During jury selection for a Long Island hate crime—in which an Ecuadorean man was stabbed to death by seven teenagers—numerous potential jurors were only too happy to identify themselves as racially biased. Many cited a conservative stance on immigration as evidence they couldn’t make a fair decision in the killing of an illegal resident. As one prospective juror after another was dismissed, the scene may have reflected more about the community than about the case. One, who was dismissed for other reasons, said, “I don’t care whether the man was legal, illegal, white, black, purple or green. There was a murder. It almost seemed like the poor victim was the one going on trial.”
The Times reports that “the jury selection had the feel of a call-in show on talk radio, as men and women sounded off on illegal immigration, hate crimes, their ethnic background and the American dream.” A young woman said that her father has a “huge opinion about illegal immigration,” and that his views have “become my opinions as well.” A man told the judge he’d been robbed by illegal immigrants and that the incident would render him partial. Out of 130 people interviewed only five were accepted onto a jury last week.
In Suffolk County where the crime occurred, there’s no doubt that immigration and race are contentious issues. The teens are accused of not only killing Macrcelo Lucero in 2008, but of routinely attacking Hispanic men, calling it “beaner hopping.” Still, the victim’s brother protested that the judge and prospective jurors were losing sight of what's really important. “We’re not talking about any issues about immigration,” he said. “We’re talking about justice and human rights. This is totally different.”
