Racial Justice Activists

Anand Jon Alexander

Anand Jon Alexander should get relief under Racial Justice Act, hi trial record shows extraordinary xenophobia, racial/religious, ethnic, nationalistic inflammatory tactics employed by the prosecutor against Mr. Alexander (an Indian citizen). His case has played a prominent role in the inception1 and emergence of the Racial Justice Act (RJA). Mr. Alexander is clearly deserving relief under the RJA which is intended to “to eliminate racial bias from California’s criminal justice system because racism in any form or amount, at any stage of a criminal trial, is intolerable, inimical to a fair criminal justice system, is a miscarriage of justice” Art. VI Cal. Const, Assembly. Bill No. 2542,2 subd (i).

This case was rampant with “racially discriminatory language”, comparisons “to an animal” and “reference[d] the defendant’s physical appearance, culture, ethnicity, or national origin” using overt or coded language, implicit “negative stereotypes” to inflame the communal fears, passions and prejudices of the jury in violation AB 256 Sec. 2. 745(c)(4); (a)(2).

While a single violation is sufficient for relief, and Mr. Alexander does not need to show intentionality, prejudice, or unfairness, the instant case qualifies, however, for relief under each, and every one of the possible four categories of behavior that infringe the RJA 745 (a). The requirement to (1) allege facts that would establish a RJA violation occurred, (2) the prima facie stage for an evidentiary hearing, as well as (3) the legal standard for actual relief, because Mr. Alexander was discriminated against during trial proceedings, are easily and overwhelmingly established here. Penal code 745 (h) (2) (c) (d) (c) (4).