NCJ Number
146930
Date Published
1993
Length
10 pages
Annotation
The case of the Martinsville Seven in Virginia illustrates the use of race as a critical variable in punishment and is an important early example of the abandonment by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) of a desegregation strategy in favor of the separate-but-equal doctrine.
Abstract
The seven black defendants confessed to raping a white female in 1949 and were sentenced to capital punishment. The Virginia NAACP handled the appeal. The attorneys abandoned narrow procedural challenges in favor of a direct attack on the discriminatory application of the death penalty. This case was one of the earliest in which attorneys used statistical data to prove systematic racial discrimination against black offenders in capital cases. The strategy failed for several reasons. Racism had a major role. However, the judges were influenced by the defendants' apparent guilt. In addition, prevailing judicial attitudes during that period emphasized the preservation of social order over the values of due process and equal protection. Finally, the attorneys did not conform to the judiciary's conception of the proper method of legal argument or the proper scope of judicial review. Despite the failure in the Martinsville case, its approach was the forerunner of further efforts to attack the separate-but-equal doctrine by using equal protection arguments based on empirical and sociological data to challenge systemic racism and discrimination in the legal system of the United States. 43 reference notes