State AG fighting judicial prejudice
Rachael Abramson
Daily Free Press Staff Writer

In a three-hour, lecture-style forum yesterday, state Attorney General Scott Harshbarger created a mock trial in an attempt to address the race dilemma in today's legal system.

The Statehouse courtroom employed a defender, judge and prosecutor, but it operated without a tangible defendant.

"Thought" was placed on trial in the presence of some 100 professionals, a majority of which came from the attorney general and assistant attorney general's offices.

"Race matters," Harshbarger said. "We must resist the impulse to turn away from these issues because they're too controversial to address."

Harshbarger mediated the panel discussion, "Race on Trial: The L.A. Cases," in an ongoing effort to illustrate the role race plays in the judicial system.

The token academic, Boston University School of Law's Eva S. Nilsen, joined Hampden County District Attorney William M. Bennett, Superior Court associate justice Isaac Bornstein, Chelsea police chief Edward A. Flynn, Suffolk County District Attorney Ralph C. Martin II and assistant state attorney general Shelley L. Taylor to discuss the presence of the "race card."

The panelists disagreed on points of jury selection and fair trials, but they collectively acknowledged that racism does permeate the legal system.

In addressing the problems of inequity and discussing their solutions, the most heated points of debate spouted from defense attorney Henry F. Owens III.

"Building more and more expensive jails doesn't reduce the crime rate," Owens said. "Capitol punishment is not a deterrent for crime. Jail is in better condition than the Jeremiah E. Burke High School [in Dorchester] that isn't even accredited. Thirty years later, black people are worse off than 30 years ago."

The panel cited examples of inequality, such as the fact that there are few black prosecutors in the state and no black judges on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

Concentrating on the O.J. Simpson case and the Rodney King police beating nearly four years ago, members of the panel portrayed the different angles in which they viewed the incidents. The discussion of the Simpson case divided the panel.

"We all agreed the King verdict was incorrect, but we didn't all agree that the O.J. verdict was correct," Taylor said.

The Simpson case was practically tried in America's living room, and the race issue permeates the system everyday, Owens said, adding that Simpson's case is not an accurate representation of everyday courtroom procedures.

"You can't use [the O.J. trial] as an example," he said. "You can't look at the O.J. trial and say that's how the United States justice system works."

Harshbarger said he hopes to open daily conversations on Beacon Hill about race relations.

"Our goal is a somewhat modest one," he said. "I want to raise our collective awareness and leave here with some ideas on what to do next."