When in Rome: Our Trip to Rome, Batson Claims, and the More Perfect Podcast
Last night, we premiered the second episode of our second season of the Undisclosed Podcast: “In Situ,” which is Latin for “on site” or “in position.” It was about the trip that Susan, Rabia, and I took to Rome, Georgia to investigate the Joey Watkins case. As Rabia said in our first episode, Rome, Georgia is a “little big town.” It has a population of about 36,000, and it is basically due west of Columbia, South Carolina, where I live and teach.
Rome has a cool little downtown area that it describes as “[t]he Largest Victorian Era District in the state…filled with antiques, collectibles, gifts, furniture, books, jewelry and much more!” We had a couple of great meals there, at the Harvest Moon Cafe and Jamwich, which finds unique ways to work jam into all of its menu options.
Rome also plays a part in an important recent Supreme Court case.
On May 23rd, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Foster v. Chatman.
On the morning of August 28, 1986, police found Queen Madge White dead on the floor of her home in Rome, Georgia. White, a 79-year-old widow, had been beaten, sexually assaulted, and strangled to death. Her home had been burglarized. Timothy Foster subsequently confessed to killing White, and White’s possessions were recovered from Foster’s home and from Foster’s two sisters. The State indicted Foster on charges of malice murder and burglary. He faced the death penalty.
Timothy Foster was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death in a Georgia court. During jury selection at his trial, the State exercised peremptory strikes against all four black prospective jurors qualified to serve. Foster argued that the State’s use of those strikes was racially motivated, in violation of our decision in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U. S. 79 (1986). The trial court and the Georgia Supreme Court rejected Foster’s Batson claim.
During jury selection, the State exercised peremptory strikes against all four black prospective jurors qualified to serve. Subsequently, after Foster was given the death penalty, he appealed his death sentence, arguing
that the State’s use of those strikes was racially motivated, in violation of our decision in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U. S. 79 (1986). The trial court and the Georgia Supreme Court rejected Foster’s Batson claim.
Batson is the Supreme Court opinion finding that the State cannot strike jurors based upon their race, and the Supreme Court of Georgia rejected Foster’s Batson claim despite the following evidence.
(1) Four copies of the jury venire list. On each copy, the names of the black prospective jurors were highlighted in bright green. A legend in the upper right corner of the lists indicated that the green highlighting “represents Blacks.”…The letter “B” also appeared next to each black prospective juror’s name….According to the testimony of Clayton Lundy, an investigator who assisted the prosecution during jury selection, these highlighted venire lists were circulated in the district attorney’s office during jury selection….
(2) A draft of an affidavit that had been prepared by Lundy “at Lanier’s request” for submission to the state trial court in response to Foster’s motion for a new trial….The typed draft detailed Lundy’s views on ten black prospective jurors, stating “[m]y evaluation of the jurors are a[s] follows.”… Under the name of one of those jurors, Lundy had written:
“If it comes down to having to pick one of the black jurors, [this one] might be okay. This is solely my opinion….Upon picking of the jury after listening to all of the jurors we had to pick, if we had to pick a black juror I recommend that [this juror] be one of the jurors.”…
That text had been crossed out by hand; the version of the affidavit filed with the trial court did not contain the crossed-out language….Lundy testified that he “guess[ed]” the redactions had been done by Lanier….
(3) Three handwritten notes on black prospective jurors Eddie Hood, Louise Wilson, and Corrie Hinds. Annota- tions denoted those individuals as “B#1,” “B#2,” and “B#3,” respectively. App. 295–297. Lundy testified that these were examples of the type of “notes that the team— the State would take down during voir dire to help select the jury in Mr. Foster’s case.”…
(4) A typed list of the qualified jurors remaining after voir dire….It included “Ns” next to ten jurors’ names, which Lundy told the state habeas court “signif[ied] the ten jurors that the State had strikes for during jury selection.”…Such an “N” appeared alongside the names of all five qualified black prospective jurors….The file also included a hand- written version of the same list, with the same markings….Lundy testified that he was unsure who had prepared or marked the two lists.
(5) A handwritten document titled “definite NO’s,” listing six names. The first five were those of the five qualified black prospective jurors….The State concedes that either Lanier or Pullen compiled the list, which Lundy testified was “used for preparation in jury selection.”…
(6) A handwritten document titled “Church of Christ.” A notation on the document read: “NO. No Black Church.”…
(7) The questionnaires that had been completed by several of the black prospective jurors. On each one, the juror’s response indicating his or her race had been circled….
Given this same evidence, the United States Surpeme Court reversed the Georgia Supreme Court and found a Batson violation, concluding that “The contents of the prosecution’s file…plainly belie the State’s claim that it exercised its strikes in a ‘color-blind’ manner.”
For further discussion of jury selection, Chatman, Batson, and even an interview with James Batson himself, I highly recommend the “Object Anyway” episode of the “More Perfect” podcast. A spinoff of Radiolab, “More Perfect” is brought to you by Jad Abumrad, Elie Mystal, Suzie Lechtenberg, Kelsey Padgett, Sean Rameswaram, and Katherine Wells. I had the chance to listen to it this weekend, and it really does a nice job of breaking down the jury selection process, the flaws of Batson, and the question of whether there are any viable solutions.