In March of 1988, Charles Sennett, a Church of Christ pastor of Colbert County, Alabama, cash-contracted Billy Gray Williams, a tenant, in a murder-for-hire to be committed on his wife, Elizabeth Dorlene a/k/a ‘Dorlene’ Sennett. It was said that she had threatened to divorce him in light of an alleged extramarital affair.

Williams split the initiating fee, giving $1,000 each to John Forrest Parker and Kenneth Eugene Smith to commit the actual crime. The “hit” men somehow decided that $1,000 each was enough money for them to lose their own lives. Parker was given $100 by Williams to buy a gun, but Parker instead used the money to buy an injectable painkiller and Smith sharpened the knife used to stab Dorlene. A week after Dorlene’s death from multiple stab wounds, Charles Sennett committed suicide.

During the course of the trial, information came forth from the attorney for the defense that when Sennett got home, Dorlene was still alive and Charles allegedly used a different weapon to finish her off. His words were that Parker and Smith “merely” assaulted… cut… stabbed… robbed… Dorlene, but she was still alive when they left.

The Race-based Juror Exclusion/Selection Process

In John Forrest Parker’s petition for Writ of Habeas (unlawful detention), one of his many reasons for grant of petition includes the race-based challenge of a biased jury during trial, often notated as the “Batson defense”* (see For More Information below). Out of nine black jurors, eight were stricken from serving. Why?

Two had taken psychology classes and the prosecution decided they would give “undue emphasis” to a defense psychologist’s testimony as to the Defendant’s mental capacity at the time of the murder. This was clearly a situation where the prosecution decided that being educated was not always a good thing.

Four of the black jurors were related to someone who had been charged with a crime and who were considered possibly prejudiced against the State. One black juror was excluded because of traffic offenses and arrests and was thought of as someone who might think the State was “picking on him,” thus it might close his mind to the testimony of law enforcement personnel. It was doubted that this juror had any ability to “follow the law.”

One juror said he would not be able to stay overnight if sequestered, and another worked with the co-defendant’s (Smith’s) family and had overheard conversation about the case, indicating the possibility for prejudice during trial. All nine blacks were opposed to the death penalty and stated that the death sentence would not be a consideration as an option for punishment.

Of the white venire (venue) members, only one was stricken for general opposition to the death penalty. The others were stricken because of having had coursework in psychology, traffic offenses (in and outside of Colbert County and one outside the state of Alabama), three could not stay if sequestered, and one because she knew members of the Parker family.

What was curious about the strikes is that eight of the 11 white venire members selected were also related to someone who had had felony convictions (though three of them were outside of the prosecution’s five-year range for purposes of background investigations), one had taken a psychology course, several were intimately acquainted with the defense attorney, and one was convicted of one or more traffic offenses. One of the white jurors-in-waiting had outstanding child support contempt issues.

The outcome of the jury selection was that of the seven-percent black jurors present to serve (nine), the seated jurors was eight percent black (one of the nine). Though the prosecution admitted to several “errors” in selection and striking of jurors, the burden of proof is on the defense to prove out the “race card” and then it shifts to the prosecution to prove that “race had nothing to do with it.”

The District Court found that the prosecution’s failure to strike the white jurors who had the same challenges as the black jurors who were stricken did not, in fact, ‘taint’ the jury. The end result is that it is okay, by constitutional law, to retain what is referred to as “death-qualified” jurors. The State typically has a preference for those who would gladly see someone die in the event that they are found guilty.

Meanwhile, over in Georgia, the problem is, as was the case with Troy Anthony Davis, the convicted aren’t always proven “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” In John Forrest Parker’s case, there is no reason left to doubt and no stone was left unturned as to his guilt, not even the [unmentionable] murder weapon that never surfaced in the Davis case. It was refreshing to see that Alabama did a more thorough job than Georgia on making certain that Parker was guilty before sentencing him to die. Note: Williams, the one who received the initial funds from Sennett to commit the murder, was sentenced to life without possibility of parole.

There are only four questions left to consider in the case of the denied Habeas petition of John Forrest Parker that only he can answer: Did you enjoy yourself? What’d you do with all that money? Was it worth it? Would you do it again, if you could?

For More Info: *The Batson Defense