Posted on 10/03/2005 12:47:56 PM PDT by nypokerface
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court let stand on Monday a ruling that overturned the death penalty for a Colorado murderer because jurors during deliberations had been improperly influenced by passages from the Bible.
The justices declined to review a Colorado Supreme Court ruling that imposed a sentence of life imprisonment for Robert Harlan because jurors brought a Bible into the jury room and discussed the passage about an "eye for eye, tooth for tooth."
Without comment or recorded dissent, the nation's top court rejected an appeal by Colorado prosecutors who argued the introduction of the Bible into death penalty jury deliberations did not automatically violate the defendant's constitutional right to a fair trial.
Harlan was convicted and sentenced to death in 1995 for the kidnapping, rape and murder of a cocktail waitress who was on her way home from work at a casino. He also was convicted of shooting another woman who had given the waitress a ride.
According to the evidence, jurors brought a Bible, a Bible index and hand-written notes containing the location of passages into the jury room to share with another juror.
One passage stated: "Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, as he has caused disfigurement of a man, so shall it be done to him. And whoever kills an animal shall restore it, but whoever kills a man shall be put to death."
A trial judge overturned the death sentence after concluding that a reasonable possibility existed that use of the Bible would influence a typical juror to vote for the death penalty.
The Colorado Supreme Court agreed. "We can no longer say that Harlan's death sentence was not influenced by passion, prejudice or some other arbitrary factor," it ruled.
How stupid.
How stupid.
------
It is BEYOND STUPID. It represents the kind of insanity that takes place in court rooms today.
Why would someone need to consult the Bible on an issue as oft quoted as the justification for the Death Penalty. In any case bringing materials into the Jury Room other then court transcripts is forbidden entirely so its not surprising there was a mistrial called for.
I'll bet a quote from the devil would have fried they guy. I am never surprised but the "stuck on stupid" courts.
Oh those wacky Christians... I guess they didn't read Jesus' new and improved version:
"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matt. 5:38-29)
Didn't the RAT Earle use the bible also to indict Delay or something like that?? I know I read it somewhere! Can anyone here find the thread or link to the article...just curious that's all!!
1. So basically they are saying that jurors no longer have freedom of religion.
2. Is Roberts active yet? This is two unfortunate choices for early decisions by the new Robert's court if he is active.
Such as the fact that he was guilty of heinous crime....
--- The Colorado Supreme Court agreed. "We can no longer say that Harlan's death sentence was not influenced by passion, prejudice or some other arbitrary factor," it ruled. ---
Kidnap, Rape, Murder... ya, the Bible being introduced into the jury deliberations was the REAL crime.
Was Roberts in on this????????????????????????????
Perhaps context. Also, sometimes people like to look up John 3:16 even though they know it's there too.
maybe pingout tomorrow...
use of the Bible would influence a typical juror to vote for the death penalty.
As if the whole jury process isn't about influencing jurors. Sheesh.
I guess this means we should get rid of prisons, huh?
Bad start.
A juror is not allowed to bring anything into the jury room to show other jurors - not a newspaper, not a law textbook, not a Bible, not a copy of Mike Mulligan and His Steam Shovel, not anything. Jurors are supposed to decide solely based on the evidence presented and the law which they have been asked to apply.
Although the example which the Supreme Court refused to review looks extreme, the principle is universal.
"Was Roberts in on this????????????????????????????"
He's on the job, isn't he?
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.