Implicit Bias Case Study

Implicit Bias and The Courts According to the NCSC which defines Implicit Bias as “implicit bias is the bias in judgment and/or behavior that results from subtle cognitive processes that often operate at a level below conscious awareness and without intentional control.” It’s been more than 300 years since the country we know and inhabit has been founded. It’s been more than sixty years since people of color have been granted the same liberties and treatment that was once only available to Anglo’s. Even with all these newfound liberties prejudice is still alive and continues to affect people of color. in the cases of Buck V Davis and Pena V Colorado the matter of race of the defendant is brought into question and brings to the light a prevalent …show more content…
Davis. As the Death Row inmate Duane Buck was on trial for the murder of his Ex-girlfriend Debra Gardner and her friend Kenneth Butler. Along with these offense buck was on trial for the attempted murder of Phyllis Taylor his step-sister. Buck was appointed two attorney’s one being Christina swarm and jerry Guerinot who was described as the “worst capital defense attorney in the country”. Guerinot’s previous twenty clients received the death penalty. Vivian Jackson who was one of Duane Buck’s former girlfriends testified to the notion that Duane Buck was a violent person and would constantly abuse her when the couple were romantically involved, but feared the backlash by Duane Buck if she came foward. Buck’s defense attorney Jerry Guerinot brought forth the input of psychologist Walter Quaijno to discuss the possibility of future violence by Duane Buck. the reason for this incorporation pertains to Texas law that requires the jurors to determine if the defendant will be a dangerous to society. The state of Texas along with this question needs to unanimously vote for the death penalty to be given. Dr. Quinjo discussed the relationship between race and crime and “stated that he considered demographic factors, including race, in his analysis and …show more content…
While at the racetrack Pena had went into the women’s facility and asked the females if they wanted to “Party”. After they declined Pena proceeded by turning of the lights and touching one of the females in the breast and the other one on the shoulder. Pena was sentenced to two years’ probation and required to register as a sex offender. After court was concluded certain racial remark was brought to the attention of Pena’s attorneys by two unnamed jourors concerning one of the jurors that was on the case that being a retired police officer. The remarks were aimed at Pena and a witness who testified on Mr. Pena’s behalf that pertained to his alibi. Juror made such remarks as “because he’s Mexican, and Mexican men take whatever they want.” And “nine times out of ten Mexican men were guilty of being aggressive toward women and young girls." These statements were aimed at Pena. The juror was quoted as saying the witness that testified on the behalf of Pena was not credible due to the fact that he was “illegal”. The attorneys of Mr. Pena argued that the Miguel Pena was denied his sixth amendment right that being the right to an impartial trial. What stood in the way of this new trial that was desired by the defendant was the “No impeachment rule”. The no impeachment rule “prevents jurors from testifying after a verdict about what happened during deliberations. There are limited exceptions that do not include that a juror expressed racial bias.”