NC NAACP blasts “racist” actions of prosecutor and Wilmington 10 prosecutor sought KKK jury Reviewed by Momizat on . BY CASH MICHAELS OF THE WILMINGTON JOURNAL In an effort to define both the moral and legal arguments for Gov. Beverly Perdue to grant pardons of innocence to th BY CASH MICHAELS OF THE WILMINGTON JOURNAL In an effort to define both the moral and legal arguments for Gov. Beverly Perdue to grant pardons of innocence to th Rating:
You Are Here: Home » Feature » NC NAACP blasts “racist” actions of prosecutor and Wilmington 10 prosecutor sought KKK jury

NC NAACP blasts “racist” actions of prosecutor and Wilmington 10 prosecutor sought KKK jury

BY CASH MICHAELS OF THE WILMINGTON JOURNAL

In an effort to define both the moral and legal arguments for Gov. Beverly Perdue to grant pardons of innocence to the Wilmington Ten, the NC NAACP Tuesday focused on the now infamous, and many say “illegal” behavior of prosecutor James “Jay” Stroud during the trials forty years ago.

In fact, veteran civil rights attorney Al McSurely told reporters during Tuesday’s NAACP press conference that the State Bureau of Investigation should probe Stroud’s alleged racial jury gerrymandering, and his calculated “illness” that forced a mistrial in the first June 1972 Wilmington Ten trial.

“This is direct evidence, and this evidence should put Mr. Stroud in jail,” attorney McSurely declared.
Stroud feigned sickness because he didn’t think he could win with a jury of ten blacks and two whites, his own handwritten notes reveal.

When prosecutor Stroud got both a judge, and a jury – ten whites and two blacks – that were more to his liking for the second trial in Sept. 1972, that’s when he was able to falsely convict the Wilmington Ten of conspiracy in connection with the racial violence that struck the port city in February 1971.

“We rarely get such direct evidence of prosecutorial racism in jury selection,” Rev. William J. Barber, president of the North Carolina NAACP, told reporters at First Baptist Church in Raleigh. “The prosecutor is ethically bound to put justice over winning. District Attorneys represent all the people in North Carolina, not just white people in North Carolina.”

Frequently referring to large poster blowups of pages from the Stroud legal pad where the prosecutor wrote to “stay away from black men” during jury selection for the first trial; put a “B” next to the names and/or numbers of prospective black jurors; and wrote “KKK…good” for white jurors he liked and “Uncle Tom type” next to black jurors he would accept, Rev. Barber went on to detail how methodically prosecutor Stroud was in trying to racially gerrymander the jury.

“If this direct evidence had been available for the Fourth Circuit [US Court of Appeals, which overturned the Wilmington Ten convictions in Dec. 1980],” Rev. Barber commented, “I believe they would have recommended prosecuting the prosecutor.” “The new evidence is a nightmare. It’s a nightmare to see evidence of this District Attorney committing such egregious acts of hate on behalf of the citizens of North Carolina. The evidence clearly reveals the injustice that took place in the conviction of the Wilmington 10 and the entrenched racism that polluted the process. North Carolina needs to repent and cleanse itself of this tragic misuse of power in our judicial system.”

Attorney Irv Joyner, chair of the NCNAACP Legal Redress Committee and attorney for the Wilmington Ten Pardons of Innocence Project, said even without the Stroud files, the evidence that the Wilmington Ten are innocent of all crimes they were convicted for is overwhelming.

The Stroud files just add fuel to the fire that further proves that the state of North Carolina framed the Ten because of their civil rights activism, not for any crimes the state accused them of committing, he said

Both Joyner and Rev. Barber urged Gov. Perdue to grant pardons of innocence to all members of the Wilmington Ten, four of whom have since died.
In an interview published Wednesday in StarNewsOnline.com, Stroud confirmed that the damning handwritten notes were his, but denied any racial intent in his jury selection notations. He added that he still felt the Wilmington Ten were guilty, but denied any guilt at all for the many crimes he’s been convicted and sent to jail for for the past six years.
Stroud lost his law license in 2008.

The Wilmington Journal, and other African-American member newspapers of the National Newspaper Publishers Association – the sponsor of the Wilmington Ten pardons of innocence effort – first and exclusively reported about the Stroud files last September after attorney Irving Joyner, law professor at the North Carolina Central University School of Law; and James Ferguson, longtime lead defense attorney for the Wilmington Ten, revealed the contents of the Stroud files at a forum at the law school.

With the exception of an Oct. 28th Associated Press article which mentioned the Stroud files, this week was the first time that the mainstream press en masse statewide actually focused on the story.

In their reporting, it was revealed that New Hanover County District Attorney Ben David admitted that he turned over a box of materials labeled “Wilmington Ten” to Duke University historian Prof. Timothy Tyson several years ago. Prof. Tyson was doing research for a book about the Wilmington Ten case.

In that box were the files of former New Hanover County Assistant District Attorney James Stroud, and the infamous yellow legal pad that has been the center of so much controversy.

In February of this year, Prof. Tyson allowed the Wilmington Ten Pardons of Innocence Project access to the materials, which were all public record.

During the spring and summer, attorneys Joyner and Ferguson, who had filed the legal petition with the Governor’s Office of Executive Clemency, extensively researched the entire file to authenticate every document against the court record.

They revealed their findings last September.

Prof. Tyson, a Senior Research Scholar at the Center for Documentary Studies at Duke University in Durham, says the Stroud files are now located at the Southern Historical Association at UNC in the Timothy B. Tyson Papers section.

Last week, the national NAACP launched a nationwide online petition for the Wilmington Ten pardon effort. Officials say they expect to garner at least 10,000 signatures by the end of this week.

Here in North Carolina, thousands of petition signatures – both hard copy and online – will be calculated this weekend and delivered to the Governor’s Office next week.

The Wilmington Ten Pardons of Innocence Project is still encouraging those who want to continue to support the effort to write Governor Beverly Perdue, and send their letters to:

The Honorable Beverly Eaves Perdue

Governor of North Carolina

116 West Jones St.

Raleigh, North Carolina 27603

 

Letters should be sent by Dec. 15th.

A spokesperson for Gov. Perdue says while she will be stepping down by January 5th, 2013, there is no timetable between then and now for the governor to make her pardons decision.

Indeed, it could be the last thing Gov. Perdue does as she leaves office.

 

Wilmington 10 prosecutor sought ‘KKK’ jury

Posted by: Posted date:  November 08, 2012In:  Feature| comment : 0

BY CASH MICHAELS OF THE WILMINGTON JOURNAL

WILMINGTON, N.C. (NNPA) – In an extraordinary discovery, the 40-year-old case files of the prosecuting attorney in the two 1972 Wilmington Ten criminal trials not only document how he sought to impanel, according to his own written jury selection notes, mostly White “KKK” juries to guarantee convictions, but also to keep Black men from serving on both juries.

The prosecutor chose, in his own words, “Uncle Tom” types to serve on the jury, it was disclosed. The files of Assistant New Hanover County District Attorney James “Jay” Stroud Jr. also document how he plotted to cause a mistrial in the first June 1972 Wilmington Ten trial because there were 10 Blacks and two Whites on the jury, his star false witness against the Ten was not cooperating, and it looked very unlikely that he could win the case, given the lack of evidence.

History shows that prosecutor Stroud told the presiding judge that he had become “ill,” as that first trial began, and a mistrial was indeed declared. It was during the second trial, 40 years ago this week, that Stroud got a jury more to his liking – this time 10 Whites and two Black domestic workers – and a different judge who was arguably biased against the defense.

The result? In October 1972, the 10 young civil rights activists, led by the Rev. Benjamin Chavis, were falsely convicted of conspiracy charges in connection with racial violence in the small North Carolina port city a year earlier. The nine Black males and one White female were collectively sentenced to 282 years in prison, some of which they all served before the three state’s witnesses recanted their false testimonies in 1977, admitting to being paid by prosecutors.

A federal appeals court, citing prosecutorial misconduct among other findings of fact, overturned all 10 convictions in December 1980. However, in the subsequent 32 years, the state of North Carolina has refused to follow suit, not allowing the Wilmington Ten – four of who have since deceased – to clear their names.

The explosive “Stroud files,” as they’re being referred to, were discovered several months ago by a Duke University professor who was researching the Wilmington Ten case for a book he was writing.

When the Wilmington Ten Pardons of Innocence Project, a special outreach effort of the National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA) to seek pardons of innocence for the Ten from North Carolina Gov. Beverly Perdue, announced its formation earlier this year, the professor allowed the Wilmington Journal and Carolinian newspapers, both NNPA members, access to the materials.

Some of the contents of the Stroud files are being revealed only now because attorney Irving Joyner, law professor at North Carolina Central University School of Law in Durham, NC; and attorney James Ferguson of Charlotte, the original lead defense lawyer for the Wilmington Ten, spent the summer confirming the authenticity of the materials.

On Sept. 5 during a forum at the law school on the Wilmington Ten case hosted by Professor Joyner; Rev. Chavis; Rev. Kojo Nantambu, a colleague who worked with Rev. Chavis in Wilmington in 1971 as they led a Black student boycott of the local racially divisive public school system; and Ms. Judy Mack, the daughter of now-deceased Wilmington ten member Anne Sheppard, attorney Ferguson confirmed what he discovered in the Stroud files.

There was a fair amount of confirmation of things we suspected at the time that race was the central strategy of the prosecution,” attorney Ferguson maintained, singling out a legal pad that prosecutor Stroud used during jury selection of the first trial to track Ferguson’s questioning of potential jurors in Pender County, a neighboring county the case had been moved to in June 1972.

Pender had a larger African-American population than New Hanover, where the Wilmington Ten had been charged, thus, more Black candidates for jury service.

Ferguson details how Stroud wrote on the top of one page of his jury selection legal pad “Stay away from Black men.” Next to that on the top of that same sheet, Stroud wrote, “Leave off Rocky [Point], Maple Hill. Put on Burgaw, Long Creek Atkinson Blacks.”

Apparently in Stroud’s mind, Blacks from the more rural towns of Burgaw, Long Creek and Atkinson, would probably be less likely to identify with “radical” civil rights leaders like Ben Chavis than African-Americans from the more urbane towns of Rocky Point and Maple Hill.

Indeed, the 29th prospective juror on that same page named “Randolph” has a capital “B” in front of his name in the margin, and in parentheses the word “no,” and written afterwards, “on basis Maple Hill.”

In contrast, another possible juror, number 9 with a “B” named “Murphy,” Stroud has written in parentheses, “Worth chance because from Atkinson.”

There are several prospective jurors listed by name, and if not, certainly by number, who have the capital letter “B” written in the margin. If there was any doubt about the “B” indicating “Black” – which was attached to many names the words “leave off” were added.

On prospective “B” juror number eleven named “Graham,” Stroud writes, “knows; sensible; Uncle Tom type.”

On Number 27 named “Stringfield,” Stroud writes, “no named Black on jury.” On Number 19 named “James” Stroud writes, “stay away from,” apparently indicating that the potential juror is a Black male he doesn’t want.

And prosecutor Stroud had unmistakable codes for White jurors he preferred.

On that same legal pad sheet tracking juror interviews, when Stroud was impressed with a White interviewee’s answers, he’d write down the three letters of the alphabet most commonly associated with the most fear White supremacist group in the South at the time – the Ku Klux Klan.

“KKK?…good” is what Stroud wrote for juror Number 1 known as “Pridgen.” For Number 6 named “Heath,” the reverse, “O.K.” then “KKK?”. Number 75 on a subsequent page was “Fine – probably KKK!!” and on Number 99 Stroud writes, “does not have a record – KKK!!”

There are other potential White jurors Stroud has also written “KKK” next to, but he then crosses them out, possibly indicating that they were no longer eligible.

In some cases, Stroud apparently had trouble telling the difference between Whites and fair-skinned Blacks. For Number 38, the prosecutor writes, “good name and location – KKK if White.” On Number 59, Stroud writes, “take off on basis of name if Black.”

After studying the notes, Attorney Ferguson observed: “Race infused the jury selection strategy in that June trial.” When the first jury was dominated by Blacks, Ferguson said,

“We were able to position ourselves in a way that we were headed toward getting what appeared to be a jury that might be fair. But at that time, as they say, a funny thing happened on the way to the forum.”

Ferguson and Prof. Irving Joyner note that on the cardboard back of that jury selection legal pad Stroud used, the prosecutor literally drew a line down the middle. On the left he titled it, “Disadvantages of Mistrial.” On the right, “Advantages of Mistrial.”

Ferguson quipped, “Most people don’t list the pros and cons of getting sick.”

Stroud, plotting his next move, noted, listed the disadvantages of a delay: “1 – waste of a week;  2 – could affect Hall’s attitude and other witnesses (referring to star state’s witness Allen Hall, who was being paid by the prosecution to deliver false testimony)  3 – possibly waste of 2 weeks unless Allen can set up quick docket; 4 – inconvenience to all concerned;  5 – possibly get Judges Chess, Godwin or Copeland on new trial; and 6 – delaying getting cases over with.”

On the other side of Stroud’s list for “Advantages of Mistrial’ in the first Wilmington Ten trial, the prosecutor listed, “1 – different judge; 2 – better prepared to select jury and to handle motions/more organized; 3 – avoid longer jury selection and hung jury in Pender because of their concern about retaliation; 4- fresh start [with] new jury from another county; 5- avoid reversible error [and] new trial on lack of [defense] witness interviews;  6 – can enlist Dan Johnson’s help; 7 – opportunity to separate [White Wilmington Ten member Ann] Shephard (sic) from others to keep out [Allen] Hall’s letter; and 8 – time to have case well prepared and organized.”

Stroud decided to fake an illness, resulting in a mistrial.

“The main prosecutor in the case (Stroud) suddenly became ill,” Ferguson recalls. “For what reason I do not know. [Perhaps] sitting there looking at that many Black folks serving on the jury. But he became ill, sort of, and decided that he could not proceed with the trial. So that trial was aborted.”

Ferguson recalls how during the second trial in September 1972, not only did the new judge allow White jurors with apparent biases against the Wilmington Ten to be seated, but allowed state’s witness Allen Hall to jump off the stand to attack him without punishment, and disallowed any defense challenges to the prosecution’s case before the convictions.

The two Blacks who were seated on the second trial’s jury was a maid who worked in a White home, and a janitor, two “easy targets of economic reprisal,” said Ferguson.

“We complained throughout about the prosecution’s use of challenges to remove Blacks from that second jury,” Ferguson said. To no avail. In the end, the Wilmington Ten were convicted, and remains felons in the state of North Carolina until this day.

Former prosecutor James Stroud Jr., 69, could not be reached for comment on this story. According to published reports, Stroud lives in Gastonia, N.C. and is said to be homeless. The Gaston Gazette reported in December 2011 that Stroud, who went on to have a successful private law practice after prosecuting the Wilmington Ten, fell on hard times.

His adult son, Kirk told the paper that Stroud suffers from manic polar disorder, a diagnosis that reportedly goes back to when Stroud as starting law school more than 50 years ago. The Gazette said police reports show former prosecutor Stroud has been arrested at least 14 times in the past five years, with some of the charges ranging from assault with a deadly weapon, to several domestic violence protection orders, to a charge of hit and run.

Stroud’s son told The Gazette last December that his father, “…has yet to be involuntarily committed for mental health treatment.” He lost his license to practice law in North Carolina in 2008, according to the North Carolina State Bar.

Notes  of the prosecutor  of the Wilmington 10

(The Stroud file documents cited in this story, along with attorney James Ferguson’s presentation, can be seen in the video, “The Wilmington Ten – the Stroud Files” on YouTube).

Be Sociable, Share!

    About The Author

    Number of Entries : 126

    Leave a Comment

    Scroll to top