Death penalty decision overturned after jurors misinterpret bible texts
-29/03/05
A divided Supreme Court in the US has thrown out the death penalty for a convicted murderer after jurors discussed verses from from the Bible during their deliberations, and reached conclusions that many Chistians would disagree with.
Robert Harlan was sentenced to death in 1995 for the murder of cocktail waitress Rhonda Maloney, but defence lawyers learned that five jurors had looked up such Bible verses as “an eye for eye, a tooth for tooth,” and discussed them, in their attempt to reach a verdict.
Defence attorney Kathleen Lord, arguing before the state Supreme Court last month, said the jurors had gone outside the law
Prosecutors countered, saying jurors should be allowed to refer to the Bible or other religious texts during deliberations.
Many Christians will point out that if the jurors were influenced by their readings of such verses, they misinterpreted them.
The ‘Lex Talionis’ (the idea of an “eye for an eye”) is seen by many scholars as a limitation on the excalation of violence – in other words ‘an eye for an eye but no more’ – rather than a command for people to be punished in the same way that they offended. Jesus Christ is also quoted in the gospels as referring to the Hebrew verses which refer to ‘an eye for an eye’ but then commanding forgiveness rather than vengeance.
But Monday’s ruling said such verses and other religious writings, often selectively quoted, are considered “codes of law by many” in Colorado. But noting that it takes a unanimous jury to impose a death sentence, the court said “at least one juror in this case could have been influenced by these authoritative passages … when he or she may otherwise have voted for a life sentence.”
But Gov. Bill Owens said Monday’s ruling was “demeaning to people of faith and prevents justice from being served.”
Prosecutors were reviewing the decision and could ask the state Supreme Court to reconsider or could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Jay Horowitz, a former assistant U.S. attorney and former University of Denver law professor, said the law bars jurors from considering evidence not presented at trial.
But he noted it was unreasonable to expect them to set aside moral standards when they step into a jury room, though there must be limits. “In fact, people do bring their background and thoughts and impressions, and you can’t separate from that, and shouldn’t try to,” he said.
The conservative Christian group, Focus on the Family, had sharp criticism for the court.
“Today’s ruling further confirms that the judicial branch of our government is nearly bereft of any moral foundation,” said Tom Minnery, the group’s vice president for government and public policy.
Many other Christians in the US however, are opposed to the death penalty based on their understanding of the bible.