{"title":"该死的密西西比:花诉密西西比州廉价的种族正义","authors":"P. Butler","doi":"10.1086/708458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Flowers v Mississippi is a Supreme Court case about a man who was tried six times for the same crimes. The trials took place over a span of twenty-one years. In four of the trials, there was a conviction, but appellate courts reversed because of prosecutorial misconduct. In the other two trials, the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict, and the judge declared a mistrial. Curtis Flowers was charged with murdering four people—Robert Golden, Carmen Rigby, Bertha Tardy, and Derrick Stewart—in a small town in Mississippi. Mr. Flowers is African American. Doug Evans, the district attorney who was the lead prosecutor in all six trials, is white. Winona, Mississippi, where the killings occurred, is roughly 53 percent black and 46 percent white.","PeriodicalId":46006,"journal":{"name":"Supreme Court Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/708458","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mississippi Goddamn: Flowers v Mississippi’s Cheap Racial Justice\",\"authors\":\"P. Butler\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/708458\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Flowers v Mississippi is a Supreme Court case about a man who was tried six times for the same crimes. The trials took place over a span of twenty-one years. In four of the trials, there was a conviction, but appellate courts reversed because of prosecutorial misconduct. In the other two trials, the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict, and the judge declared a mistrial. Curtis Flowers was charged with murdering four people—Robert Golden, Carmen Rigby, Bertha Tardy, and Derrick Stewart—in a small town in Mississippi. Mr. Flowers is African American. Doug Evans, the district attorney who was the lead prosecutor in all six trials, is white. Winona, Mississippi, where the killings occurred, is roughly 53 percent black and 46 percent white.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46006,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Supreme Court Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/708458\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Supreme Court Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/708458\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supreme Court Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/708458","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Mississippi Goddamn: Flowers v Mississippi’s Cheap Racial Justice
Flowers v Mississippi is a Supreme Court case about a man who was tried six times for the same crimes. The trials took place over a span of twenty-one years. In four of the trials, there was a conviction, but appellate courts reversed because of prosecutorial misconduct. In the other two trials, the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict, and the judge declared a mistrial. Curtis Flowers was charged with murdering four people—Robert Golden, Carmen Rigby, Bertha Tardy, and Derrick Stewart—in a small town in Mississippi. Mr. Flowers is African American. Doug Evans, the district attorney who was the lead prosecutor in all six trials, is white. Winona, Mississippi, where the killings occurred, is roughly 53 percent black and 46 percent white.
期刊介绍:
Since it first appeared in 1960, the Supreme Court Review has won acclaim for providing a sustained and authoritative survey of the implications of the Court"s most significant decisions. SCR is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, keeping up on the forefront of the origins, reforms, and interpretations of American law. SCR is written by and for legal academics, judges, political scientists, journalists, historians, economists, policy planners, and sociologists.