The Colorado Supreme Court, in a 3-2 decision, threw out the death sentence imposed on a man who raped and killed a cocktail waitress.
The reason?
Jump the hump. And set your coffee mug down somewhere where it won't fry your laptop if it gets knocked over.
"Ruling that juries cannot turn to the Bible for advice during deliberations, a divided Colorado Supreme Court threw out the death penalty for a convicted murderer because jurors discussed verses from Scripture.
Five of the jurors who convicted Robert Harlan of a brutal rape and murder consulted the Bible before voting for the death penalty, reports CBS News Correspondent Lee Frank.
In a 3-2 vote on Monday, justices ordered Harlan to serve life without parole for kidnapping Rhonda Maloney and raping her at gunpoint for two hours before fatally shooting her.
Authorities said Maloney, a 25-year-old cocktail waitress, was on her way home from work at a casino. Harlan later admitted killing her, but said he was addled by cocaine, alcohol and rage.
Harlan was sentenced to death in 1995, but defense lawyers learned that five jurors had looked up such Bible verses as "eye for eye, tooth for tooth," copied them and discussed them while deliberating behind closed doors.
The jurors had been instructed to only consider evidence presented in court, reports Frank.
Defense attorney Kathleen Lord, arguing before the state Supreme Court last month, said the jurors had gone outside the law. 'They went to the Bible to find out God's position on capital punishment,' she said.
Prosecutors countered, saying jurors should be allowed to refer to the Bible or other religious texts during deliberations."
As a third year law student who has taken evidence, I understand the importance of keeping jurors focussed on evidence that has been submitted and not on extraneous materials.
That being said, the two dissenting judges on the Colorado Supreme Court said that they did not feel that the discussion of Bible passages had influenced the judges.
Why I found this decision disturbing is that it puts a "gag order" on all religious people. Not just Bible-reading Christians, but Jews who read Torah and/or the Talmud, Muslims who read the Koran, and Mormons who read the Book of Mormon. Furthermore, as evidenced by the 2004 case in Texas where a death penalty was thrown out because a juror consulted his priest to ask what the spiritual consequences are of sentencing a man to death, it shows that our modern American society is placing all religious people on notice that their concerns about salvation and "doing the right thing" are grounds for letting killers go free. Especially if they are "crazy" enough to discuss their religious views.
The right of gays to talk about their sexual orientation is considered protected by the first amendment. Therefore, whether a gay person is on a jury or teaching a class at a public school, he or she can rely on the Constitution to protect his or her job or verdict if he/she chooses to discuss his sexuality (as long as it is discreet, in the case of the school teacher).
But, in the case of a Christian juror, he or she must be careful not to discuss his/her religious belief in the Bible while considering a legal case. Furthermore, he/she must make the decision without regard to whether or not the decision will place his/her standing before God in jeopardy. This places those with religious views in a very uncomfortable position. Unlike non-believers, they are forced to act in a way that contradicts their beliefs when they are barred from seeking spiritual counsel regarding a decision that could have consequences on their standing before God.
We have obviously come a long way since the days of the Founding Fathers. Can anyone explain to me with any coherence why it is that the First Amendment no longer protects the rights of religious people to discuss their beliefs either while serving on a jury or while teaching at a public school?
