Oscar-winning ‘American Justice On Trial’ reveals remarkable legacy of the Huey Newton murder case

It’s been more than 50 years since Huey Newton, co-founder of the Black Panthers Party, walked into an Oakland courtroom for murder, but his trial continues to influence the American justice system.

The effects of the sensational case are described in the short documentation American justice in court: People v. Newtondirected by Andrew Abrahams and Herb Ferrette and written by Lise Pearlman (based on her book Everything is possible). It was produced by Abrahams and Pearlman. The film earned a place on the prestigious Oscar shortlist despite a lack of distribution.

“When we think of big trials, we don’t think of this one,” Abrahams told Deadline. “But once you start looking at it, it really is.”

The film dates back to 1967 when the Oakland Police Department ran a Newton van. An argument ensued and gunfire erupted, killing Officer John Frey and injuring another officer and Newton. Many observers, especially conservative whites, saw it as an open-and-shut case that would lead to Newton’s conviction; Members of the Black Panther Party and others sympathetic to Newton were convinced of his innocence, but doubted that he would be acquitted.

The outcome of the trial will depend on attorney Charles Garry’s strategy. Above all, he sought to empanel a jury of open-minded judges.

“Basically, what the defense team, led by Charles Garry, did was to challenge the systemic racism that was present in the justice system and especially in the jury selection process,” Abrahams explained. “We were actually used to a jury of 12 white men. And it was really undisputed until then. What he did was daring and brave and also involved a lot of risk.”

During jury selection, “Garry attacked prospective jurors for their implied biases, which also did not happen,” Abrahams added. “It exposed the issue of racism in terms of implicit and unconscious bias on the part of juries, the fact that there was little diversity on the juries, the fact that it was much harder for black jurors. [to be seated].”

African-American banker David Harper was elected to the jury – the only person of color on the panel – and appointed foreman.

“David Harper was a breakthrough when it comes to anyone [whose race] is clearly a parallel to Huey,” notes Ferrette. “[That] was different. This has never happened before.”

“[Harper] was very interested in justice and took his work, his civic duty, very seriously,” notes Abrahams. “That’s not what David Harper assumed [Newton] was innocent… He wanted Newton to get a fair trial and see where things end based on the evidence and what can be presented in court.”

Judge Monroe Friedman will preside. Newton took the stand and the judge gave him exceptional leeway to articulate his defense.

“He allowed Huey to learn a lesson…about race [history in America]Ferrette says “to bring it into the present, to be able to make it more public.”

“The whole issue of 400 years of racism was something the judge allowed,” Abrahams added. “This will not be allowed in most courts.”

“Especially in the 1960s. Are you kidding me?” exclaimed Ferrette. “We can’t even think about it.”

The directors hired voice actors to bring the court transcripts to life. Cameras were not allowed in the courtroom at the time; With no courtroom footage available, Abrahams and Ferrette hired an artist to render scenes.

“Creating recreations, or as we originally thought, creating animation was expensive, and without the funding that independent producers get, budget is an issue,” says Ferrette. “The sketch design was quite a bit of money, but less than it would have cost [for another approach].”

Testimony at the trial softened the perception that some people thought Newton acted in cold blood. For example, the first bullet that struck Officer Frey appears to have been fired by his colleague. Ultimately, the jury led by Harper found him not guilty of first-degree murder, but found Newton guilty of first-degree manslaughter. In 1970, the conviction was overturned and two new trials resulted in hung juries.

The original trial changed the way jury selection is conducted across America. The film itself makes history.

“David Harper made an agreement with the other jurors not to speak publicly about the trial for 20 years,” Abrahams said. “This is really the first time the jury has talked about the trial in a meaningful way.”

Abrahams was already on the Oscar shortlist with his film documentary from 2008 Under our skin. Get this award with American justice in court surprised because of the truly independent way of production.

“We are one of one or two [shortlisted shorts] that wasn’t recorded, produced or distributed by a major studio,” says Abrahams. “We didn’t have the marketing money to put it in. I like to think that the film’s merits got us to where we are today is

He adds: “We will spread it pedagogically. We believe it has a good place in the education market. We want to use it for universities and law schools and law firms. As for wider distribution, we don’t have an agreement yet. Maybe that will change if we get a nomination.”