Difference between revisions of "Scottsboro case"
(new (starting)) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The '''Scottsboro case''' was a miscarriage of justice in the 1930s that is primarily important because the Communist Party seized on it to recruit black members, much to the annoyance of the civil rights leaders who were trying to save the defendants from the death penalty. | The '''Scottsboro case''' was a miscarriage of justice in the 1930s that is primarily important because the Communist Party seized on it to recruit black members, much to the annoyance of the civil rights leaders who were trying to save the defendants from the death penalty. | ||
| − | + | ==Incident== | |
The Scottsboro incident of 1931 involed in which seven young black men who were convicted of raping two white women on a freight train on its way through Alabama. As the train approached Scottsboro, a sheriff's posse seized the seven blacks and charged them with rape. They were indicted and tried in April, 1931, in three groups, each trial being completed in a single day. The juries found the defendants guilty and imposed the death penalty on all. | The Scottsboro incident of 1931 involed in which seven young black men who were convicted of raping two white women on a freight train on its way through Alabama. As the train approached Scottsboro, a sheriff's posse seized the seven blacks and charged them with rape. They were indicted and tried in April, 1931, in three groups, each trial being completed in a single day. The juries found the defendants guilty and imposed the death penalty on all. | ||
| + | ==Supreme Court== | ||
| + | On appeal to the Supreme Court the civil rights lawyers argued argued that prisoners (1) had been denied the right to counsel; (2) had not been given a fair and impartial trial; and (3) had been tried before juries from which blacks were systematically excluded. They argued that these allegations constituted a denial of due process of law and equal protection of the laws under the 14th Amendment. | ||
| + | Speaking for a majority of seven in Powell v. Alabama (1932), Justice George Sutherland declared that the Alabama trial court had failed to give the defendants reasonable time to secure counsel, which was a denial of due process. This decision helped establish the federal constitutional right to counsel in all state criminal cases, because it is inherent in [[due process]]. | ||
==Further reading== | ==Further reading== | ||
Revision as of 00:54, August 13, 2009
The Scottsboro case was a miscarriage of justice in the 1930s that is primarily important because the Communist Party seized on it to recruit black members, much to the annoyance of the civil rights leaders who were trying to save the defendants from the death penalty.
Incident
The Scottsboro incident of 1931 involed in which seven young black men who were convicted of raping two white women on a freight train on its way through Alabama. As the train approached Scottsboro, a sheriff's posse seized the seven blacks and charged them with rape. They were indicted and tried in April, 1931, in three groups, each trial being completed in a single day. The juries found the defendants guilty and imposed the death penalty on all.
Supreme Court
On appeal to the Supreme Court the civil rights lawyers argued argued that prisoners (1) had been denied the right to counsel; (2) had not been given a fair and impartial trial; and (3) had been tried before juries from which blacks were systematically excluded. They argued that these allegations constituted a denial of due process of law and equal protection of the laws under the 14th Amendment.
Speaking for a majority of seven in Powell v. Alabama (1932), Justice George Sutherland declared that the Alabama trial court had failed to give the defendants reasonable time to secure counsel, which was a denial of due process. This decision helped establish the federal constitutional right to counsel in all state criminal cases, because it is inherent in due process.
Further reading
- Acker, James R. Scottsboro and Its Legacy: The Cases That Challenged American Legal and Social Justice. (2007)