Race and the Scottsboro Boys Trial
This trial happened because of racial tensions in the South. African-Americans were nothing better than second class citizens at the time and for many years to come. This trial showed to the world that if you were not white, in the Southern parts of America, justice did not matter. This culture of racial inequality caused a miscarriage of justice, and ruined the lives of 9 young African-Americans but in the end it became a victory for racial equality.
First a little bit of background, since this is a part of history most have no idea about. The Scottsboro Boys were arrested because of their race, nothing more and nothing less. Two white women stated they were raped by the boys while riding the train to back to Huntsville (Ransdall). During the trial, the boys said there were 15 boys total in their group of friends, the two girls claimed there were only 12 on the train. There were only 9 officially charged with the crime, since that was how many were already in jail for minor charge of riding the rails illegally (Kindig). 8 of the boys were eventually given the death penalty, by an all white jury, with the 9th given life imprisonment due to his age. The case was sent before the Supreme Court in 1937 where all 9 were saved from the death penalty, it took another twenty years for them all to be released from prison (Kindig).
Why did this travesty of justice happen one might ask? The answer is simple, the African-American boys dared to violate a white woman, not just once but twice. The age of the girls helped to inflame the hate already there in the community for “Negroes”. The anger and hate then spilled over into the trial for the boys, making it difficult for them to get a fair trial. Ruby Bates was the youngest of the girls at 17. She lived in the “Negro” part of town due to poverty. The whites in the area held her up as the symbol of Untouchable White Woman, to contrast the depravity of the black men (Ransdall). Victoria Price was the older of the two “victims”. Her age was never agreed on. It varied from 19 to 27 depending on who you asked. She was listed as married but separated at the time of the trial. She was the main witness for the prosecution during the trial, with Ruby staying in the background. It was felt that she had a better personality, and came off better on the stand (Ransdall). These two women with their testimony whipped the town into frenzy. Though the officials and journalists did not see it, or maybe turned a blind eye, the community was ready to lynch the “black fiends” (Ransdall).
Journalists from the Northern states who interviewed the police, lawyers and judge after the trial stated that they (the people who were supposed to uphold the law) felt that they gave the defendants the fairest trial possible. The journalists then stated that they, the police etc.,”wanted the Negros to be killed as quickly as possible”, and “they preferred a sentence of death by a judge” (Ransdall). This just shows that the community had the 9 boys convicted and killed in their minds long before they came to trial. It also makes a statement that because they’re not white, they just do not matter in community.
The prejudice of the judge was shown by how he conducted himself during the trial. In an article, of the period, in the New York Times the author states the “Court Angered by the Attorney’s Manner in Cross-Examining Mrs. Victoria Price” (Daniell). One would think by the headline it meant that the Defense badgered the witness, or said things that they shouldn’t. However the journalist goes on to state things that make you wonder about whether the judge should have recused himself because of his prejudices. Statements like, “It is not to late for the court to enforce it’s orders. Your manner is going to lead to trouble, Mr. Leibowitz, and you might get ready for it (SIC). In reference to the fact that he, the judge, did not like how the attorney was getting Price to contradict her testimony. When Leibowitz moved to have Price’s testimony stricken from the record, the attorney did not even get to finish his statement to the facts behind his move to strike. The judge stopped him mid-statement, denied the motion, and had the jurors brought back into the courtroom (Daniell). This makes one think that the judge had already made up his mind, and was going to stop anything that could make the jury waver on the convictions of the Scottsboro boys. He, the judge, wanted them dead for what they supposedly did. It did not matter if they had actually done the act; it was a way to show the African-American community who was boss. It was also a way to keep them quiet, a statement of you do not have to actually do the crime. If the whites feel you are capable of it, you are going down for it, so watch yourselves and follow our rules. It was basically a type of scare tactic to keep them in line.
The States attorney as well as the original prosecutor during the first trial showed their prejudice not just for the blacks, but the Northerners as well. One declared that Mr. Leibowitz’s talk was aimed not at the jury but at the press behind them, insinuating that he was in it for the fame. It was also stated in the article that Charlie Weems, one of the boys, wasn’t on trial in this case but, a Jew lawyer and New York state by the inflammatory remarks Mr. Bailey”, the aforementioned original prosecutor(Daniell).
This case was a fiasco from beginning to end. In 1932 Ruby wrote a letter stating that “those policemen made me tell a lie”, and “if you had to stay in jail with 8 Negros you would tell a lie two (SIC) (Bates). It would take another 5 years for the boys to be acquitted though. It would take even longer for them to all be released from jail. Ruby eventually became a part of the group that was fighting for their release (Kindig).
This case showed the country what could happen when those in law enforcement and those who are supposed to be for justice allow their prejudices to hold sway over what is right. If Ruby Bates had not recanted her testimony, if the NAACP had not become involved with the defense of the Scottsboro Boys, and even more shocking if the American Communist Party had not been allowed to get on board there is a good chance the 8 would have been executed and the youngest would have spent his life in jail.
Racism and prejudice should have no place in influencing how you conduct yourself in a job situation. This case shows the consequences of allowing your hatred to get the better of you. The case all but ruined the lives of the accused, some being kept in jail until they were middle aged. In the end though everything the Scottsboro boys went through helped the advance of Civil Rights in America and that is a good thing.
Works Cited
Bates, Ruby. “Letter from Ruby Bates to Earl Streetman”. 1932. Sinclair Community College. Web. April 2015.
Daniell, F. Raymond. “Scottsboro Judge Warns Leibowitz”. New York Times. 1937. Sinclair Community College. 2014. Web. April 2015.
Kindig, Jessie. “Scottsboro Boys, Trial and Defense Campaign(1931-1937)”. BlackPast.Org. University of Washington. 2015. Web. April 2015.
Ransdall, Hollace. “The First Scottsboro Trials”. American Civil Liberties Union. 1931. Sinclair Community College. 2014. Web. April 2015.
This trial happened because of racial tensions in the South. African-Americans were nothing better than second class citizens at the time and for many years to come. This trial showed to the world that if you were not white, in the Southern parts of America, justice did not matter. This culture of racial inequality caused a miscarriage of justice, and ruined the lives of 9 young African-Americans but in the end it became a victory for racial equality.
First a little bit of background, since this is a part of history most have no idea about. The Scottsboro Boys were arrested because of their race, nothing more and nothing less. Two white women stated they were raped by the boys while riding the train to back to Huntsville (Ransdall). During the trial, the boys said there were 15 boys total in their group of friends, the two girls claimed there were only 12 on the train. There were only 9 officially charged with the crime, since that was how many were already in jail for minor charge of riding the rails illegally (Kindig). 8 of the boys were eventually given the death penalty, by an all white jury, with the 9th given life imprisonment due to his age. The case was sent before the Supreme Court in 1937 where all 9 were saved from the death penalty, it took another twenty years for them all to be released from prison (Kindig).
Why did this travesty of justice happen one might ask? The answer is simple, the African-American boys dared to violate a white woman, not just once but twice. The age of the girls helped to inflame the hate already there in the community for “Negroes”. The anger and hate then spilled over into the trial for the boys, making it difficult for them to get a fair trial. Ruby Bates was the youngest of the girls at 17. She lived in the “Negro” part of town due to poverty. The whites in the area held her up as the symbol of Untouchable White Woman, to contrast the depravity of the black men (Ransdall). Victoria Price was the older of the two “victims”. Her age was never agreed on. It varied from 19 to 27 depending on who you asked. She was listed as married but separated at the time of the trial. She was the main witness for the prosecution during the trial, with Ruby staying in the background. It was felt that she had a better personality, and came off better on the stand (Ransdall). These two women with their testimony whipped the town into frenzy. Though the officials and journalists did not see it, or maybe turned a blind eye, the community was ready to lynch the “black fiends” (Ransdall).
Journalists from the Northern states who interviewed the police, lawyers and judge after the trial stated that they (the people who were supposed to uphold the law) felt that they gave the defendants the fairest trial possible. The journalists then stated that they, the police etc.,”wanted the Negros to be killed as quickly as possible”, and “they preferred a sentence of death by a judge” (Ransdall). This just shows that the community had the 9 boys convicted and killed in their minds long before they came to trial. It also makes a statement that because they’re not white, they just do not matter in community.
The prejudice of the judge was shown by how he conducted himself during the trial. In an article, of the period, in the New York Times the author states the “Court Angered by the Attorney’s Manner in Cross-Examining Mrs. Victoria Price” (Daniell). One would think by the headline it meant that the Defense badgered the witness, or said things that they shouldn’t. However the journalist goes on to state things that make you wonder about whether the judge should have recused himself because of his prejudices. Statements like, “It is not to late for the court to enforce it’s orders. Your manner is going to lead to trouble, Mr. Leibowitz, and you might get ready for it (SIC). In reference to the fact that he, the judge, did not like how the attorney was getting Price to contradict her testimony. When Leibowitz moved to have Price’s testimony stricken from the record, the attorney did not even get to finish his statement to the facts behind his move to strike. The judge stopped him mid-statement, denied the motion, and had the jurors brought back into the courtroom (Daniell). This makes one think that the judge had already made up his mind, and was going to stop anything that could make the jury waver on the convictions of the Scottsboro boys. He, the judge, wanted them dead for what they supposedly did. It did not matter if they had actually done the act; it was a way to show the African-American community who was boss. It was also a way to keep them quiet, a statement of you do not have to actually do the crime. If the whites feel you are capable of it, you are going down for it, so watch yourselves and follow our rules. It was basically a type of scare tactic to keep them in line.
The States attorney as well as the original prosecutor during the first trial showed their prejudice not just for the blacks, but the Northerners as well. One declared that Mr. Leibowitz’s talk was aimed not at the jury but at the press behind them, insinuating that he was in it for the fame. It was also stated in the article that Charlie Weems, one of the boys, wasn’t on trial in this case but, a Jew lawyer and New York state by the inflammatory remarks Mr. Bailey”, the aforementioned original prosecutor(Daniell).
This case was a fiasco from beginning to end. In 1932 Ruby wrote a letter stating that “those policemen made me tell a lie”, and “if you had to stay in jail with 8 Negros you would tell a lie two (SIC) (Bates). It would take another 5 years for the boys to be acquitted though. It would take even longer for them to all be released from jail. Ruby eventually became a part of the group that was fighting for their release (Kindig).
This case showed the country what could happen when those in law enforcement and those who are supposed to be for justice allow their prejudices to hold sway over what is right. If Ruby Bates had not recanted her testimony, if the NAACP had not become involved with the defense of the Scottsboro Boys, and even more shocking if the American Communist Party had not been allowed to get on board there is a good chance the 8 would have been executed and the youngest would have spent his life in jail.
Racism and prejudice should have no place in influencing how you conduct yourself in a job situation. This case shows the consequences of allowing your hatred to get the better of you. The case all but ruined the lives of the accused, some being kept in jail until they were middle aged. In the end though everything the Scottsboro boys went through helped the advance of Civil Rights in America and that is a good thing.
Works Cited
Bates, Ruby. “Letter from Ruby Bates to Earl Streetman”. 1932. Sinclair Community College. Web. April 2015.
Daniell, F. Raymond. “Scottsboro Judge Warns Leibowitz”. New York Times. 1937. Sinclair Community College. 2014. Web. April 2015.
Kindig, Jessie. “Scottsboro Boys, Trial and Defense Campaign(1931-1937)”. BlackPast.Org. University of Washington. 2015. Web. April 2015.
Ransdall, Hollace. “The First Scottsboro Trials”. American Civil Liberties Union. 1931. Sinclair Community College. 2014. Web. April 2015.