enough for his crime reflected no potential bias in Max well’s favor, whereas Juror 29’s comments about the legalization of drugs tended to favor Maxwell. Because Maxwell failed to establish that the government’s proffered reasons for the strike were a pretext for race discrimination, the District Court did not err in rejecting Maxwell’s Batson challenge with respect to Juror 29. The government explained that it struck Juror 26 because the juror lacked strong ties to the community, and because the juror’s body language suggested to the government that he held significant doubts about the credibility of police officers’ testimony. The absence of community attachment is a legitimate, race-neutral reason for striking a juror. See United States v. Atkins, 25 F.3d 1401, 1406 (8th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 953, 115 S.Ct. 371,
recognizing that discrimination causes injury to the whole community recognizing that either party to a divorce action may bring in third parties who claim an interest in the property alleged to be community or third parties themselves may intervene and have their rights therein determined holding that an expert can comply with the timing requirement if an experts research even after his or her deposition revealed that the standard of care in his or her community was the same or similar to the standard of care in the community in which he or she is testifying when the injury occurred holding that louisiana will not execute an individual who lacks the capacity to understand the death penalty recognizing that party may strike a veniremember who lacks an attachment or commitment to the community