Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Paradox
A jury does not have the right to refer to ANYTHING not introduced during the trial. The jurors, in this case, screwed up, and now a piece of crap is free..

Excuse me but this is only true in the criminal part of the trial. When the sentance is deliberated this doesn't hold true. They used the law introduced in the trial to find him guilty, then some of them used the bible to decide if it was ethical to sentence the person to the death penaltry.

What is the differenc in doing that and simply using an innate sense of right and wrong in deciding? None, except the bible is a much surer guide to morality than say a "progressives" sense of right and wrong.

38 posted on 03/29/2005 1:14:03 PM PST by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: calex59
Excuse me but this is only true in the criminal part of the trial.

Thank you for pointing out this oversight on my part, now I understand the outrage!

39 posted on 03/29/2005 4:21:44 PM PST by Paradox (Occam was probably right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson