12月10日CNN聽力：美國法律部宣告查詢拜訪芝加哥警局法律行動 種族輕視再次成為熱門題目
Great to have you watching CNN STUDENT NEWS.
I'm Carl Azuz at the CNN Center.
This Tuesday, we're starting with an announcementby the U.S. Justice Department.
Yesterday, it said it was launching an investigation ofthe Chicago, Illinois Police Department.
The announcement came after days of protests inthe city and the release of a video from October of last year.
That's when 37-year-old Police Officer Jason Van Dyke, who is white, shot and killed LaquanMcDonald, a black 17- year-old.
The teenager was armed with a knife and apparently had the drug PCP in his system.
The video shows him approaching and then moving away from police officers who had gunsdrawn.
Officer Van Dyke eventually opened fire, shooting McDonald 16 times.
Some of the police who were there said McDonald had approached and threatened Van Dykebefore the shooting.
But last month, Officer Van Dyke was charged with first degree murder.
On November 24th, the video was released to the public and protests lasted for days.
Demonstrators accused Van Dyke of using excessive force and other police of dishonesty.
City reports released last weekend indicate that what police on the scene said appears to bedifferent than what the video shows.
They also question why it took more than a year for the city to release the video and chargeOfficer Van Dyke.
They demanded that the police chief and mayor resign.
In its investigation, the Justice Department is trying to determine whether Chicago police hadmade a habit of breaking the law or violating the U.S. Constitution.
Specifically, we will examine a number of issues related to the Chicago Police Department's useof force, including its use of deadly force, racial, ethnic and other disparities in its use of force,and its accountability mechanisms.
So, as the Justice Department investigates that, the U.S. Supreme Court is looking an issuepotentially involving race.
It's about race as a factor in jury selection.
A number of studies have found that potential black jurors are struck from cases at higherrates than potential white jurors.
Article 3, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution states the trial of all crimes shall be by jury.
The Sixth Amendment states that a jury shall be impartial.
But could discrimination lie in peremptory challenges?
The idea behind jury selection is to sit a fair and impartial jury.
The reality is, that's only the judge's goal.
What most people won't tell you is that the different attorneys, they want to sit the mostbiased jury they can possibly find-biased towards their case.
First, the court actually has to summon jurors to the courthouse.
That sounds simple, but believe me, it isn't.
In a typical case, if a court summons, say, 300 potential jurors, they're lucky if a hundredshow up.
And for the most part, the judge's main inquiry is, based on whatever your preconceived ideasare, or what you've heard about this high profile case.
Can you put all that aside and render an impartial verdict?
Now, the attorneys are certainly involved.
They can challenge jurors either for cause or using what are called peremptory challenges.
This is a challenge than an attorney can use to strike a juror for any reason at all.
But they only get a few of them. So, they have to use them wisely.
Suppose there's a juror way down the line that you want on your jury, well, you have to holdon those peremptory strikes and strikes as many jurors before that juror so you can get thatjury on your panel.
An interesting point about peremptory challenges, a lawyer can use them to get rid of apotential juror for any reason, and he doesn't have to explain why, unless the other sidethinks he's using it to get rid of specific races of jurors.
Everybody's got a theory on what race or gender thinks this way, what particular region thinksanother way, whether rich or poor people think one way or the other.
And ultimately, it's all guess work.
Jury selection gets even more complicated in high profile cases.
Why? Because more of the jury poll may be tainted by either pre-trial publicity, or they mayhave actually been affected by what the defendant is alleged to have done.
So, you have to find somebody who even if they know about this case can put aside theirfeelings and render an impartial verdict.
So, as the high court considers race in light of peremptory strikes, or the Justice Departmentlooks into the issue in multiple cases nationwide, you might be wondering how the U.S. publicfeels when it comes to race relations.
A recent poll gives us some idea.
The United States is often called the great melting pot, but it's a country that struggled withrace relations throughout its history.
And still does today.
A 2015 CNN and Kaiser Family Foundation poll found about half of Americans think racism is abig a problem, one that doesn't seem to be getting better.
Two thirds had racial tensions in the United States had increased over the last decade.
More than half of Blacks said they had experienced some form of racial discrimination in theirlifetimes, from being denied a job to fearing for their lives.
About a third of Whites and Hispanics reported similar experiences.
Blacks and Hispanics were also far more likely than Whites to say that they had been unfairlytreated in the last month in a public place, such as a restaurant or in a store because of theirrace.
Segregation is still a reality as well, at work and at home.
Sixty percent of Whites said their work colleagues were all or mostly white.
And close to 70 percent of Whites said either their social circle or their neighborhood wasmostly white.
點擊下一頁檢察譯文
【參考譯文】
感激收看CNN門生消息。
我是CNN中間的卡爾·阿祖茲。
本周二的時勢消息咱們起首從美國法律部宣告的一項舉動開端。
昨天美國法律部表現將對芝加哥伊利諾斯州警員局睜開查詢拜訪。
客歲10月宣布的一段視頻激發芝加哥數天抗議運動後美國法律部於昨天宣告了這項舉動。
人們爭議的核心在於37歲的白人警官傑森·範戴克開槍將17歲的黑人青年拉寬·麥克唐納射殺。
其時麥克唐納帶著一把刀,並且明顯是剛服用過致幻類藥物。
這段視頻表現他靠近然後闊別已取出槍的警員。
範戴克警官終極照樣開了火，直接向麥克唐納連開16槍。
其時在場的一些警察表現麥克唐納已接近警車並在範戴克警官開槍以前有過尋釁行動。
但上個月,範戴克警官被控告為一級行刺罪惡。
11月24日,這段視頻公之於眾後激發連續數天的抗議運動。
請願者們訓斥範戴克警官過分應用致命性武力及其他警員的不老實行動。
而上周末的消逝表現現場警方的言辭仿佛同視頻傍邊分歧。
"大眾,"也在質疑芝加哥為何耗時一年多才宣布這段視頻並告狀範戴克。
他們請求警員局長及市長引咎告退。
在此次的查詢拜訪中，美國法律部遷就芝加哥警員局法律行動是不是違背美國憲法或聯邦司法睜開查詢拜訪。
詳細來講,咱們將會查詢拜訪一些芝加哥警員局應用致命性武力等題目,而這次查詢拜訪的重點是芝加哥警員局在法律過程當中應用一樣平常性武力或致命性武力時是不是差別看待分歧種族人群。別的該警局的問責機制也將同時遭到查詢拜訪。
是以，跟著美國法律部宣告舉行查詢拜訪,美國最高法院大概會面對觸及種族輕視題目的案件。
此案觸及陪審團職員選取中的種族身分。
大批的研討發明潛伏黑人陪審員遇襲概率要比黑人陪審員更高。
美國憲法第3條第2項劃定:“統統罪案,除彈劾案外,應由陪審團審訊”。
而第六修改案則明白陪審團應公平忘我。
但種族輕視題目可以或許攔阻不陳說來由而請求陪審員躲避嗎?
陪審團成員選取暗地裏的理念是願望建立公正公平的陪審團。
但究竟上，那只是法官的目的。
大多半人不會告知你的是，對分歧的狀師而言,他們想要的是最左袒的陪審團，如許就會左袒他們一方。
起首,法院現實上要傳喚法院的陪審員進入法庭。
聽起來很簡略,但信任我,這絕非易事。
在一路異常典範案件傍邊,假如法院傳喚300名潛伏陪審員,假如有100人湧現，他們就算很榮幸了。
而大部門法官的重要查詢拜訪訊問是基於你先入為主的設法主意或你所懂得到這個案子的情形。
你能置那統統於掉臂然後公平的做出訊斷嗎?
而如今,明顯狀師也牽扯個中。
他們可以由於一個啟事或應用不陳說來由而請求躲避給陪審員們制作困難。
狀師可以不陳說來由難堪陪審員。
但他們只有很少機遇,是以必需明智地應用。
假如正有一位陪審員，而你想要這小我進入你的陣營, 嗯,你必需掌控如許的機遇襲擊盡量多的陪審員,如許那位陪審員就會支撐你的態度。
而對付不陳說來由而請求陪審員躲避有個風趣的概念。一名狀師可以不陳說來由來解脫潛伏的陪審員, 並且他不消說明任何緣故原由。
每小我對種族或性別都有本身的概念，特定處所的人以為是如許，其別人則是那樣認為，不管貧富都有本身的概念。
而終極都成為了料想。
遴選陪審團成員在更龐雜案件傍邊會變得更加龐雜。
為何?由於更多的陪審團查詢拜訪大概遭到審前宣揚,大概他們大概已受被告影響。
是以你必需找到縱然對案情管窺蠡測也能放下一己私欲公平訊斷的人。
是以跟著高級法院以為種族題目大概會牽扯個中,或法律部查詢拜訪天下多起觸及此類的案件,你大概會料想談及種族幹系時美國"大眾,"作何感觸。
比來的一項民意查詢拜訪為咱們供給了一些偏向。
美國被稱為大熔爐,但這個國度在其汗青長河中就一向被種族幹系所攪擾。
並且現現在也仍舊如斯。
CNN及凱塞家庭基金會2015年舉行的一次民意查詢拜訪表現約莫一半的美國人以為種族輕視是一個很大的題目,並且仿佛一向沒有改良。
曩昔10年間美國有三分之二的種族間重要幹系增長。
跨越一半的黑人表現他們平生中遭到過從被謝絕事情到擔憂本身的生存等各種的種族輕視罪行。
約莫三分之一的白人和西班牙裔都有相似的閱歷。
比擬白人，黑人及西班牙裔表現他們本身上個月在如餐廳或市肆中等公開場合因為種族題目遭到的不公正看待更多。
不管是事情場合照樣家中，種族斷絕仍舊是一個實際。
60%的白人表現他們的同事全體或大部門人都是白人。
靠近70%的白人表現他們的交際圈或鄰人大可能是白人。
市場價：HK$ 110
