Replies

"Juries just cannot be allowed to act on their own like this..."

They do worse things...the O.J. Simpson trial.

Do you actually think that when I delibrating a case, or anyone of strong religious conviction, that I am not actively reliely on scripture to guide me in a decision process? I may not have the Bible in my hand, but it is still their in my heart(mind). You can't take that away from me, or anyone else for that matter.

The idea of keeping things out of the Jury room is in reference to specific things pertaining to the case such as newspaper accounts, etc. so as you have said only the testimony and evidence presented in court can be considered. A Bible only speaks in general terms. Plus, the ONLY bearing it had on the deliberations would be if some were hesitant, after determining guilt, to impose a death penalty for murder based on religious grounds - if that hesistancy was based upon their background. Then it would be germane. When elected officials take the oath of office on a Bible, you tell me it doesn't belong in a court of law or a jury room?

I think that is absurd. It is indeed institutionalized anit-bible nonsense. The very basis of western law is the Bible.

"It is indeed institutionalized anit-bible nonsense."

It is no such thing; the law makes no specific reference to the Bible, but to any materials the jury introduces without approval of the court. And that generally means that the jury may only review evidence that has already been presented in court. If you want to base your decisions based on your understanding of Biblical justice, you can do that; but you cannot impose a sentence not allowed by our contemporary laws, and if you introduce evidence not presented in court, your verdict will be overturned.

One of the problems with the O.J. jury was that they seemingly disregarded the preponderance of the evidence and ruled on the basis of their emotions, and that is precisely what you seem to be advocating.

The very basis of western law is the Bible.

Not really. In Continental Europe, Roman Civil Law is the greatest source of law. The Anglo-American legal tradition traces its roots back to pagan Anglo-Saxon law.

Some people can look without seeing, listen without hearing, and in the instance of this response both of those human frailties apply. The jury room may be a place where biblical teaching may indeed motivate a member and that member may use whatever such argument is compelled by such thought. The tangible book itself cannot be in the jury room as a reference or to justify or add ostensible authoritative support for one's argument. In this instance it would be no different and equally impermissible as if one juror brought in yesterday's editorial with an opinion as to how a case should be decided. The fact that it is a revered book doesn't cloak it with any different import or significance for that specific purpose.