UK markets closed
  • FTSE 100

    7,494.13
    -90.88 (-1.20%)
     
  • FTSE 250

    22,263.24
    -451.74 (-1.99%)
     
  • AIM

    1,132.08
    -24.37 (-2.11%)
     
  • GBP/EUR

    1.1947
    -0.0072 (-0.59%)
     
  • GBP/USD

    1.3546
    -0.0055 (-0.40%)
     
  • BTC-GBP

    26,338.75
    -2,428.05 (-8.44%)
     
  • CMC Crypto 200

    870.86
    +628.18 (+258.85%)
     
  • S&P 500

    4,397.94
    -84.79 (-1.89%)
     
  • DOW

    34,265.37
    -450.02 (-1.30%)
     
  • CRUDE OIL

    84.83
    -0.72 (-0.84%)
     
  • GOLD FUTURES

    1,836.10
    -6.50 (-0.35%)
     
  • NIKKEI 225

    27,522.26
    -250.67 (-0.90%)
     
  • HANG SENG

    24,965.55
    +13.20 (+0.05%)
     
  • DAX

    15,603.88
    -308.45 (-1.94%)
     
  • CAC 40

    7,068.59
    -125.57 (-1.75%)
     

New trial after jury met in room with Confederate symbols

·1-min read

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A Tennessee appeals court has granted a new trial for a Black man who was convicted of aggravated assault by an all-white jury that deliberated in a room containing Confederate symbols.

The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals ruled Friday that Tim Gilbert deserves a new trial on charges stemming from a December 2018 altercation, The Tennessean reported.

Gilbert was sentenced to six years in prison after his conviction on charges of aggravated assault, reckless endangerment, unlawful possession of a weapon by a convicted felon and resisting arrest.

His attorney appealed, arguing that Gilbert's right to a fair trial was violated because the jury deliberated in a room adorned with an antique Confederate flag and a portrait of Confederate President Jefferson Davis.

Video: Virginia removes Robert E. Lee statue from capital

The appeal court’s ruling came after a circuit court judge denied Gilbert’s motion for a new trial.

The appeals court ruling said that allowing the jury to decide whether Gilbert was innocent or guilty in a room at the Giles County Courthouse maintained by the United Daughters of the Confederacy “exposed the jury to extraneous prejudicial information and violated his constitutional rights to a fair trial conducted by an impartial jury.”

The trial court also made a mistake by allowing a challenged witness statement, an error that “cannot be classified as harmless,” the appeals court said.

Our goal is to create a safe and engaging place for users to connect over interests and passions. In order to improve our community experience, we are temporarily suspending article commenting