Trials: Juries & Justice in Alabama

When Ku Klux Klansman Collie Leroy Wilkins’ trial for the murder of Civil Rights Worker Viola Gregg Liuzzo ended in a mistrial last spring, it was something of a victory for the prosecution. In that Deep South Lowndes County courtroom at Hayneville, Ala., anything short of outright acquittal had to be considered a surprise. And when Wilkins went on trial again last week, the odds against conviction had not changed. Juries in that very courtroom were remembering their old racist ways. Only last month, before the same Judge T. Werth Thagard who had presided at the first Wilkins trial, Tom Coleman had been acquitted of murdering another civil rights worker, Seminarian Jonathan M. Daniels.

For Cause. Now, as he had in the Coleman trial, Alabama’s Attorney General Richmond Flowers exercised his right to supersede the county prosecutor. As far as he was concerned, his state’s jury selection system was as much on trial as was the defendant. Relentlessly, Flowers and an assistant questioned each prospective juror, asking him whether he thought the white race superior to the Negro, whether he felt that any person like Mrs. Liuzzo who associated with Negroes thereby made herself inferior to other whites. Over vehement defense objections, Judge Thagard let Flowers get his answers. In short order, Flowers established that of 30 veniremen available for the jury, eleven felt that white civil rights workers were indeed inferior.

Then Flowers dropped his bombshell. He demanded the right to challenge all eleven “for cause.”* “How can the State of Alabama expect a fair and just verdict in this case from men who have already sat in judgment on the victim and pronounced her inferior to themselves?” he asked. Judge Thagard denied the motion. But he gave Flowers time to seek a reversal in Alabama’s Supreme Court.

Unprovoked Violence. A special four-judge panel quickly turned Flowers down. “If we were to interrupt the trial of the Wilkins case to review the rulings here under consideration,” said the court, “we would establish a precedent that would in the future operate to impede the progress of all criminal trials.” Very carefully, the Alabama judges avoided any ruling on the Alabama jury system.

Back in Hayneville, the trial finally got under way with a jury including ten present or former members of the white Citizens Council and five men who admittedly believe in the inferiority of white civil rights workers.

Once more, the prosecution led FBI Informant Gary Rowe through his tale of unprovoked violence. Once more, the defense hammered away at alleged inconsistencies in the testimony of prosecution witnesses. Shying away from the blatant racism of the late Matt Murphy, who defended Wilkins at the last trial, Attorney Arthur Hanes told the jury it had to choose between the “Judas goat,” Gary Rowe, and the “scapegoat,” Collie Wilkins. If you do not vote for conviction, countered Attorney General Flowers, “the blood of this man’s sin will stain your county for eternity.”

In just one hour and 47 minutes, the jury emerged with the expected verdict: “Not guilty.” The crowd in the courtroom broke into noisy applause.

* Unlike the peremptory challenges allowed the prosecution (six in Alabama), which need not be for any stated cause, challenges “for cause” are not limited by number.