# Depo P Adegbile is rejected by senate. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 8, 2014, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187 "2014-03-08T12:10:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/21 "2014-03-09T19:35:47Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I missed an important point, apparently. Please cite where he advocated that Jumal be released. [From the Washington Post](http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/justices-civil-rights-nominee-has-resume-that-includes-sesame-street-and-voting-rights/2013/12/31/7e321eee-7236-11e3-8def-a33011492df2_story.html): > [@](#): > > Adegbile and other fund lawyers filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the Supreme Court in 2009 asserting that the conviction was invalid because of racial discrimination in jury selection. And before you complain that I’m taking that sentence out of context by ignoring the next line, an amicus curiae brief is _by definition_ not performed while representing the client, and so is not a response to the later attempt to reinstate the death penalty and Adegbile being taken on as Abu-Jamal’s representative. > [@](#): > > As well, the “dishonorable tactics” are not explicitly pointed out. Abu-Jamal was convicted because the gun he owned was drawn from the holster he was wearing and fired five bullets that matched the ones that killed a police officer. Trying to pass that off as “because he is black” makes Adegbile a dishonest piece of shit. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/22 "2014-03-09T19:45:32Z")
Are murderers entitled to an impartial jury? Twelve Klansmen and twelve card carrying members of the ACLU might reach the same conclusion any particular case, but I think that a black defendant has a right to question the judgment of a jury suspected of having racial bias. I believe Abu Jamal is guilty, but even guilty people have legal rights. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/23 "2014-03-09T20:19:58Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > …I think that a black defendant has a right to question the judgment of a jury suspected of having racial bias. The black defendant wasn’t questioning it. The black defendant’s lawyer wasn’t questioning it. An uninvolved third party was questioning it, twenty-eight years after the fact. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/24 "2014-03-09T20:30:02Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > [From the Washington Post](http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/justices-civil-rights-nominee-has-resume-that-includes-sesame-street-and-voting-rights/2013/12/31/7e321eee-7236-11e3-8def-a33011492df2_story.html): > > And before you complain that I’m taking that sentence out of context by ignoring the next line, an amicus curiae brief is _by definition_ not performed while representing the client, and so is not a response to the later attempt to reinstate the death penalty and Adegbile being taken on as Abu-Jamal’s representative. > Abu-Jamal was convicted because the gun he owned was drawn from the holster he was wearing and fired five bullets that matched the ones that killed a police officer. Trying to pass that off as “because he is black” makes Adegbile a dishonest piece of shit. Question, if during the trial the judge was overheard by a courtroom stenographer declaring “I’m going to help fry that nigger” would you still find the concern about racism to be “dishonorable” and disqualify the man from serving in the US government. Particular when there was accusations of racially biased jury selection and improper jury instructions? I’m also a bit surprised your so certain that Abu Jamal as to why the jury made the decision they did. > [@](#): > > Abu-Jamal was convicted because the gun he owned was drawn from the holster he was wearing and fired five bullets that matched the ones that killed a police officer. Really? And you think the witnesses to the shooting who testified to seeing the shooting, who’s credibility has been called into question(for example one was a prostitute who may have been a police informant pressured into making the claim)? You think the testimony of the police officer who claimed that Jamal bragged about killing Faulkner when brought into the hospital had nothing to do with their verdict. It’s worth noting the initial police report, which the jury wasn’t allowed to see said nothing about this confession and the doctors present overheard know such confession and said Jamal couldn’t have made it because he was barely conscious. For the record, I think Jamal was guilty as hell and even if you throw out all the questionable evidence there’s still enough to satisfy beyond reasonable doubt, though posters who clapped at the failure the jury to convict the killer of Jordan Davis who were happy that a “thug got killed” would disagree.(that last part isn’t aimed at you) However, there was plenty of reason to be believe that all was not right in Denmark and the police may have testilied and stacked the deck. That’s wrong and the courts made the right decision. Jamal deserves to rot in jail but he deserves a fair trial. I’d also caution about making judgements based on a really thin newspaper article regarding a complicated case that’s been going on for decades. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/25 "2014-03-09T20:34:49Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > The black defendant wasn’t questioning it. The black defendant’s lawyer wasn’t questioning it. An uninvolved third party was questioning it, twenty-eight years after the fact. “The black defendant’s lawyer”? You’re familiar with all the legal wrangling that went on over the case like how he was denied counsel of his choice aren’t you and chose to represent himself but was forced to take a lawyer he didn’t want who’d never defended a death penalty case. FTR, even if he may have vowed to help the prosecution “fry that nigger” I think the judge’s decision in that case was defensible, but you seem to have read a a couple of paragraphs on a several decades old case and made a lot of bad assumptions? ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/26 "2014-03-09T20:45:20Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > The black defendant wasn’t questioning it. The black defendant’s lawyer wasn’t questioning it. An uninvolved third party was questioning it, twenty-eight years after the fact. The issues raised in this case, if they had been compellingly demonstrated, would have warranted a new trial. The fact that the SCOTUS and the Circuit Court found all of the claims (aside from sustaining the claim of improper jury instruction in the sentencing phase) didn’t get demonstrated sufficiently to require vacating the original conviction and a retrial suggest that the issues weren’t compelling demonstrated. That doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re a bad lawyer or exercising poor judgment for raising them. The judge for example may have been a racist, which is / was worth examining (the only evidence of this is based on the shaky claims of a single court reporter hearing him use the word nigger and expressing pre-conceived bias against the defendant, but it was a single-party claim that they could never substantiate.) ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/27 "2014-03-09T20:48:57Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > For the record, I think Jamal was guilty as hell and even if you throw out all the questionable evidence there’s still enough to satisfy beyond reasonable doubt, though posters who clapped at the failure the jury to convict the killer of Jordan Davis who were happy that a “thug got killed” would disagree.(that last part isn’t aimed at you) Not sure that’s an accurate way to describe what happened to Jordan Davis’s killer, there was a mistrial on the charge of First Degree Murder, which was a hard case to make anyway since it was a spur/heat of the moment killing. He was convicted of multiple other charges and will certainly die in prison. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/28 "2014-03-09T20:57:14Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Er… Why? > > I suppose it’s possible to find defense attorneys who’ve never defended a guilty client but outside of reruns of L.A. Law I don’t think they exist. > > Based on your logic virtually no criminal lawyer other than a prosecutor would be able eligible for the job. > > Is that what you really believe? No, it is more what **Grunman** has explained and what I originally posted. I do not care to have someone heading the Civil Rights department who plays the race card in trying to get a guilty man freed. That’s not the sort of person who should be deciding what is a genuine violation of civil rights, and what is a disgusting lie promulgated by a murderer. If he does not know the difference, his judgment is wanting. If he does not care, his character. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/29 "2014-03-09T21:03:42Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I do not care to have someone heading the Civil Rights department who plays the race card in trying to get a guilty man freed. Are you saying that you’d categorically consider unfit any defense attorney who tries to raise a _Batson_ claim for the job? ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/30 "2014-03-09T21:30:47Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > FTR, even if he may have vowed to help the prosecution “fry that nigger” I think the judge’s decision in that case was defensible, but you seem to have read a a couple of paragraphs on a several decades old case and made a lot of bad assumptions? OMG, this one again. A person enamored with Mumia (her right), someone who attended free Mumia rallies suddenly remembered 19 years after the fact that Sabo said this. Yeah, there’s plenty of questionable “facts” in this case, and this one leads the list. As I said in [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=548248&highlight=mumia): > [@](#): > > An unsubstantiated (and denied) quote from a free-Mumia nut, heard only by her. One that she told lots and lots of people, but is doubtful that any will come forward and substantiate. Waited 19 years, right at the point of a key ruling, to make her affidavit. Okee-dokee. That’s a good one. The eyewitness testimony in the this case was spectacularly solid in the aggregate. Here’s the testimony of one of the eyewitnesses, Robert Chobert. I believe I got this originally from a Danny Faulkner cite, so feel free to pooh pooh something that is on the record, if anyone would like: > [@](#): > > Robert Chobert, age 22, was a cab driver who had just let out a fare. He was filling out his logbook and was parked directly behind Officer Faulkner’s patrol car, just two car lengths away from where he fell. Only five minutes after the shooting, Robert Chobert made an in-person identification of Jamal as the killer as Jamal sat in the back of a police wagon. Chobert was then transported to the Police Administration Building, arriving there at 4:15 AM, where he gave a formal statement just 35 minutes after the murder: > > I was writing down on a pad how much my fare was. Then I heard a shot. I looked up and I saw a cop who was on the pavement next to his car, his car was parked a little in front of my car. I saw the cop fall to the ground when I looked up and I saw this black male stand over the cop and shoot him a couple of more times. Then I saw the black male start running towards 12th St. He didn’t get very far, maybe thirty or thirty-five steps and then he fell. I got out of my cab and started walking over to the cop. When I got up to him all of the sudden all of the cops came and told me to get back. Then I got back in my cab and I was getting ready to leave, but they had me blocked in. > > Chobert Statement, 4:25 AM, 12/9/81 > > Jamal was found sitting on the curb with his gun on the ground beside him, in the exact spot that Chobert said the killer fell. > > Chobert further stated that there was a second man at the scene – Jamal’s brother, William Cook. In his written statement to police, when asked what happened to this man. Chobert said, > > “I saw another guy running, but the police got him too.” > > Robert Chobert clearly stated, that both the man who killed Faulkner (Jamal) and the man who had been in front of the car with Officer Faulkner before the shooting started, (Cook) had been captured. > > At the Motion to Suppress, while being questioned by Jamal – who was acting as his own attorney at the time – Chobert stated that he was certain that Jamal was the man who shot Officer Faulkner. > > Jamal - “You did see the cop being shot - the man shoot the cop?” > > Chobert - “Yeah, I said I did didn’t I.” > > Jamal - “Well, you sure did. And you saw me in the back of the wagon didn’t you?” > > Chobert - “Yes, I did.” > > Jamal - “What made you certain it \* was the same man?” > > Chobert - “Because I saw you, buddy. I saw you shoot him.” > > Jamal - “You saw me-” > > Chobert - I saw you shoot him, and I never took my eyes off you until you got in the back of the wagon. I am so @#$%ing sick of people who keep trotting out the same debunked bullshit. There was no racist aspect of the trial or his representation ever established despite an endless parade of idiots asserting such a situation. And anyone who doubts the verdict, read the transcript. Also from me, from that same thread: > [@](#): > > You ain’t kidding, brother. Faulkner was killed by the weapon purchased by Mumia and found right at the scene. By Mumia’s side, where a cop kicked it aside so that Mumia couldn’t reach it. Mumia had a slug from Faulkner’s gun in his chest, the shot that ultimately incapacitated him. Multiple people on the scene witnessed the entire exchange, where Mumia shot Faulkner five times, once in the back, four more times as he lay prone (once in the face; his gun had five empty chambers). They identified Mumia as the killer–it not being a particularly difficult exercise, since he never moved from the scene, being shot and all. > > They needed to create a new verdict for this trial. Super Guilty, maybe. Really Fucking Guilty. Something like that. It defies common sense, it defies the simplest of logic, it defies description, frankly, to have familiarized yourself with the facts of this case and then to have decided that Mumia might not have killed Faulkner. Adegbil made a choice in his involvement, his “extra-attorney” filing of briefs on Mumia’s behalf, on the incendiary nonsense he spouted to reporters and at rallies that helped perpetuate the “mythic hero” nonsense that idiots in Hollywood rallied around. And we are free to question that judgment for someone who was slated to protect the civil rights of ALL Americans. You think he didn’t cross a line? Fine. But it is not at all unreasonable to think otherwise. I’m disgusted by him. There are limited resources, always, to defend people, and Adegbile decided this guy was worthy of the time, money and effort that the expended. Not the countless other guys in jail in Philly who might have actually been railroaded. That was his judgment. He needs to own it. Enough with the John Adams nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/31 "2014-03-09T21:53:05Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I do not care to have someone heading the Civil Rights department who plays the race card in trying to get a guilty man freed. I think it’s pretty out of touch with America to think that there is no legitimate question that can be raised about the racial views of a jury in 1981 considering the case of a black man who shot a white cop. I’m not saying that such claims always have merit. I’m saying that racism was worse then that it is today, and such issues cannot be dismissed by simply saying a lawyer was playing the race card. But I’m very happy that you are so certain that juries in 1981 were totally devoid of racial bias. How is it that you are so confident in this fact? ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/32 "2014-03-09T22:50:14Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No, it is more what **Grunman** has explained and what I originally posted. I do not care to have someone heading the Civil Rights department who plays the race card in trying to get a guilty man freed. That’s not the sort of person who should be deciding what is a genuine violation of civil rights, and what is a disgusting lie promulgated by a murderer. If he does not know the difference, his judgment is wanting. If he does not care, his character. > > Regards, > Shodan What exactly did Agebile say that was “playing the race card” and disqualified him from the case? If he’d claimed that he believed that due to genetic reasons blacks scored lower in intelligence tests than whites would you think that was “playing the race card” and disqualified him from the job. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/33 "2014-03-09T23:06:52Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I think it’s pretty out of touch with America to think that there is no legitimate question that can be raised about the racial views of a jury in 1981 considering the case of a black man who shot a white cop. > > I’m not saying that such claims always have merit. I’m saying that racism was worse then that it is today, and such issues cannot be dismissed by simply saying a lawyer was playing the race card. Such an assertion should have some basis, don’t you think? Adegbile’s had none. Or do you disagree? What racial bias was in play? Saying “juries of that time could have been racist” is meaningless without some basis with regard to this case. Please provide a cite, one that has not been debunked, that is suggestive of racial bias. > [@](#): > > But I’m very happy that you are so certain that juries in 1981 were totally devoid of racial bias. How is it that you are so confident in this fact? Sorry, the question is about this case in particular. No one has offered anything that withstood scrutiny or appeal supportive of a racial bias _in this case_. It is clearly a desperation strategy in support of a spectacularly guilty scumbag. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/34 "2014-03-09T23:44:43Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > Such an assertion should have some basis, don’t you think? **Adegbile’s had none.** Or do you disagree? Honestly, I don’t know the basis of the claim that he pursued. However, I do believe that as a general principle, even convicts should have access to courts for substantive claims. The idea of bias in a jury in a case where a black man kills a white cop is totally plausible to me. I’m not saying it occurred, I’m saying the allegation should be taken seriously. If you have further information on Adegbile’s claim and specifically why you conclude that it had no merit – a conclusion that sure seems like you have reason to believe it was frivolous. My mind is open, I’m simply inclined to give a guilty man another day in court and not hold a zealous defense against an attorney until further facts come to light. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/35 "2014-03-09T23:55:17Z")
I’d like to ask one other question: John Ferguson killed eight people. He claimed he was the “Prince of God” who would survive his execution, despite being a serial killer. He committed what was at the time the worst mass murder in the history of Dade County, up until 1977. He also raped one of his victims. He did not survive his execution. He did, however, receive 25 hours of pro bono work by an attorney in private practice. This attorney went on to become Chief Justice of the United States. Why does John Roberts get respect for defending a horrible mass murderer, and Adegbile is reviled for defending a cop killer? It makes no sense to me… Unless the race card is involved, or the victims of Ferguson didn’t have a powerful enough lobbying organization. It seems like it has to be one or the other, and I’m betting the latter. ---
**Author:** ![not\_what\_you\_d\_expect](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/not_what_you_d_expect/32/3246_2.png) [@not\_what\_you\_d\_expect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/not_what_you_d_expect)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2014, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/36 "2014-03-09T23:56:09Z")
Well, the death sentence was overturned. So, some issues were present. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2014, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/37 "2014-03-10T00:19:30Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Anyone who thinks Mumia is innocent has shown that his judgment is too poor to be in government. A lawyer needn’t think that to defend him in good conscience. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2014, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/38 "2014-03-10T00:29:54Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I’d like to ask one other question: John Ferguson killed eight people. He claimed he was the “Prince of God” who would survive his execution, despite being a serial killer. He committed what was at the time the worst mass murder in the history of Dade County, up until 1977. He also raped one of his victims. > > He did not survive his execution. > > He did, however, receive 25 hours of pro bono work by an attorney in private practice. This attorney went on to become Chief Justice of the United States. > > Why does John Roberts get respect for defending a horrible mass murderer, and Adegbile is reviled for defending a cop killer? It makes no sense to me… > > Unless the race card is involved, or the victims of Ferguson didn’t have a powerful enough lobbying organization. It seems like it has to be one or the other, and I’m betting the latter. I think there is a difference between an attorney doing pro bono work and defending an accused criminal in court and someone coming in out of the blue, unsolicited, to try and overturn a verdict on charges of racial bias (correct me if I’m wrong on that detail). Unless, of course, there were clear signs of said bias. Like you, I find it entirely plausible that the jury was biased, but I haven’t seen either side of this argument present a case as to why the jury was either: 1. Clearly not biased -or- 1. Clearly, possibly biased. No dog in this fight myself, but would like to see one side present some actual evidence. I don’t know much about this case other than its celebrity status. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2014, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/39 "2014-03-10T00:37:47Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Why does John Roberts get respect for defending a horrible mass murderer, and Adegbile is reviled for defending a cop killer? It makes no sense to me… > > Unless the race card is involved, or the victims of Ferguson didn’t have a powerful enough lobbying organization. It seems like it has to be one or the other, and I’m betting the latter. You have been told, repeatedly, that it is the former. Why are you even posting in this thread if you’re not going to read it? ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2014, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187/40 "2014-03-10T00:44:18Z")
> [@not\_what\_you\_d\_expect](#): > > Well, the death sentence was overturned. So, some issues were present. It was a procedural error, based on instructions to the jury. I don’t agree with the decision, but in any event, it had nothing to do with race. The appeals judges agreed with the argument that the instructions could have potentially led the jury to believe that findings on mitigating factors had to be unanimous. Their verdict needed to be unanimous, of course, but each juror was free to make his own conclusions with regard to mitigating factors. Although the jury instructions didn’t state unanimity was required, the proximity of the instructions on mitigating factors to separate instructions that did require unanimity seemed ambiguous to the court. The DA was still free to pursue the death penalty with a different jury. None of the allegations regarding bias were a factor in the decision, just as they had not persuaded any prior court. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/depo-p-adegbile-is-rejected-by-senate/683187.md?page=3)