Kalief Browder Case Analysis

1423 Words 6 Pages
Kalief Browder was an innocent, black 16 years old. Due to the Stop and Frisk law of New York, police officers, who found nothing on him, were able to stop him and his friend, search them, and arrest them. Kalief was incarcerated on robbery, grand larceny, and assault charges; like the story of many others, he ended up dead. He was beaten, harassed, and placed in solitary consignment in prison for years before the charges were dropped. When he was finally released, he committed suicide. His family believed his experience in prison took such a toll on him that he longer felt his life was worth it. How was Kalief able to be falsely incarcerated for years without anyone taking notice to such an issue? How could it be justified for police officers to use legislation that allows their biased opinions to stop anyone for no reason? Racism is present in criminal justice because of the difference in percentage of non-white inmates vs white inmates, poor legislation, and lack of jury duty diversity.
In 1986 and 1988, two federal sentencing laws were enacted that made the punishment for distributing crack cocaine 100 times greater than the
…show more content…
Many African Americans do not go to trial because they are advised that they would earn an easier sentence from pleading guilty; innocent people are coerced into pleading guilty because it known that they will have a smaller chance of beating the charge in court. Some reasons for African Americans being dismissed from jury duty include: too young or old, single or divorced, religious or not, failed to make eye contact, lived in a poor part of town, had served in the military, had a hyphenated last name, displayed bad posture, were sullen, disrespectful or talkative, had long hair, wore a beard (Liptak). These reasons are called peremptory challenges which are the right in jury selection for the attorneys to reject a certain number of potential jurors without stating a

Related Documents