProfessor]

30. Ahhh, not even close. Both were convicted of lesser crimes including 3rd degree murder and assault

Other threads have much more detail on this. Local DUers and others are blaming the prosecutor for doing a poor job.

[MadMaddie]

31. What's everyone's thoughts on if this was reversed?

3 Hispanic men taunt a white woman, utter racial slurs against the white male victim and then proceed to beat and kick the shit out of him?

The reason I ask this question is I think we all know what the result would have been. 3 Hispanic men on death row....

All murders are not equal in America....

These boys can go on with their lives like this murder never happened, simply because they were popular white football players!

I hope that this case goes to the Federal level because they did commit murder and a man is dead because of their actions.

[dustbunnie]

32. What if they were all white?

The dude with the young girl was Irish let's say, and the drunken group were Polish. The Polish dudes taunt the Irish guy with "you f***in Irish f**k" (or whatever drunken a-holes say). The Irish dude taunts them back. Punches are exchanged. It breaks up long enough for the Irish guy to call his friend with the gun. The Polish dudes start to walk away, still yelling taunts and the Irish guy decides to go back into the fray. By the time the friend with the gun arrives, they've beaten the Irish guy to a pulp and he dies.

Would the charge have been murder, manslaughter or same as in this case? With the conflicting evidence at hand, the witnesses they hear, those they don't, how would the jury find?

Considering that the Irish dude did take himself back into the fight, seems doubtful to me they'd be on death row. If it were three hispanic guys as in your comparison, and they were being judged by a jury of their hispanic peers, would they be sent to death row? Doubtful to me as well.

[MellowDem]

34. But you don't go far enough...

The jury would have been all Hispanic and in, say, Mexico. And the town would have been a very poor town with lots of unemployment. And the three Hispanics would have got off, if they were even prosecuted. And the white man would have been living in the country illegally.

And the woman would have been a Hispanic 15 year old that was the older white man's girlfriend, as she was white and 15 in this case.

And regardless of race, these cases of drunken brawls involving minors where someone ends up being killed are hard to prosecute. The killing wasn't premeditated, heck, it could definitely have been accidental if they were just fighting spontaneously. And then the fact that there were minors. All those things serve to cloud up the case, not to mention a big group was involved.

If there was no evidence that this was a hate crime and not a drunken brawl, then why judge it as such?

[MadMaddie]

35. Much of what you say is true

Do you remember the case down south of the black football player that got into a fight with white kid, the white kid got bruised up and the black kid was prosecuted and thrown into jail for (I think it was 10 years) but the case was revisited and he was released. The prosecutor is still wanting to go after him.....

There is an absolute difference in how certain defendents are treated in this country. It's a very sad truth.

The killing may not have been premeditated but I would liken in to drunk drivers, involuntary manslaughter.
They were illegally drinking, they caused a mans death. They didn't even get their hands slapped, they were just inconvenienced. There is something wrong with the system.


Having said that, if the prosecutor put on a poor case then most of the blame should reside on his shoulders.

[LisaL]

36. I've never heard of that case. Have you got a link?

[hfojvt]

47. pretty sure you have heard of it

it's Jena, Karl Marx's home town.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/06/29/2188

[LisaL]

48. As far as I am aware he was never sentenced to 10 years.

[MadMaddie]

58. Thanks hfojvt!

[MellowDem]

56. Involuntary manslaughter it may very well be...

and there are definitely times when justice is not served or doled out to particular communities. But it doesn't look like this was one of those times. The fact that they were minors has a lot to do with the light sentences and the victim's own willingness to escalate the fight made it seem less like a beat down and more like a drunken brawl gone terribly wrong.

Who knows, maybe the feds will find something in the case the original prosecutor didn't.

[EFerrari]

38. They beat him to death shouting racial slurs at him per the witnesses.

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/7/24/friend_of_mexican_immigrant_beaten_to

[MellowDem]

55. So what?

Their intention didn't seem to be to beat him to death, they got in a spontaneous fight with him, which he partially instigated. Lots of people will shout racial slurs at people they're in fights with. It's a powerful insult is the reason. Doesn't make them racist or make it a hate crime per se.

It doesn't look like he was targeted because of his race. It sounds like if anything the inappropriate nature of his underage girlfriend drew the attention of the boys in the first place, and then he helped escalate the fight with a bunch of drunken minors.

[JI7]

37. the jurors were racist, they probably want to thank those teenagers for killing the brown guy

[MajorChode]

51. Falsely accusing someone of racism is just as bad as racism

Are you honestly going to try and convince anyone that all 12 members of that jury (without exception) are "racist"?

Right.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

54. So...

you're saying all those all white juries who acquitted those klan members of all those lynchings in the sixties and before delivered the correct verdict?

[MajorChode]

57. So....

You're saying the US hasn't changed in almost 50 years?

[JI7]

60. those people haven't changed, while the country as a whole is better off

millions still voted for race baiting Palin. and this part where this guy was killed hasn't changed either.

[MajorChode]

62. Be that as it may, Pennsylvania isn't lower Alabama in the 1960's as was alleged

If you were able to get past the headlines you might know the trial wasn't even within a cab ride of being black and white. Witnesses gave conflicting accounts and the only ones who could definitively say who landed the fatal blow were themselves accused and cut a deal with the prosecution. Police officers testified they overheard conversations claiming someone else threw the fatal kick. Ramirez came back for more after the white teens were trying to walk away.

[JI7]

63. if the race of these people were turned around and it was some white guy

who was beaten and killed and the guys who did it were hispanic or some other minority those same white jurors would have found them guilty.

today CNN showed some white guy talking about how they just don't want outsiders coming in and everything is ok there. it's always white people who claim this like the ones who criticized integration and busing of kids.

and yes, things have changed for the better in this country but a majority of white people still voted for McCain/Palin. and if you have watched the Palin campaign rallies and the more recent tea bag events you will see there are still dangerous racists out there.

[MajorChode]

64. I've sat on a few juries in my day and I can't agree with you

I sat on a capital murder trial once where we convicted a man and sentenced him to life without parole. The responsibility you have in such situations takes a very hard toll on you. You have the victims families and the families of the accused right there beside you every day. In a trail like this one you also have the added burden of media attention. Almost everyone is influenced by prejudices to one degree or another, but I can say from experience that when that burden is placed on you, your thoughts are much more about facts and what can be proved and what can't. To allege that the case was a slam dunk and that the only explanation was that all 6 men and 6 women were racist is simply ludicrous. That's not even within a cab ride of reality, and not that much different than alleging that everyone who voted for McCain/Palin was a racist. You should be a bit more careful with your allegations.

[Raineyb]

41. What year is this again?

Oh look, we elected a black man as president so racism has...

Never mind it's still here.

Sheesh!

I wish I could say I was surprised but I'm not.

Regards

[burning rain]

44. Looks like a case where federal civil rights charges are in order.

Of course that's not double jeopardy, but completely permissible within the law.

[JonLP24]

53. Your link leads me to a homepage

I know the headline sounds very bad but without facts on the case I don't have an opinion. I mean not a few basic facts, no the entire facts that the jury got to see is what I'm talking about.

[backscatter712]

59. I'm thinking Carville was right...

He referred to Pennsylvania as "Pittsburgh and Philadelphia with Alabama in between."

[bullwinkle428]

61. I'm guessing those Palin rally people made a special effort

to get on this jury!