damn the muse

god, that makes me ill feeling. :/

no kidding.

That is nauseating, definitely. Why can't these types of Christians grasp the fact that the Bible could sometimes be damaging or even wholly inappropriate in some circumstances?

because they don't see it as inappropriate, which is part of the problem. it makes me wonder if this has ocurred in other courts in the other states.

You are all missing several points as you get into high dudgeon:

1. The article was from CNN. Who owns CNN? Don't you think they might have a little bias toward inflaming conservative Christians? Keeping people in an identifiable social group feeling persecuted is an excellent way to keep them cohesive and ready to follow a leader who promises to free them from persecution. In my opinion, this is Rupert's newsroom playing with people's heads. The article did NOT identify ALL the passages that were considered by the jury, just the Old Testament lex talionis stuff.

2. The way the Bible was apparently used in this case may have been closer to superstition than to the true Christian faith. These people were either JUST looking for justification for their decision, or they were picking verses at random trying to divine what they were supposed to do. They could have been using the I Ching or The Lord of the Rings -- it would still have been improper. The fact that it was the Bible just makes it more interesting for conservative Christians and those who intensely dislike conservative Christians.

3. We don't know anything about the case. What if the defendant was (pardon the expression) guilty as sin and deserved to die? The defense is going after a reversal on grounds of a technicality, not on the basis of evidence or law. Old attorney saying: "If you haven't got the law, pound the evidence. If you haven't got the evidence, pound the law. If you haven't got either, pound the table." Nobody says the defendant wasn't guilty -- could be CNN bias again (making conservative Christians angry) but I'm suspicious that the defense isn't going for a reversal based on the facts of the case.

You folks are way too smart to get suckered by stories like this. Newspapers and online media are NOT fair and impartial reporters of events.

Bill:

Of course CNN or any other news agency is biased. I'm very well aware of this fact, as am I of the fact that the defendants in the cases may very well be deservingly guilty. I won't contest that one bit. It was just slightly disturbing to read that a Bible was consulted during jury deliberations for whatever reasons. I'd be bothered if it were the Quran or even the Preamble to the US Constitution. When a jury goes into that room to decide whether to grant life in prison or death, they look at three factors, and three factors alone (and yes, I don't remember them off hand, but give me a week when I go over Crimes for the bar and I'll recall them there). Any outside influence should be looked at wearily. Juries can't be changing their minds about how they feel about the death penalty, otherwise they never would have been picked to serve on the jury. Granted, as lawyers we're taught to reach out towards their sympathies for our client's cause, but that's it. Guilt aside, I still consider it improper for any material other than the evidence presented at court and the judge's instructions to be allowed into the jury room.

Yasmin,

I wasn't actually responding so much to your post as to the others.

It did surprise me that the bailiff provided the jurors with a copy of the Bible. Especially in a murder case, I would have thought it would have required the judge's permission to provide the jury with *anything*. However ...

A juror's decision is likely to be informed by any number of things outside the case, most especially his or her beliefs. Many people know lots of scripture by heart. Those don't get set aside at the courtroom door. There's no way to control for that or to prevent it. That's why (as you surely know) during voir dire in a murder case the attorneys are always so interested in the beliefs of the jurors regarding the death penalty.

A lot of Christians and Jews on jury duty pray and consult the Bible (if they have one in their pocket or purse, and many do) when they have a difficult decision to make. This is based on personal observation from my own times on juries. They aren't always looking for a way to hang the accused. Sometimes (maybe most times) they are struggling with a decision they don't feel up to making, or with evidence or motivations they don't fully comprehend, and they feel like they need some help.

If you've been on a jury, you know this. If you're in law school, for the rest of your life if you want to avoid being impanelled all you will have to do is make sure the attorneys are aware of this. As a result, you may never have the chance to learn first hand how hard jury duty can be. There's a lot of pressure to make the right decision, and nobody in their right mind wants to annoy the judge.

Still, I have to wonder what the bailiff's reaction would have been if the jury had requested a copy of The Book of the Dead. Or the Maleus Malificarum.

Best of luck with your studies.

Bill

I have been selected for jury duty but have never been able to attend because of my disability. ::laughs:: It's a shame because I've really wanted to have the 'layperson' experience.

I realize that jurors go into that room armed with their beliefs, and that it's going to have an impact no matter how effect or ineffective the voire dire was conducted. There's always that risk. That and a person's belief at the time the decision has to be made. Afterall, he/she is choosing whether to condemn the defendant to death? Undoubtedly religion will come into the decision.

It would be very amusing to see them ask for the Book of the Dead. ::laughs:: I'd even pay to see his reaction. Things amuse me that way.

And thank you. ;-)