Lawyers for the three men accused of murdering black jogger Ahmaud Arbery deliberately excluded black people from the jury.
Over the last couple weeks, Kevin Gough (below right), the attorney for defendant William Bryan, repeatedly demanded the judge exclude black pastors from the courtroom. The judge denied his requests.
Then, on Monday, Laura Hogue, an attorney for defendant Gregory McMichael, went even further, CNN reported (here).
“Turning Ahmaud Arbery into a victim after the choices that he made does not reflect the reality of what brought Ahmaud Arbery to Satilla Shores in his khaki shorts with no socks to cover his long, dirty toenails,” Hogue (below left) told the jury.
Hogue was portraying Arbery as a “runaway slave,” said Charles Coleman Jr., a civil rights attorney and former prosecutor. It was an “attempt to sort of really trigger some of the racial tropes and stereotypes that may be deeply embedded in the psyche of some of the jurors,” he explained. Makes you want to puke, doesn’t it?
Attorneys are to act in the best interest f their clients. If the attorneys did proper jury selection techniques and it comes back and says to exclude blacks or blacks with specific backgrounds they do so.
When Jessee Jackson shows up and it is not his home town that is about influencing he jury. The fact the judge did not bar the pastor may come back to haunt should there be an appeal. What if the Gov or President shows up and sits behind the defense? Could cause an objection after all at trial and judges are to decide in light of the defendants rights. Not the victims family, part of the community or politics but the rights of the defendant.
If long dirty toe nails get your client off then you go with it. Not as catchy as: “If the glove don’t fit you can’t convict,” but you go with what you got.
I can assure you these attorneys would not get away with either racist jury selection or racist remarks to the jury in Washington. Objections would be sustained, they’d be admonished, and possibly face bar discipline. Practices may vary in other jurisdictions, which should be seen as a problem, not an excuse.