The American justice system promotes being “innocent until proven guilty,” but there are several factors that say otherwise – especially relative to Black males.
The fact of the matter is, race is often a clear determinant that can ultimately be a detriment to one’s judicial outcome.
This week’s release of two Black North Carolina men accentuates that point.
After spending 30 years in prison, half brothers Henry Lee McCollum, 50 and Leon Brown, 46, were released Tuesday after their convictions of the rape and murder of an 11-year-old girl were overturned after DNA evidence proved their innocence.
McCollum and Brown are both African-American. Both are also mentally disabled.
The case was always considered “weak,” but despite no physical evidence, claims of coercion, and the statement of a third man who confessed to authorities that he raped and killed a girl in the same area; McCollum and Brown were convicted and sentenced to death row and life in prison respectively.
In addition to the obvious disregard to the fundamentals of what America’s judicial system is supposed to be based on – the whole innocent until proven guilty thing – there are still blaring prejudices and backward thinking that make this case even more deplorable and that is the actions of two men who are supposed to serve in a fair and unbiased manner, yet failed miserably.
One of those men is Joe Freeman Britt, who was the original prosecutor in the case. Even after scientific DNA evidence proved neither McCollum nor Brown committed the crime, Britt told media he still believed the men were guilty. By the way, Britt is known as the country’s “deadliest D.A.” because of his reputation to seek the death penalty so often.
The other man who failed miserably in giving the brothers a fair shot is United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. In 1994, when the brothers had already served 10 years, Scalia refused a request to review the case. In explaining his refusal, Scalia described “McCollumn’s crime as so heinous that it would be hard to argue against lethal injection.” Even when a fellow justice noted McCollum’s mental capacity was the same as that of a 9-year-old, Scalia refused.
If people who are placed in authoritative positions of trust convict individuals simply on what they think and not what is fact, than the doors to racial, gender and even socio-economic injustice will forever remain open.
There is something seriously wrong when a prosecutor continues to proclaim the guilt of individuals who have been cleared through scientific evidence. And it is a major issue of concern when a Supreme Court justice refuses to consider a case despite extenuating evidence that at the very least, questions the men’s convictions.
Where is the accountability?
Who is the overseer of such individuals to ensure they are not only doing the best job possible, but also operate on the standard code of ethics?
Experts say if the number of Americans currently incarcerated were counted as a city of their own, they would be the largest city in the United States, second only to New York.
I can’t help but to wonder how many of those millions of people are falsely incarcerated.
Local and federal government needs to reexamine policies that are currently in place to ensure fairness and equitable standards are being adhered to by people who hold key positions in the criminal justice system: That goes for attorneys, judges, and elected and appointed officials.
As long as we have people like McCollum and Brown who spend the majority of their lives unjustly incarcerated, there is proof that the current accountability measures are ineffective, thus unjust.
