Don’t Judge a Book By Its Color
by
K. Michael Williams
Caught in the middle, you enter a courtroom hoping for fairness. The defense team will use its history and experience to present you in a light that indicates innocence or at least deserving mercy. On the other side of the table, prosecutors use the law to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the charges presented before the court. And while the presumption of innocence is more a moral statute than a constitutional guarantee, the concept is a basic requirement of the promised fair trial.
Of course, despite the system’s so-called best intentions, the concept of fairness can be seen as pure promotion.
Case in point: The People vs. Leron Liggins.
The People vs. Leron Liggins
Leron Liggins
Leron Liggins found himself in handcuffs in 2018, charged with heroin possession and the intent to distribute. Liggins’s trial was set for June of the following year. According to court records, Liggins got the date changed five times. Among other reasons, the delays were the result of the defendant’s discontent with his representation. The 25-year-old had his lawyer replaced three times. He also insisted he couldn’t decide whether to take the prosecution’s offer. The trial date was finally rescheduled for October 2021.
At some point, the judge monitoring the case, Michigan’s Eastern District Judge Stephen Murphy III, found his patience strained. During a 2020 hearing, the judge declared Liggins was “playing games.” And Murphy didn’t stop there. In open court, he declared, “I’m tired of this case. I’m tired of this defendant. I’m tired of getting the runaround.
“This guy looks like a criminal to me. This is what criminals do.”
In 2021, a jury convicted Liggins. Judge Murphy sentenced the defendant to more than 10 years in prison.
Liggins and his legal team filed an appeal. And won.
“This guy looks like a criminal to me.”
How the Judge’s Actions Were Perceived
A Michigan federal appeals court overturned the sentence in August 2023. The justices agreed the judge’s statements, which included “looks like a criminal to me,” were far too damaging. That and other “unacceptable” remarks hindered the defendant’s right to due process.
The appeals court also factored in that, in 2021, before the trial, a lawyer for Liggins asked the judge to recuse himself based on those remarks. Murphy denied the motion. And he made no public statement about the matter throughout the trial.
Not that it should surprise anyone, but once the sentence got overturned and the judge’s remarks became public, he decided it was time to humble himself. Judge Murphy boldly argued his demeanor had nothing to do with any inability to maintain impartiality. “Just because I got mad does not mean I’m biased.”
Prosecutors, looking to safeguard the conviction, took allegiance with the judge. They claimed Murphy’s frustration was “understandable,” contesting the defendant’s apparent and deliberate manipulation of the system to prolong the process.
Judge Stephen Murphy III
The appeals court disagreed. The defendant’s conduct didn’t need to be “understandable.” Liggins’s success at prolonging the proceedings was in the purview of fair practice. And no officer of the court had the right to prejudge guilt based on said behavior.
Liggins’s defense attorney at trial, Wade Fink, admitted there was certainly the idea of “gamesmanship” on both sides of the legal table. “Of course there is. But does that mean that a judge is entitled to lose his cool in the way that happened here? No.
“It is very important that community observers of the criminal justice system, especially in a majority Black city like Detroit, can see that the folks in court are being given a fair shake.”
Not that it should surprise anyone, but once the sentence got overturned and the judge’s remarks became public, he decided it was time to humble himself.
The [Alleged] Truth
Believe it or don’t, recent studies imply there is no justice system bias when it comes to arresting and sentencing black people. This despite the astonishing disparity in color within the prison population. Are things as bad as they were 60 or even 20 years ago? No. But I wouldn’t jump up and down and applaud correctional progress.
Current theories ignore the fact a black individual is far more likely to see a conviction for a crime whereas a white person charged with the same offense has a greater chance of either receiving a lesser sentence or no time at all. Statistics demonstrate whites and blacks are equally responsible for drug-related crimes but four times the number of blacks go to prison for them.
And we haven’t even touched on the actions of the police.
While in junior high, my son told me a story that still infuriates me over 20 years later. He and another (black) friend were on their way home from school. Walking in front of them was a small group of (white) kids. A group openly engaging in beer and pre-legalized weed.
A patrol car deliberately drove past the group of law-breaking white kids but stopped the two black kids, questioning them more to annoy than anything.
This was the day I learned my son never got from school to subway (or vice versa) without being stopped by Those Who Serve and Protect. Nearly every day. On one occasion, he left school and three different patrols stopped him before he got to the train station. (I called the local precinct and spoke to Public Affairs but expected nothing and got just that.)
Earlier this year, my friend Sonny was arrested for a decades-old warrant. Instead of throwing out the decrepit matter, the court fined Sonny $500. I believe it would be difficult to convince anyone who’s had contact with the carceral apparatus that a white person would’ve seen the same result.
Sure, conditions affect how the system treats you. The courts and law enforcement look at a defendant’s demeanor, history, and seriousness of the offense. But you’ll never convince us that the legal system often doesn’t see innocent black residents but potential suspects. We are regularly targeted when we fail to signal or walk down the “wrong” street. My aforementioned son drove an old Infiniti for years. He says his current BMW got stopped more times in a year than in all the years he drove that dusty Infiniti.
A patrol car deliberately drove past the group of law-breaking white kids but stopped the two black kids, questioning them more to annoy than anything.
Idealists argue that our rights are secured by the very laws that persecute us. Those poor souls have been misled by that blindfolded woman holding the scale. I do try to remember the concept of “equality” is grounded in the foundation built into the Declaration of Independence, a document Abraham Lincoln called “a rebuke and a stumbling block to tyranny and oppression.” But let’s face it, even in the 21st Century, certain peoples still face an uphill battle for a cause the DoI claims we have a right to from the git. That’s when I remember our forefathers crafted a document that allegedly protected all of us, certifying what America stands for. And afterward, the founding fathers went home to their wives, kids, and slaves.
The Founding Fathers / Courtesty havefunwithhistory.com
The Aftermath
It would take two years for Judge Murphy to publicly admit to his insulting and damaging remarks.
“I was mad, I was hostile, I was disapproving, and I regret it.” But the judge insisted that it had nothing to do with prejudice against Liggins. But j“ust because I got mad does not mean I’m biased. I’m not, trust me.”
Would it surprise you to hear that despite the harsh criticism of the judge’s actions, there is no current agenda for any penalization regarding the conduct?
Meanwhile, Liggins awaits a new trial.
K. Michael Williams is a founding member of the Re/Creation experience which began on Rikers Island in 2017. He is a freelance writer, an advocate for social justice reform, and Re/Creation’s editor. He enjoys his privacy while striving to be an engaging member of his community. He's a grandfather and lover of movies of the undead. He’s a couch potato and loves reading, drawing, music, and all things pop culture as long as it’s the 1970s or earlier.
