Evidence of Racial Bias in Texas Case Approaching Execution

John Balentine (pic­tured) is a Texas death-row pris­on­er who was sen­tenced to death in 1999 for a triple mur­der. He had been sched­uled for exe­cu­tion on February 8, 2023, but a tem­po­rary reprieve has been grant­ed. His appel­late attor­neys have pre­sent­ed numer­ous instances of racial bias that may have affect­ed the pro­ceed­ings in his case.

During Balentine’s tri­al, his attor­neys passed hand­writ­ten notes among them­selves essen­tial­ly pre­dict­ing a ​“LYNCHING” and rhetor­i­cal­ly ask­ing whether this might be a ​“jus­ti­fi­able LYNCHING.” Balentine’s appel­late attor­neys have argued that such overt use of race-laden ter­mi­nol­o­gy, espe­cial­ly in a case with a Black defen­dant and three white mur­der vic­ti­ims, exem­pli­fied racial ani­mus that per­me­at­ed through­out the case.

Balentine’s attor­neys also argued that the prosecutor’s strikes of two Black prospec­tive jurors – which result­ed in an all-white jury – were racial­ly dis­crim­i­na­to­ry. Furthermore, the jury foreper­son used racist epi­thets, indi­cat­ed he despised inter­ra­cial rela­tion­ships, and told his fel­low jurors that a life sen­tence was ​“not an option” and that sen­tenc­ing Balentine to death was ​“bib­li­cal­ly jus­ti­fied.” During delib­er­a­tions, he intim­i­dat­ed the oth­er jurors who had expressed oppo­si­tion to the death penalty.

Ballentine received a stay of exe­cu­tion because his attor­neys were not prop­er­ly noti­fied of his exe­cu­tion date. The stay is being chal­lenged by the state.