BANGOR — A Black man who is going to trial on a murder charge believes jurors could be prejudiced against him if he is forced to wear a mask.

Making the defendant, Carine Reeves of New York, wear a mask would be problematic because masks are often associated with crime, his attorney, Stephen Smith, told a judge on Wednesday.
“We’re at a particular moment in this nation’s history when having a court force a Black man to wear a mask or to be judged by jurors wearing masks … is in our view unconstitutional,” he said.
Assistant Attorney General Leane Zainea said Reeves could achieve his wish of a mask-free trial by agreeing to delay his trial until after the pandemic is over, something Reeves declined to do.
“Although the defendant does have constitutional rights, those constitutional rights have to be balanced against the health and safety of all individuals involved this process,” she said.
Reeves is charged with murder in the 2017 killing of Sally Shaw, who was shot in the head and left on the side of a road in Cherryfield.
The trial, scheduled to begin later this month, would be among the first to be held in Maine since the pandemic reduced courthouse hours and delayed trials.

Court officials have consulted with the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention on how to safely conduct trials. The Maine CDC recommends that people engage in social distancing and wear masks while indoors, officials said.
In his motion, Smith pointed to a study by North Carolina researchers who wrote, “African Americans are particularly prone to racial profiling solely due to the fact that they are wearing masks.”
Superior Court Justice Harold Stewart II said he would rule on the defendant’s motion on masks within a few days.
His trial in Maine initially was delayed while charges in New York were resolved. Reeves has been sentenced to 20 years in prison for two separate assaults in New York.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less