home

Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Jurors

By Jeralyn, Section Death Penalty
Posted on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 04:38:01 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The Colorado Supreme Court issued two correct rulings today, one in the Lisl Auman case as we reported here, and another one in a locally high profile rape-murder case, in which the defendant, Robert Harlan had been sentenced to death. The Court vacated the death sentence because jurors consulted the bible during deliberations .

Ruling that juries cannot turn to the Bible for advice during deliberations, the Colorado Supreme Court on Monday refused to reinstate the death penalty in a brutal rape and murder because jurors had studied such verses as "eye for eye, tooth for tooth."

On a 3-2 vote, justices ordered Robert Harlan to serve life in prison without parole for kidnapping 25-year-old cocktail waitress Rhonda Maloney in 1994 and raping her at gunpoint for two hours.

This decision shows that the Consitution, not the Bible, rules in criminal court.

So Harlan, the merciless killer, now may not receive what he truly deserves for his crimes. But his jurors certainly got what they deserved -- a painful but apparently necessary reminder that in our courts we turn to the Constitution and not the Bible when we are looking for answers. Add in the fact that, in the end, it was the Bible that both condemned and saved Harlan and, well, you get yet another irony that’s part of this sad story.

Jurors are not allowed to consider outside material that has not been admitted into evidence, let alone use such material to convince other jurors to convict. Kudos to Kathleen Lord and Sharlene Reynolds of the Colorado State Public Defenders Office for getting the reversal in the first place from the trial court, as we reported here.

< MGM v. Grokster: Which Side Are You On? | National Magazine Award Finalists >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Jurors | 40 comments (40 topical)
    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#1)
    by pigwiggle on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 05:43:36 PM EST
    TalkLeft- “This decision shows that the Consitution, not the Bible, rules in criminal court.” I apologize for my perhaps naïve, or otherwise mistaken assumption, but am I wrong in thinking that a juror can judge the defendant, the law, or whatever. Consider; what if the juror who used the bible been in possession of it simply through memory, and further used it as the guide to judge the morality of her decision, and perhaps also persuasion? I think the above quoted statement would be wrong. Further, a working knowledge of the constitution isn’t a prerequisite to jury duty, or for that matter desirable. I was dismissed from a jury by the judge for admitting I thought the law allegedly broken unjust and incongruous with my interpretation of the constitution. I’m curious where your moral foundation is fixed and why you think it should have more authority in a jury room than some bible thumper’s.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 05:49:00 PM EST
    Well, what is real happening is the system has no idea what its doing or where its going. that is why we have so many in prison, are system is not about rules its about the judge.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 06:06:35 PM EST
    pigwiggle - that is an excellent post. I'm eagerly awaiting the response.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#4)
    by Fr33d0m on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 06:09:04 PM EST
    I had problems when I first read this and I think it may be due to the wording. Here are what I think the facts are: 1 As a whole, or at least a group of the jury consulted the bible. 2. The jury was wrong to consult anything but the law. This would be different than a single jurist having a bible. and indicates they specifically made a point of consulting the bible as a group. Of course as I indicated earlier, I am trying to interpret what I read.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 06:18:46 PM EST
    Pigwiggle, Jurors of course bring their own common sense and experience to bear. Technically, the decision should be based on the evidence presented in the context of the law as provided by the judge's instructions to the jury. Most jurors try very hard to perform that difficult task, made even more difficult by a capital case. Some may rely on their religion to vote one way or another. Some are simply nasty vindictive people and will jump at the chance to condemn. However, expressly consulting a religous text (NOT part of the evidence or the judge's instructions) for guidance violates the defendant's right to a fair trial. Change the facts--suppose the trial is for child abuse. Dad is accused of beating his son resulting in a broken arm. There is no dispute that the beating was child abuse and the only question is whether Dad did it. A juror CANNOT vote to acquit because he/she believes in the strict interpretaion of "spare the rod and spoil the child" The juror can acquit only if he finds the evidence does not prove Dad did it. Society, through the legislature has already decided an adult cannot intentionally cause that kind of damage to a child. Neither you nor I gets to override that decision because we follow a particular interpretation or the Bible.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 06:24:16 PM EST
    In partial response to pigwiggle, the point of the ruling is actually very narrow, and is that the jury is only supposed to consider evidence that was admitted at trial. As TalkLeft said, "Jurors are not allowed to consider outside material that has not been admitted into evidence, let alone use such material to convince other jurors to convict." So a statement like "This decision shows that the Consitution, not the Bible, rules in criminal court" can be interpreted to mean that the rules of the court were followed, and that is generally a good thing. This case has nothing to do with a juror using their own personal religious beliefs to determine a verdict or sentence. That is certainly still allowed, in the most obvious example of jury nullification, where a jury can decide to not follow the jury instructions, and can decide to not convict someone even if the facts and law are such that the defendant should be convicted. (There's a lot more to be said about jury nullification, and what I just wrote isn't a great description. Oh well.) It's important to not read too much into the Colorado SC's ruling, and don't rely too heavily on the major news outlets to report this ruling accurately. It should be considered a very narrow ruling, similar to when one of the Scott Peterson jurors was removed from the jury when s/he went online to find out more information about the case. It's against the rules of the court, and it doesn't matter if your independent source is the Internet or the Bible, if it wasn't evidence admitted at trial, it's not allowed.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#7)
    by pigwiggle on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 06:33:50 PM EST
    “A juror CANNOT vote to acquit because he/she believes in the strict interpretaion of "spare the rod and spoil the child" The juror can acquit only if he finds the evidence does not prove Dad did it.” Well then, this is the crux of my argument; I believe a juror can judge the law itself.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 06:34:14 PM EST
    In spite of a person's religious beliefs, only the law should prevail in trials. Imagine what a Pandora's box would be opened otherwise: Adulterers might get the death penalty (stoning is prescribed in Leviticus). Self-defense might be considered wrong (turn the other cheek). A person who self-mutilates could be excused for mutilating a neighbor (treat your neighbor as you would treat yourself). The Bible is sometimes contradictory, depending on whether one looks at the New or the Old Testament. It is also unreliable, as various translations can sometimes be found to have different meanings for the same passage. And what about the poor shmo who is an atheist, or of a minority religion? Can he demand a new trial based on the fact that none of his peers (i.e, people of his religious flavor) were not on the jury?

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 06:36:18 PM EST
    "Can he demand a new trial based on the fact that none of his peers (i.e, people of his religious flavor) were not on the jury?" Sorry, the double negative slipped by me. I meant to say "were on the jury."

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 06:45:31 PM EST
    eb - Of course they can. Jury nullifaction, as a shield against unjust laws and prosecution, has existed for ages. Just ask OJ.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#11)
    by Sailor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 07:15:12 PM EST
    The ruling was 'that juries cannot turn to the Bible for advice during deliberations'. They can each turn to their bible for comfort or guidance, but it was not entered into evidence or testimony so as a group they cannot consider it. No problem with the jury judging the facts AND the law, no problem with freedom of/from religion. Good ruling, but boy will it be spun wrong.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 08:27:30 PM EST
    pigwiggle, don't be a pignitwit, the jury cannot "judge the law" they can only decide if the law was indeed broken. Much as you would like to twist this to meet your twisted sense of justice, it is a fact sure as the fact that a the constitution does not mention God.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#13)
    by cp on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 08:56:12 PM EST
    i was actually struck by the particular verse cited, as justification for a death sentence. "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" is not an instruction, but a warning. it is an admonition against revenge, not support for it. simply put, revenge begets revenge, causing societal unrest and disruption. this would clearly be against god's will, hence the warning. if you're going to use the bible to justify something, you should at least have half a clue what the hell you're talking about. it's obvious this bunch didn't. aside from the obvious violation of jury rules, that only evidence admitted at trial be considered, these bozos couldn't even get their bibilical interpretations correct.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#14)
    by Johnny on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 09:03:52 PM EST
    " these bozos couldn't even get their bibilical interpretations correct." Actually, that is exactly what is wrong with most bible-wavers. Interpretation amounts to opinion, and in a book which has been translated many different ways to suit many different agendas.. Of course our law books are the exact same, laws change to suit an agenda. But jurors should look to the codified law books for inspiration on punishment, not some 3000 year old text.

    Re: Death Sentence Reversed for Bible Reading Juro (none / 0) (#15)
    by Dadler on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 09:13:58 PM E