Duh.

The issue of unequal application of the death penalty depending on race is certainly of great importance. But the most fundamental problem with the death penalty is the virtual certainty of wrongful executions of people who are in fact innocent. The latest figure I am aware of showed about 3300 people on death rows throughout the U.S. If just 1/3 of 1 percent of those people were convicted mistakenly it means about eleven people in line to be wrongfully executed. And what would you like to bet that the actual rate of mistakes is significantly higher than that? For that reason alone the death penalty should be thrown out. All the other questions relating to racial disparities in its application or whether it should be allowed for juveniles, the mentally ill or the retarded simply reinforce the case.

Professor Sorenson's comments are off the mark, and sound made to order. The study did start with no evidence of racism, and concluded with no evidence of racism. Studies of this sort do not presume outcomes, and in most cases do not assign causes to those outcomes. Statistcal analysis is a tool for examination of what has been happening, nothing more.

Is it only bizarre in Texas to wonder if, all things being equal(so to speak), Black defendants are being treated to a different prosecutorial standard than are Whites accused of the same kinds of crimes?

If DNA evidence had not proven another wrongful conviction today in Dallas County of a black man. 26 wrongful convictions, 18 in Dallas county alone. Almost all black. Think there's no bias? Weaker evidence can convict based on the racial evidence of the DNA clearances.

So, within that context, Professor Sorenson appears to be correct. The bar is lower. The DNA clearances for wrongful conviction make that appear to be a logical conclusion.

In one part of Texas they try to kill black people more often than white people.

Who could have predicted such a thing?

This (Sorenson) is why courtroom experts are so frustrating, too. We have a guy in "justice studies" (not a disciplinary social science) at Prairie View A&M University, put up against someone in mainstream sociology who's at the University of Denver, a much higher-ranking (and research-focused) institution. Are we supposed to find their statements equally credible just because they are both attached to a university? There's something to be said for the quality of one's credentials.

And the critique itself is pretty dumb. 'You start with no relationship and then control for stuff.' Well, that's what a lot of science is. There can appear to be a relationship (or no relationship) between two variables, but once we account for other important things, the picture changes. It isn't "bizarre"--it's standard data analysis.

irrelevant. Because each case should be judged on it's own merit. And having 12 whites out of 100 vs. 17 African Americans out of 100 given the death penalty not that large a disperity.

Now if you would like to see full numbers of people on death row, that would probably a better comparison. Yet even then, you would have to look at that number vs. the total number of those who commit crimes to see if the number is that unreasonable.

The problem is, it ISN'T that unreasonable.

The elements of 'racism' in the 'death penalty' could be easily remedied: A) All capital cases in any state - the defendant should be allowed the legal assistance of his choice and the state be responsible for payment. This would include lawyers, investigators, forensic/DNA experts and expert witnesses. THIS WOULD ELIMINATE 'THE CLAIM' OF RACISM IN DEATH PENALTY CASES. B) if the state wishes to 'take' a person's life as a penalty - the state should be willing to pay for it!!! PROBLEM SOLVED - No more elements of racism in 'death penalty' cases

I'm not a lawyer (thank the gods) but I have been around long enough to know that in even the most severe crime situations there is latitude and sometimes a lot of latitude in what charges can be laid. Has anyone stopped to consider whether or not the charges laid were identical or at least very similar for similar crimes committed by the two racial groups? Personally I doubt it very much. I wonder if the 5 young men charged in the Jena 6 case would have been charged the same if they had been white.Not likely in my mind! The recent acquittal of the 3 policemen in the wedding day murder of Sean Bell suggests a similar inequality of justice based on skin color. To attempt to deny that there is racial bias in charging and sentencing is ludicrius and calls into question the inteleigence of the the reader or viewer!

I remember Rosa Parks, Emit Till and Gov Orval Faubus. All those events less than 60 years ago. Some of the principals are still alive. It is unreasonable to expect that attitudes prevalent in those times have done a complete about turn. Remarks by Jeremiah Wright unfortunately suggest prejudice is alive and well on both sides.

Perhaps the time is right for the election of a black president who does not carry all the baggage of the white establishment in his political agenda sack!