Posted on 03/28/2005 12:36:05 PM PST by Sola Veritas
Condemned man gets life in prison for killing waitress Updated: 2:47 p.m. ET March 28, 2005 DENVER - The Colorado Supreme Court threw out the death sentence Monday of a man convicted of raping and killing a cocktail waitress because jurors consulted the Bible during deliberations. The court said Bible passages, including the verse that commands “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” could lead jurors to vote for death. The justices ordered Robert Harlan to serve life in prison without parole for the 1994 slaying of Rhonda Maloney. Harlan’s attorneys challenged the sentence after discovering five jurors had looked up Bible verses, copied some of them down and then talked about them behind closed doors. Prosecutors said jurors should be allowed to refer to the Bible or other religious texts during deliberations.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
The defendant's attorneys can speak to the jurors after the trial, or can overhear them chatting after they've been dismissed.
Other juries all over the country seem to have no trouble deciding verdicts and sentences without dragging the Bible into the jury room.
Would you be upset if somebody brought a Koran into the jury room and used it in deliberations? I would.
Sure they can. There are various legal safeguards in place to prevent a jury decision from trampling on the rights of the defendant. For example, a judge can determine that a finding of guilty by the jury so went against the evidence as to be unreasonable. If a jury finds you not guilty, that's it. However, if a jury finds you guilty that isn't the end of the matter.
A ruling can be overturned because of something that did or did not happen in the courtroom, new evidence, police procedures,etc., but it cannot legally be thrown out because of how the jury arrived at its verdict.
If a jury finds someone guilty just because they're a minority, or a jury relies on outside evidence or sources for its decision, that decision can most certainly be overturned.
This is outrageous. The judges involved should be removed from the bench immediately. This is out and out religious BIGOTRY. No other word for it.
I can imagine them WANTING to do it. I can't imagine them actually doing it, though, knowing full well that the death sentence they were handing out would get reversed on appeal as a result. Not a smart move. You bring your own views into the jury room. If your own views include religious views, then it's unavoidable that those views might impact your decision. However, the idea of consulting the Bible in your deliberations is completely out of bounds.
My biggest concern here is the question of what the remedy is. If I'd been on the court, I'd probably remand for a new trial on whether he gets the death sentence rather than just quashing it altogether.
How does bringing one's mind fit into all this?
Might this explain why lawyers seem to go to great lengths to choose the mindless to serve on juries?
I say this only partly in jest. I would neither bring a bible to a jury room nor quote any part of it from memory.
My mind would inhibit me in that regard.
We want trial deliberations to be guided by the Koran, Bhagavad Gita, etc. ? I don't think so. Our constitution gives us BOTH freedom of religion and freedom from government bias regarding religion. Religious doctrine belongs within the domain of individuals, families and churches not in government activities such as the courts.
What other items should a jury be allowed to bring into the jury room? Law books?
This has nothing to do with religion.
Consulting scripture doesn't fall into those categories.
Something about the wording of this sentence looks odd to me. There is nothing in the article that says these jurors actually brought anything into the jury deliberation room -- just that they "copied them down" and "talked about them behind closed doors."
I'm wondering if there's more (or less) to this than meets the eye.
Consulting scriptures does not rise to the level of those things.
If they read the DaVinci Code or Fahrenheit 9/11, the criminal would have been convicted twice.
"I'm in the WPPFF)"
What are you colors????
"Other juries all over the country seem to have no trouble deciding verdicts and sentences without dragging the Bible into the jury room.
Would you be upset if somebody brought a Koran into the jury room and used it in deliberations? I would."
Don't fret your society is getting ever closer, legally speaking, to banning the Bible.
Current Communist Goals (1958)
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1272893/posts
The jurors can talk about whatever they want... this is HORSE$H!T~!!
Bringing in outside material does, however.
As long as government acknowledged God's laws were SUPERIOR to man's laws, it couldn't lie, murder, cheat, etc.
Now, it does whatever it wants because Americans believe the lie!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.