Additionally, in this trial, the implications of an elected versus appointed judge can be seen. Judge Horton did the right thing by overturning the conviction of Haywood Patterson, he did so at great risk. Horton, an elected judge, basically ended his career with this move. It is this situation that leads me to believe that judges should be appointed rather than elected. Not every judge, especially when put in a situation like this, would have the integrity to ignore the political ramifications of their decision. While there is evidence arguing both for and against the election of judges, the difficulty for judges to remain impartial seems to far outweigh the other possible pros. The third judge that the Scottsboro case was brought
…show more content…
In Alabama, while there was technically no law stating that blacks could not serve on the jury, it was understood that blacks did not serve. This unspoken contract between the two racial groups meant that a jury of their peers, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, did not try the nine Scottsboro boys. Furthermore, Judge Callahan would blatantly rush the trial in attempt to destroy the defense’s case. He would blatantly disregard physical evidence and important testimony. When the testimony of Victoria Prince and Ruby Bates contradicted not only each other but also their past testimonies, Callahan would not allow Leibowitz to push his cross examination. Leibowitz was also not permitted to inquire into the reputation and credibility of the two victims which was contrary to the accepted rules of evidence.
Later on, Callahan would not even permit a medical doctor to fully testify on his findings where he had examined the girls hours after the alleged attack. The doctor had found that there was no vaginal tearing or bleeding just hours after the rape. In order to find a semen sample, doctors had to probe up to the neck of the cervix, which would not have been necessary if multiple men had raped the girls. It was remarked that the Callahan only permitted the doctors to testify on how to properly board a
In Alabama, while there was technically no law stating that blacks could not serve on the jury, it was understood that blacks did not serve. This unspoken contract between the two racial groups meant that a jury of their peers, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, did not try the nine Scottsboro boys. Furthermore, Judge Callahan would blatantly rush the trial in attempt to destroy the defense’s case. He would blatantly disregard physical evidence and important testimony. When the testimony of Victoria Prince and Ruby Bates contradicted not only each other but also their past testimonies, Callahan would not allow Leibowitz to push his cross examination. Leibowitz was also not permitted to inquire into the reputation and credibility of the two victims which was contrary to the accepted rules of evidence.
Later on, Callahan would not even permit a medical doctor to fully testify on his findings where he had examined the girls hours after the alleged attack. The doctor had found that there was no vaginal tearing or bleeding just hours after the rape. In order to find a semen sample, doctors had to probe up to the neck of the cervix, which would not have been necessary if multiple men had raped the girls. It was remarked that the Callahan only permitted the doctors to testify on how to properly board a