Citing 'Racial Stereotype,' Supreme Court Says Texas

>Here's how NPR's Nina Totenberg described the case's genesis, in a report after Buck's execution had temporarily been put on hold in 2011:

>> "In 1995, Buck, who is African-American, was convicted of killing two people and shooting a third. During the sentencing phase of his trial, psychologist Walter Quijano was called by the defense. Although Quijano testified that Buck would not pose a continuing threat to society if incarcerated, he also testified that blacks and Hispanics are statistically more likely than whites to commit future crimes.

>> "When the prosecutor cross-examined Quijano, the psychologist testified that being black 'increases the future dangerousness for various complicated reasons.' Buck was ultimately sentenced to death by lethal injection."

>The question of predicting Buck's behavior was crucial to his sentence: The Supreme Court's summary of the case states that under Texas law, "the jury was permitted to impose a death sentence only if it found unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt that Buck was likely to commit acts of violence in the future."

>Today, Roberts wrote, "Dr. Quijano's testimony appealed to a powerful racial stereotype—that of black men as 'violence prone.' "

>When the case was argued last October, as Nina reported, "Justice Samuel Alito called the introduction of race as a predictor of violence 'indefensible,' but he was also the only justice who voiced skepticism about granting what's called a certificate of appealability for Buck."

>In pursuing an appeal of his death sentence, Buck has argued that he didn't receive effective legal representation; he also says his case includes extraordinary circumstances that would merit an appeal.
...

>From the majority opinion:

>> "Despite knowing Dr. Quijano's view that Buck's race was competent evidence of an increased probability of future violence, defense counsel called Dr. Quijano to the stand and asked him to discuss the 'statistical factors' he had 'looked at in regard to this case.'

>> "Dr. Quijano responded that certain factors were 'know[n] to predict future dangerousness' and, consistent with his report, identified race as one of them. 'It's a sad commentary,' he testified, 'that minorities, Hispanics and black people, are over represented in the Criminal Justice System.' "

>The jury deliberated for two days before returning a death sentence for Buck. During that time, they asked to see "psychology reports" that had been entered into evidence.

>Back in 1999, Buck's conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. But as Roberts wrote, "His case then entered a labyrinth of state and federal collateral review, where it has wandered for the better part of two decades."

>Quijano gave similar testimony in other cases in Texas — and in 2000, then-Attorney General John Cornyn issued a statement about "problems associated with the testimony" of the psychologist. That was the year the Supreme Court vacated a judgment against Victor Hugo Saldano, whose capital murder trial included testimony from Quijano that Saldano's Hispanic heritage increased the likelihood that he posed a danger.

>After the court's ruling, Cornyn stated, "It is inappropriate to allow race to be considered as a factor in our criminal justice system."

>But as the high court noted Wednesday, despite Buck's case being among those Cornyn's office identified as similar to Saldano's, it was not among those in which prosecutors admitted error and allowed new sentencing hearings.
...

>Thomas wrote that the lower courts got Buck's case right — and he opened his dissenting opinion with an attack on his colleagues' analysis: "Having settled on a desired outcome, the Court bulldozes procedural obstacles and misapplies settled law to justify it."

>Part of the problem, in Thomas' view, is that the high court didn't find the lower courts had used the wrong standards to determine their rulings — it's that the majority "simply disagrees with the courts below" in how those standards were applied.

>Thomas also defended the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, saying that his colleagues' criticisms of the appeals court — which the American Bar Association has dubbed "the nation's most divisive, controversial and conservative" — were wrong, misplaced, and misguided.

>"The majority also has things just backwards," Thomas writes.

>The justice also argued that the jury in the Buck case had sufficient reason to recommend a death sentence aside from the psychologist's consideration of race, saying that the evidence "of both the heinousness of petitioner's crime and his complete lack of remorse was overwhelming."

>Thomas recounted the crimes Buck is convicted of, saying that despite the defense team's assertion that the murder of Buck's former girlfriend and another man was a crime of passion, the shootings were "premeditated and cruel."

>Thomas noted that Buck had driven 28 miles to carry out his shooting rampage; that he had also shot his stepsister; that he killed his ex-girlfriend as her children looked on; and that he laughed and joked about the killings afterward.

>Citing the unique legal circumstances of this case, Thomas also wrote that the court's ruling would likely have only limited legal impact:

...

>"Despite its errors, today's opinion should have little effect on the broader law, for two reasons. For one thing, the Court's reasoning is highly factbound, and the facts presented here are unlikely to arise again. For another, although the majority misapplies settled principles, it does not purport to actually alter any of those principles."

So a hispanic lawyer argues that race is a very good predictor of future violent crimes and many of his cases are being reexamined?

>>114372
Its ammo to keep the race narrative firing at full speed.

>>114383
What is the "race narrative" ?

>>114386
dont play dumb

>>114389
It's not dumb. You have to realize that not everyone here subscribes to /pol/'s inflammatory racial theories.

>>114392
As a former /pol/tard it take some time to recover

>>114392
the current "everyone is equal" is more nonsensical then polshit.

>>114423
Let me guess, you think blacks should be 3/5th of a human as the American founding fathers intended.

>>114427
The truth is; no one is equal.

>>114423
Nobody thinks everyone is equal in that sense. Folks just are uncertain about the causes of that, and in any case don't see the need to invest effort into ethnic cleansing. Even virulent racists are pretty indifferent in that they're certainly not going to place their own livelihoods at risk to get rid of the ethnic district. They prefer to just ignore them because that works just as well.

Im sick of racial discrimination

END THIS SHIT

>>114479

what the fuck kind of deflecting bullshit is this
at least racists 20 years ago straight up said 'i hate niggers' instead of spouting hilarious /pol/ deep state theories and pseudo sciences on how races are actually not the same (bonus points if you can include the 'NOT ALL HUMANS CAME FROM AFRICA UHH WHITE PEOPLE CAME FROM THE SKY'

>>114515
>deep state
i keep seeing this in the past few days
is this a new meme?

>pseudo sciences on how races are actually not the same
to claim that different races all have the same traits with the same frequencies is far more absurd then any pseudo science about differences between races.

>>114515
I don't hate niggers, i just don't want more of them in my country. There's a huge continent called africa; let them have that.

>>116179
Your ancestors brought them there. Blame them.

>>116184
I'm not looking for a blame, I'm looking for a solution. Deportation sounds nice.

>>116185
good luck convincing them

>>116186
Who's them?

>>116184
what if we right the wrongs of our ancestors and send them back with $500 each to their name?

>>116224
Make it 5m and call it even.

>>114180
>"the jury was permitted to impose a death sentence only if it found unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt that Buck was likely to commit acts of violence in the future."
So how was the prosecution wrong? Being black is entirely relevant to his likelihood of committing crimes in the future based on much stronger evidence than things like 'doesn't seem to regret it' or 'thuggish attitude and community'.

>Dr. Quijano's testimony appealed to a powerful racial stereotype—that of black men as 'violence prone.'
It wasn't appealing to the stereotype, it was to the statistics.

>>114515
"racists" have always understood the inherent differences between the different human race, and the march of science has only proved it beyond any doubt.

>>116250
Progressives might as well be the christians they deride so much considering they deny evolution on the basis of religion.

>>116252
Progressive here. No we don't. What the hell are you talking about, cletus? Where do you get this shit from?

>>116252
they believe in evolution, but just not for humans because thats racist.

>>116276
So you do believe evolution applies to humans? Or do you believe that the basis on which you deny evolution applies to human is for a reason that does not qualify for the definition of religion?

Must be some powerful ideology you've got that can stare the vast array of scientific evidence and total consensus within the relevant scientific community (e.g. geneticists) in the face and declare them categorically incorrect without even deferring to some higher power - like, wishful thinking, for example.

>>116622
What you're proposing is absolute nonsense and any evolutionary biologist or anthropologist would tell you so.

>>116633
IQ differences among racial groups is accepted fact.

see: bell curve

>"Black people are more likely to commit crime"
>"HOLY FUCK SOMEONE SHUT THIS RACIST WHITE SUPREMACIST UP AND FREE THIS POOR MAN FROM PRISON IT'S NOT LIKE HE KILLED TWO PEOPLE OR ANYTHING, SUPPORTING THE POINT THE LAWYER MADE"

>>116638
What's your point? Heritability of a trait is a consequence of genetics interacting with environment. Lots of traits are heritable but not caused by genetics. Women in some Burmese tribes elongate their necks through use of neck-rings. There's a genetic (chromosomal) difference between men and women. So neck length among Burmese tribes is hereditary (aka strongly corresponds to a genetic difference). But that doesn't mean Burmese tribespeople have a gene that directly CAUSES long necks. If they stopped the practice tomorrow, the trait would stop being strongly heritable. Would you then say "oh microevolution must have happened"? No, you'd argue that a change in environment, such as culture, produced the difference in heritability over time.

>>116622
Some traits feature selection pressure but it's not a given. Sometimes a cultural change is sufficient to offset new selection pressures as well. It's quite easy to point out differences between skin pigmentation for example but problematic to extrapolate that to every phenotype, let alone suggest a genetic difference, given that humans are still vastly genetically and physiologically similar in all respects.

And when we're talking about racial differences, it's also worth being weary of formulating "just so" stories that fit a particular narrative without evidence. E.g. white people score higher than blacks on IQ tests, and it just so happens that many of white peoples' ancestors lived in alpine regions where higher intelligence would serve them well to construct shelters to survive the colder temperatures. The problem with this line of thinking is that it will always be possible to design a narrative to fit whatever differences are observed.

>>116639
It's problematic for the jury to hear that during a trial because it's a confounding variable. That's not the sort of information that's relevant to deliberating on a particular defendant.

>>116656
or you know you can apply occam's razor and just say it's genetics, which, you know, it is. adjusting for economic circumstances and all other factors, africans are simply less intelligence in most of the ways that matters, and this applies across all socio-economic groups, continents, and state lines.

intelligence is highly heritable and that means some groups of humans will be less intelligent on average than others. this pokes a hole in the left's pre-occupation with science above all, because they discard science whenever it is convenient for them.

%triforce

>>114179
>the subject, based on his genes, is more likely to commit crimes
There, no mention of race, but still the same thing.

At the same time, lets not forget what this guy has done to deserve a fucking death sentence.

>>116633
It's scientific consensus. They had to gather the top minds in all the relevant fields just to sign a public statement desperately pleading people to believe they believe IQ/g is an accepted measure, because the media and their libtard drones kept maliciously/ignorantly citing a nonexistent "consensus" against all the evidence. The genetic heritability of g is said to be more firmly proven than height, and the different levels of g by race is well established (nitpicking about 'can race, like, REALLY be defined, man?' aside), as well as the correlation between g and violent crime after accounting for socioeconomic factors.

>Mainstream Science on Intelligence
http://www.intelligence.martinsewell.com/Gottfredson1997.pdf
>Race and IQ
http://unamusementpark.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Race-and-IQ-flyer.jpg
>Race and Crime
http://unamusementpark.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Race-and-crime-flyer.jpg

>>116728
>these blogs said it so it must be true!
nice try, marty.
http://www.tcs.cam.ac.uk/news/0017083-cambridge-economics-supervisor-criticised-for-racist-and-sexist-views.html

>>114179
>Year 2041
>Child is conceived
>"Whelp, the DNA tests confirm that this kiddo's gonna be a murdering rapist"
>Abortion

You know, the left might have accidentally made a right-wing decision in this case. I'm okay with this.

Besides, saying that someone is "statistically likely to commit a crime and must therefore be punished" is the same as saying "This person has committed no crime so we should punish him now". Granted, this dude is bad and should fry, but setting a precedent is way more important than his life or the lives of his victims.

>>116731
>criticised for racist and sexist views
humans criticize.
these people are like dogs.
they dont understand anything, but are trained to whine whenever they hear certain keywords. race&IQ, eugenics, etc.

>>116731
>these independent writers' heavily sourced articles are automatically wrong because they're not official Kosher™ outlets!
>students throwing a hissy fit at an advistor for writing hate facts (not even for the research being wrong, but solely because it's problematic) demonstrates scientific consensus better than a statement of consensus signed by all the major geneticists
Try to be a little more honest with yourself.

>>116252
The left really is becoming more and more like a religion every day, they even have multiple denominations.

The social justice one has
>Privilege is original sin
>Hollywood celebrities are the priests
>White / male guilt is repentance
>Victimhood is sainthood

>>116656
Thanks for correcting the record.
>.02 has been deposited into your account

>>116870
The right has all the christian fundamentalists so the left has some catching up to do to get to that level of fanaticism.

>>116875
>I do it for free

>>116225
Fine. It's a small price to pay to be rid of the problem.

And no, once they leave they cannot come back.

>>114423
>"everyone is equal"

Fuck the constitution tbh fam.

>>117053
Said Mugabe.

>>117056
>Mugabe
Are you really trying to compare the removal of the white Rhodesians with the hypothetical removal of African Americans? Do you really not see how flawed that comparison is?

>>117446
Just the idea of throwing people out of the country they call home.

You can obviously see what I'm talking about.

>>117454
I get that, but Mugabe threw out the highly skilled minority who up until then held all major leadership positions. Clearly things were not going to go well.

I don't think we can say the same about the position that blacks in America hold.

>>117501
Two wrongs don't make a right.

>>117510
Right and wrong are relative. Arguments based solely on morals are inherently flawed.

>>116225
Always looking for a handout.
You'll get paid as soon as you undo the civil war and fix Detroit.

>>116276
Different races come from different areas on earth. There has been speculation that further studies of DNA differences between races would be "problomatic" because as it turns s out, we're not nearly as similar as once believed. The out of Africa theory is wrong.

>>114427

Strawman/10, and I don't agree with him either.

>>117536
The problem comes when you try to quantify which race is "better".

>>117532
That doesn't prove him wrong. How do you think throwing people out of where they and their ancestors have rightly called home, and have as much of a right to be there as you; can possibly be justified

>>117567
just saying there are differences is enough to trigger any progressive,
unless its something thats anti-white then its a-ok.

they are just hypocrites.

>>117575
You would have to look at net gain on society from keeping v. removing said people. It is not morally nor ethically acceptable in western society to even propose this, but from a utilitarian standpoint it is most certainly justified.

>>117644
White, black, brown or red, it's all pink on the inside.

>>117535
But whites caused the civil war