BANGOR, Maine (AP) — A Sad man who goes to trial for extinguish ought to wear a mask even supposing he thinks it would possibly possibly possibly possibly prejudice jurors towards him, a settle on ruled.
Carine Reeves, of New York, contended that a mask would subject him to racial profiling and stereotyping by jurors who accomplice masks with criminals. Court docket principles require all americans in a court to wear a mask one day of the coronavirus pandemic.
Justice Harold Stewart II acknowledged jurors will understand why Reeves and all others in the court are wearing masks. And Reeves would possibly possibly possibly well be subjected to “undue consideration” if he were the objective one and not utilizing a mask, the settle on acknowledged.
“For the length of this pandemic, the court can’t judge a better articulate curiosity than taking measures that prevent the unfold of the virus, for all americans’s successfully being and safety,” the settle on wrote Thursday in his resolution.
Bigger than 4,700 of us had been infected with the coronavirus in Maine and further than 130 of them accept as true with died because the open of the pandemic.
Reeves is charged with extinguish in the 2017 killing of Sally Shaw, who used to be shot in the head and left on the facet of a boulevard in Cherryfield, in eastern Maine.
The trial, scheduled to open later this month, is the most well-known extinguish trial in Maine because the pandemic reduced courthouse hours and delayed trials.
Reeeves’ attorney, Stephen Smith, had pointed to a scrutinize by North Carolina researchers who wrote, “African American citizens are particularly inclined to racial profiling completely attributable to the reality that they’re wearing masks.”
“We’re at a dispute 2d on this nation’s history when having a court force a Sad man to wear a mask or to be judged by jurors wearing masks … is in our behold unconstitutional,” he told the settle on.
Assistant Licensed first rate Popular Leane Zainea acknowledged Reeves would possibly possibly possibly enact his wish of a mask-free trial by agreeing to prolong the trial — something Reeves declined enact.
In his motion, Reeves also contended that witnesses would possibly possibly possibly well calm no longer wear masks since it would possibly possibly possibly possibly violate his constitutional correct to confront them. The settle on ruled towards the defendant on that time, too.