Doubts About the Legal System in the US

Published in Berliner Zeitung
(Germany) on 4 December 2014
by Damir Fras (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Amy Baker. Edited by Stephen Proctor.
Grand juries should not be allowed to deliberate in cases involving police violence. They work mysteriously and appear to be susceptible to racism.

A white policeman kills an unarmed black man and does not even have to justify his actions before a court. What sounds like a story from the days of apartheid rule in South Africa also applies in the United States. First it happened in Ferguson, and now it is happening in New York. Once again, a grand jury has decided not to charge a man whose actions ended a person’s life as the result of police violence.

A big problem is that there is widespread structural racism among police forces in the U.S., and this racism continues to reduce African-Americans to second-class citizens. Equally problematic is the fact that in court cases such as these, the wrong body of people renders a verdict in court. In Ferguson and New York, the decision as to whether the police officer would be charged was made by a grand jury. This is the kind of proceeding where members of the jury conduct hearings that are closed to the public. How they reach a final decision is unclear. Any communication by the grand jury with the prosecution or defense, important for purposes of reaching its decision, is completely absent.

This process is very ambiguous and produces reasonable doubt about the legal system of the oldest parliamentary democracy in the world. Neighborhood disputes may be easily resolved by grand juries, but cases involving racially motivated violence by police officers may be resolved much better in an ordinary court of law.


Zweifel am Rechtssystem in den USA

Geschworenenjurys sollten nicht über Fälle von Polizeigewalt entscheiden. Sie arbeiten intransparent und scheinen vor Rassismus nicht gefeit.

Ein weißer Polizist tötet einen unbewaffneten Schwarzen – und muss sich dafür nicht einmal vor Gericht verantworten. Was klingt wie eine Geschichte aus Apartheidszeiten in Südafrika, scheint inzwischen auch Methode in den USA zu haben. Erst war es Ferguson, jetzt ist es New York. Schon wieder hat eine Geschworenenjury entschieden, einen tödlich endenden Einsatz von Polizeigewalt nicht anzuklagen.

Ein großes Problem dabei ist der in US-Polizeitruppen offenbar weit verbreitete strukturelle Rassismus, der Afroamerikaner immer noch zu Menschen zweiter Klasse macht. Mindestens genauso problematisch aber ist es, dass die falschen Gremien über solche Fälle zu Gericht sitzen. In Ferguson und in New York wurde die Entscheidung, ob die Polizisten angeklagt werden, einer sogenannten Grand Jury überlassen. Das ist eine Art Vor-Gericht, dessen Geschworene in nicht-öffentlichen Sitzungen tagen. Wie eine Entscheidung zustande kommt, ist nicht ersichtlich. Der öffentliche Schlagabtausch zwischen Anklage und Verteidigung, der für die Beurteilung der Entscheidung wichtig ist, entfällt komplett.

Das ist intransparent und lässt berechtigte Zweifel am Rechtssystem in der ältesten parlamentarischen Demokratie der Welt aufkommen. Mit Grand Jurys lassen sich vielleicht Nachbarschaftsstreitigkeiten lösen. Über rassistische motivierte Polizeigewalt aber sollten besser ordentliche Gericht entscheiden.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Spain: Trump’s Focus on the Western Hemisphere Is Astute, but His Policy Needs Adjustment

Mexico: A Migrant’s Triumph

Nigeria: Christian Genocide as Shoe Wearer’s Perspective

Sri Lanka: The American Dream Is Now Transformed: Being an Outsider Is an Asset in American Politics

Australia: Have the Epstein Files ‘Ripped MAGA Apart’? Maybe Not, but There Will Be Fallout

Topics

Poland: Ending the US Government Shutdown Could Lead Democrats to Victory

Germany: The Pressure on Trump Will Continue

Germany: Trump’s Epstein Problem

South Korea: Why Is the ‘Queen of Stocks’ Stepping Down? The Pelosi Index and the PELOSI Act

Germany: Trump’s Surprise U-Turn: Majority Votes To Release the Epstein Files

Nigeria: Christian Genocide as Shoe Wearer’s Perspective

Philippines: The Washington Consensus and President Ramos

Israel: Gaza Proves You Can’t Solve Everything with Business Deals

Related Articles

Germany: The Epstein Curse Continues To Loom Large

Germany: Donald Trump vs. James Comey: A Legal Vendetta

Germany: Unfortunately, Reality Comes to Those Who Wait

Germany: A Software for Authoritarian Restructuring

Russia: The Issue of Weapons Has Come to the Forefront*