shadow

By John Thompson.

The Justice for Julius rally at the Oklahoma state Capitol began as a spiritual gathering with a prayer and a remembrance of Paul Howell, the victim of the 1999 carjacking murder for which Julius was improperly convicted. Then the evidence which was not heard by the mostly white jury who sent my former student to Death Row was presented to the crowd.

As was explained in the three-part ABC documentary, The Last Defense, the testimony of four family members on what Julius was doing at the time of the murder was not provided to the jury. Neither did the jury hear statements by two inmates who said that co-defendant Christopher “Westside” Jordan bragged about the killing and the deal he made to get out of prison in 15 years. Jordon, in fact, was released 15 years into his 30 year sentence.

The jury heard Jordan’s testimony, but they were not shown how much his statements contradicted themselves, and how they seemed to be coached by detectives, who improperly kept his attorney at bay.  Julius’ inexperienced public defender acknowledged that he did a “terrible job” of cross examining the key witness who repeatedly contradicted himself when fingering Julius as the murderer.

The jurors heard the evidence provided by two longtime police informants, who had years of experience as felons and who were in danger of being incarcerated for decades for their latest crimes. The jury couldn’t know that one would never be charged for his crime, and the police detective who led the murder investigation would go to bat for the other, helping to get a possible 40 year sentence reduced to four years.

The only eyewitness testified that the shooter had up to an inch of hair sticking out from his hat, but the jury wasn’t shown contemporary photographs of Julius’ close-cropped hair. At least one juror heard a fellow juror say, “Well, they should just take that n—– out back, shoot him and bury him under the jail.” The juror told the judge about the comments the following day, but the juror was not removed, supposedly because the judge was not told that the N-word was used.

Above all, the jury wasn’t told the story of why there is no hard evidence linking Julius to the crime. It took 18 years for prosecutors to finally agree to a DNA test of the shooter’s bandanna (or gun.) Results from the newly-ordered test should be released in the fall.

The rally felt in our guts as both a time of mourning, and dedicating ourselves to action, as well as questioning why Oklahoma prosecutors have remained so determined to execute a person who seems to be innocent, and who certainly did not receive a fair trial. It was also a time of soul-searching: Where did our era’s increasing fear of other types of people come from, and what does it mean?

Before and after the rally, it felt in our hearts as if we were at a homecoming. Most of my former students, as well as Julius’ friends, are now middle-aged. Although I was slow to recall most of my former kids’ names, they wore many of the same energetic facial expressions, displayed the same youthful body language, offered the same dry witty political commentary, and shared hugs that were just as loving. However, my former basketball buddies just laughed at my suggestion that we find a basketball and brush off our old skills.

On the other hand, I could not resist the urge to ask the type of questions that always prompted deep class discussions. I quoted a New Yorker article about Brexit, Trumpism, and the rise of the new authoritarianism about the way it comes from large numbers of people suffering from “SLS,” or the “shitty life syndrome.” This prompted many wise observations by family people who are dismayed by the rising tribalism, as well as reports on how their children are developing a deep political consciousness.

Only afterwards did the obvious occur to me. All types of white people, and people from all sorts of backgrounds, would have been just as welcome as the white people who attended the rally. Had we kept our eyes on the integration prize, opportunities for heartfelt sharing across racial and class lines would have been transformative. I’m sure most white people would love the opportunity to bond with the families at the Capitol, and to share our common humanity. I’m afraid, however, that in our increasingly conflicted society, even fewer Americans think that that is possible.

I stress the gut level feelings that I felt privileged to explore at the rally because I can’t forget the words of the foreman of the jury who sentenced Julius to death. He told ABC that, in a case like that one, you “go with your heart more than anything else.” The juror trusted “what you felt in your gut.” When delivering the verdict, the juror “felt right.”

What was it in our community on the eve of the 21st century that made it feel right to convict and sentence to death an honors student on the basis of backroom deals between the police and their informants? What did appeals court judges feel in their guts when they ruled that the abuses in the Jones case were wrong, but they didn’t rise to the level that demands a new trial, or even a full disclosure of evidence? What should we feel, nearly two decades later, when our criminal justice system still seems to value court victories more than justice?

A DNA test has finally been ordered on the bandanna. Appeals may be under consideration by appeals courts, although there has been some hairsplitting in terms of the language used in discussing the situation. We should learn more by the fall.

During the rally, we learned how the trials that Julius has faced have shaped his faith and those of his family and friends. If Sunday morning wasn’t still the time when America is most segregated, wouldn’t we have more cross-racial heart-to-heart conversations?

We learned that Julius began this week reading Robert Caro’s latest biography of Lyndon Johnson. If more people engaged simple things like book discussions with different types of people, would our gut-level judgments evolve?

And if police, prosecutors, and judges have a heart-felt commitment to the rule of law, shouldn’t they focus on evidence and stop playing on the emotions of the public and manipulating jurors’ feelings to win at all costs?

What do you think? Why are we so tribal? Has progress stopped in the criminal justice system? Can we get back to expanding integration?

Author

Anthony Cody

Leave a Reply