Durg Natnal Pri Month, South Dakota Schl Executn Case Tated by Anti-Gay Bias | Death Penalty Informatn Center

Contents:

• WAS A GAY MAN OM SOUTH DAKOTA SENTENCED TO DEATH FOR FEAR HE WOULD 'ENJOY' PRISON?
• WAS THIS MAN SENTENCED TO DEATH BEE HE’S GAY?
• GAY MAN SENTENCED TO ATH BY REPORTED HOMOPHOBIC JURORS WILL NOT GET HIS APPEAL
• HIS CRIME WAS HORRENDO, BUT SO WAS THE REASON JURORS SENTENCED HIM TO ATH. HE’S GAY.
• A JURY MAY HAVE SENTENCED A MAN TO DEATH BEE HE’S GAY. AND THE JTIC DON’T CARE.
• THIS INMATE ARGUED HE WAS SENTENCED TO DEATH BEE HE’S GAY. SCOTUS JT REFED TO HEAR HIS CASE.
• A JURY MAY HAVE SENTENCED A MAN TO DEATH BEE HE IS GAY. IT’S TIME FOR A FERAL COURT TO HEAR HIS BIAS CLAIM.
• SUPREME COURT REJECTS ATH ROW APPEAL OVER ANTI-GAY JURORS
• A JURY LIKELY SENTENCED A MAN TO DEATH BEE HE’S GAY. THE SUPREME COURT JT LET ITS VERDICT STAND.
• JURORS THOUGHT A GAY MAN WOULD ENJOY PRISON. THEY SENT HIM TO DEATH ROW INSTEAD. WILL THE SUPREME COURT INTERVENE?
• DURG NATNAL PRI MONTH, SOUTH DAKOTA SCHL EXECUTN CASE TATED BY ANTI-GAY BIAS
• ANTI-GAY PREJUDICE MAY HAVE DRIVEN JURORS TO SENTENCE A MAN TO ATH. HIS EXECUTN IS TODAY.
• CONVICTED KILLER WHO CLAIMED JURORS WERE BIASED AGAST HIM FOR BEG GAY IS EXECUTED SOUTH DAKOTA
• SUPREME COURT WON’T HEAR ATH PENALTY APPEAL ALLEGG ANTI-GAY REMARKS OM JURORS
• JURORS SENTENCED S.D. KILLER CHARL RH TO DEATH FOR BEG GAY AND THE SUPREME COURT IS OKAY WH THAT

WAS A GAY MAN OM SOUTH DAKOTA SENTENCED TO DEATH FOR FEAR HE WOULD 'ENJOY' PRISON?

Appeals for a ath row mate clu claims of bias a 1993 sentencg due to juror reactn over the fendant's homosexualy.

In June 2018, mors spread on social media that a gay mate om South Dakota had been sentenced to ath by executn solely bee a urt emed that he might fd prison "too enjoyable":. " That article opened wh background about a 1992 homici by stabbg and a subsequent crimal trial, durg which fendant Charl Rh was found guilty of murr and sentenced to ath -- wh jurors reportedly handg down the harsh sentence bee they "worried that, as a gay man, Rh might enjoy prison":. It seems that, cidg what sentence to impose — ath or life whout parole — jurors worried that, as a gay man, Rh might enjoy prison.

On [18 June 2018], the Supreme Court announced would not stop South Dakota om killg a man who may have been sentenced to ath bee he is gay... Some of the jurors who imposed the ath penalty on Charl Rh, who was nvicted of murr, have said they thought the alternative — a life sentence served a men’s prison — was somethg he would enjoy as a gay man.

WAS THIS MAN SENTENCED TO DEATH BEE HE’S GAY?

The anecdot about juror sentiment appear to have been drawn om a May 2018 petn for a wr of certrari based on the notn that "at least one juror relied on anti-gay stereotyp and anim to sentence [Rh] to ath":. In the wake of Peña-Rodriguez, Charl Rh, a gay man, sought to troduce the South Dakota Supreme Court the statements of three of the jurors who had voted to sentence him to ath.

GAY MAN SENTENCED TO ATH BY REPORTED HOMOPHOBIC JURORS WILL NOT GET HIS APPEAL

One juror stated that the jury “knew that he was a homosexual and thought that he shouldn’t be able to spend his life wh men prison. Rh up wh other men for life imprisonment whout parole “would be sendg him where he wants to go, ” and that there had been “lots of discsn of homosexualy” and “a lot of disgt. The qutn prented is whether Peña-Rodriguez appli to Petner’s evince that at least one juror relied on anti-gay stereotyp and anim to sentence him to ath.

Whether Rh will be succsful obtag a review of his se, and whether he was sentenced to ath (rather than a lser punishment) solely or primarily bee he was gay are qutns that rema to be tted the legal system. ’” Another juror said they “knew that he was a homosexual and thought that he shouldn’t be able to spend his life wh men prison.

In sence, the fense argu, the jury sent Rh to his ath bee some jurors thought life a male prison might be enjoyable for a gay man. The Supreme Court is now nsirg whether to hear Rh’s argument that his ath sentence should be thrown out bee was tated by homophobia.

HIS CRIME WAS HORRENDO, BUT SO WAS THE REASON JURORS SENTENCED HIM TO ATH. HE’S GAY.

A few studi have found that llege stunts, servg as mock jurors, tend to fd people they know are homosexual guilty more often certa circumstanc. “If there is a potential homosexualy ponent to the se, this is somethg that is on the mds of jurors, ” Bellarme Universy crimologist Heather Pss wrote a dissertatn based on thoands of terviews nducted by the natnal Capal Jury Project.

In s out of Kentucky and California, for example, jurors spoke disparaggly about gay victims — suggtg they were somehow culpable bee they were lured by the fendants — and the implitn was that this ma the jurors ls likely to vote for ath.

Former juror Franc Cersosimo said last week that she vividly remembers a juror sayg that Rh might not md life prison bee he was gay. In another affidav llected by the fense, juror Harry Keeney adms the knowledge of Rh’s homosexualy affected his cisn. Those thgs never leave your head, ” said juror Delight McGriff, who has no memory of any ments about homosexualy, though she admted “this was a long time ago.

A JURY MAY HAVE SENTENCED A MAN TO DEATH BEE HE’S GAY. AND THE JTIC DON’T CARE.

A divid three-judge panel of the Eighth Circu Court of Appeals yterday refed to hear the appeal of Charl Rh, a gay man on ath row South Dakota, who argued that he should be allowed to prent new evince showg that anti-gay bias may have motivated the jury to sentence him to ath.

THIS INMATE ARGUED HE WAS SENTENCED TO DEATH BEE HE’S GAY. SCOTUS JT REFED TO HEAR HIS CASE.

The brief provid rmatn about the long and paful history of discrimatn agast lbian, gay, and bisexual people the Uned Stat and asked the urt to issu a certifite of appealabily to Rh to allow him to prent evince of juror bias. “There is pellg new evince that some of the jurors who sentenced Charl Rh to ath South Dakota were motivated by anti-gay bias.

Rh to ath bee some thought that, as a gay man, he would enjoy life prison wh other men, ” Rh’ attorney, Shawn Nolan, said. “Anti-gay stereotyp and anim should have no role our crimal jtice system and certaly should never be a reason to impose a ath sentence. Today, the feral ernment and 28 stat do not have laws that exprsly prohib discrimatn based on sexual orientatn, leavg lbian, gay, and bisexual people at risk for discrimatn jobs, hog, tn, cred, health re, jury service, retail stor, and other aspects of public life.

As if that weren’t enough, several jurors later issued sworn claratns affirmg how homophobia warped their juror was quoted as sayg that puttg a gay man prison would be “sendg him where he wants to go.

A JURY MAY HAVE SENTENCED A MAN TO DEATH BEE HE IS GAY. IT’S TIME FOR A FERAL COURT TO HEAR HIS BIAS CLAIM.

Rh’ lawyers reasoned that if racism is enough to qutn a jury’s cisn, homophobia should be, last week, the urt cled to hear Rh’ appeal.

SUPREME COURT REJECTS ATH ROW APPEAL OVER ANTI-GAY JURORS

People facg 19, Lichtenste/Corbis, via Getty ImagOn Monday, the Supreme Court announced would not stop South Dakota om killg a man who may have been sentenced to ath bee he is of the jurors who imposed the ath penalty on Charl Rh, who was nvicted of murr, have said they thought the alternative — a life sentence served a men’s prison — was somethg he would enjoy as a gay liberatns, the jury had often discsed the fact that Mr. When South Dakota jurors were sentencg Charl Rh, nvicted of murr durg a robbery, some reportedly thought life prison would be enjoyable for him bee he's gay.

Supreme Court will nsir whether to hear his argument that homophobia sent him was nvicted 1993 of the prev year's murr of Donnivan Schaeffer, a urier who walked to a Rapid Cy doughnut shop that Rh was the procs of robbg, reports the Arg Lear, a South Dakota newspaper.. But when cidg whether to sentence him to ath or to life prison, jurors raised qutns about his homosexualy, somethg Rh's lawyers disvered years later, reports The Marshall Project, a webse focg on crimal jtice.

A JURY LIKELY SENTENCED A MAN TO DEATH BEE HE’S GAY. THE SUPREME COURT JT LET ITS VERDICT STAND.

"As is, Rh has been prison for more than 20 years, but a segregatn un where he spends 23 hours a day his cell, wh one hour out for supervised exercise and recreatn, the Arg Journal Rh's lawyers are askg the Supreme Court to nsir whether antigay bias was a factor his sentence and uld possibly validate . "Taskg jurors wh the cisn whether to sentence an dividual to ath and, then, precludg evince that jurors relied on anti-gay anim and stereotyp vlat the right to impartial jury sentencg, " Rh's lawyers wre their brief to the Supreme state of South Dakota is fightg agast the team's effort to have Rh's se rensired. In their brief to the Supreme Court, the state's lawyers argue that jurors were reactg primarily to the btaly of Rh's crime sentencg him to ath, and they st doubt on some jurors' rellectns of antigay remarks, The Marshall Project also ntend that sexual orientatn isn't parable to race.

"No polician has ever proposed nstctg a wall to keep homosexuals out of the untry, " the state's brief says, acrdg to The Marshall Project. "Like race-based bias, anti-gay bias systemic harm to the jtice system and, particular, pal jury sentencg, " they wre their brief. " They note that the high urt referred to pervasive antigay prejudice s marriage equaly lg, and they ce other s as well.

JURORS THOUGHT A GAY MAN WOULD ENJOY PRISON. THEY SENT HIM TO DEATH ROW INSTEAD. WILL THE SUPREME COURT INTERVENE?

"To allow a juror to vote for a man's ath sentence on the basis of anti-gay anim and stereotyp unqutnably vlat the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments" to the U. Fight disrmatn: Sign up for the ee Mother Jon Daily newsletter and follow the news that, April 15, 2019: On Monday, the US Supreme Court cled to take up the se of Charl Rh, a gay South Dakota ath row mate, who argued that anti-gay discrimatn promised the jury his murr trial. When Charl Rh, a gay man, was nvicted of murrg Donnivan Schaeffer January 1993, the jurors at his trial South Dakota were tasked wh cidg whether he would serve life prison whout the possibily of parole or be sentenced to ath.

Durg liberatns, some jurors wonred if life prison would be punishment at all, suggtg that years a men’s prison might not be a hardship for a man who is gay.

DURG NATNAL PRI MONTH, SOUTH DAKOTA SCHL EXECUTN CASE TATED BY ANTI-GAY BIAS

In , they said that orr to nsir what “life prison whout parole” really meant, they need to know what life prison would be like for a gay man like Rh. “It’s jt so clear this se that the jury was nsirg gay bias their liberatns, ” says Shawn Nolan, one of Rh’ attorneys.

ANTI-GAY PREJUDICE MAY HAVE DRIVEN JURORS TO SENTENCE A MAN TO ATH. HIS EXECUTN IS TODAY.

But 2018, the urt led that a Colorado baker who refed to bake a weddg ke for a gay uple for relig reasons did not discrimate agast the uple. After terviews wh jurors 2016 found evince of gay bias, lawyers pursued that angle Rh’ se, makg “the first of s kd, ” Nolan says. One juror, Franc Cersosimo, scribed how an unintified juror said, “If he’s gay we’d be sendg him where he wants to go” bee a men’s prison would be a pleasant oute.

“The history of discrimatn agast lbian, gay, and bisexual people nearly every aspect of life illtrat the need to safeguard agast sexual orientatn bias our natn’s judicial system, ” the ACLU and the Lambda Legal Defense and Edutn Fund wrote their amic brief.

However, Rh’ lawyers are now petng for a rctn his sentence to life whout parole due to alleged homophobia shown by the jury durg the sentencg.

CONVICTED KILLER WHO CLAIMED JURORS WERE BIASED AGAST HIM FOR BEG GAY IS EXECUTED SOUTH DAKOTA

One juror stated that several jurors “knew that [Rh] was a homosexual and thought that he shouldn’t be able to spend his life wh men prison.

Another juror reunted one fellow juror sayg durg the sentencg: “if he’s gay we’d be sendg him where he wants to go. The Supreme Court refed, on three separate ocsns, to orr a urt to evaluate new evince of anti-gay bias the jury room. Last week, civil rights groups, cludg the ACLU and Lambda Legal, urged the Eighth Circu Court of Appeals to accept the se of Charl Rh, a gay man South Dakota whose sexual orientatn may have played a role his ath sentence 1993.

Rh learned of the anti-gay statements ma durg jury liberatns, he asked a feral trial judge to allow him to update his petn to add this new rmatn. As a rult, no feral judge has even nsired the jurors’ statements to terme whether anti-gay bias was a motivatn for the jury to sentence Mr. The Supreme Court is aga rejectg a gay ath row mate's appeal that claims jurors South Dakota were biased agast him bee of his sexual jtic did not ment Monday leavg place the ath sentence for Charl Dakota ath row mate Charl Rsell Rh is shown this 1990s photo Rapid Cy, South Cy Journal / AP fileRh was nvicted the stabbg ath of Donnivan Schaeffer, 22, while burglarizg a Rapid Cy doughnut shop March 1992.

SUPREME COURT WON’T HEAR ATH PENALTY APPEAL ALLEGG ANTI-GAY REMARKS OM JURORS

Acrdg to urt documents clud Rh’ appeal, several jurors ma ments about Rh’ sexualy and s impact on their cisn to remend the ath penalty li of life whout the possibily of Harry Kenney, a sworn statement, said the jurors knew that Rh "was a homosexual and thought the he shouldn’t be able to spend his life wh men prison.

”Juror Bent Blake, acrdg to urt documents, said there was “lots of discsn of homosexualy” among the jurors and “a lot of disgt. ”Juror Franc Cerosimo relled a 2016 sworn statement that another juror, whom she did not name, said, “if he’s gay, we’d be sendg him where he wants to go if we voted for" life whout the possibily of NAACP Legal Defense Fund, a nonprof racial jtice legal group that had filed an amic brief urgg the Supreme Court to hear Rh’ se, issued a statement cril of the high urt’s cisn, sayg “sexual orientatn discrimatn has no place the admistratn of jtice. Current statSce Sep 20, 2011Legal Don't Ask, Don't Tell is officially repealed throughout the Uned Stat, and gays and lbians may openly donatns by MSMs South Dakota?

The jtic’ cisn clears the way for South Dakota to execute a man, Charl Rh, who may have been sentenced to ath by a homophobic jury bee he is gay. But the urt’s refal to hear his appeal is still a disappotg dodge, one that unrm gay Amerins’ Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury. Prosecutors tried him for first-gree murr and asked all but one of the jurors whether they would harbor bias agast him due to his homosexualy.

JURORS SENTENCED S.D. KILLER CHARL RH TO DEATH FOR BEG GAY AND THE SUPREME COURT IS OKAY WH THAT

Ten jurors said no; one said that homosexualy was “sful” but that Rh’ orientatn wouldn’t affect her cisn the se.

Multiple qutns seemed to dite that jurors were ncerned that Rh, as a gay man, would enjoy himself too much prison. One juror stated that other jurors “knew that [Rh] was a homosexual and thought that he shouldn’t be able to spend his life wh men prison.

Specifilly, they argue that Rh, who is gay, was discrimated agast when anti-gay bias fected the jury room, vlatg Rh’s right to an impartial jury and due procs. ” One said the jurors knew that Rh was gay “and thought that he shouldn’t be able to spend his life wh men prison. “To allow a juror to vote for a man’s ath sentence on the basis of anti-gay anim and stereotyp unqutnably vlat the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, ” Rh’s lawyers wrote their pleadg to the Supreme Court.