It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Texas man faces execution after jurors consult Bible to decide fate

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Texas man faces execution after jurors consult Bible to decide fate


www.t elegraph.co.uk

It later emerged that while deciding whether he should be given the death penalty, jurors consulted the Bible. Four jury members admitted that several copies had been in the jury room and that highlighted passages were passed around.

At one point, a juror reportedly read aloud from a copy, including the passage: "And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death."

Defence lawyers argued in appeals that jurors had been improperly influenced by the Bibles but the trial judge rejected the claim, a decision upheld by
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   
I've long held the belief that the "separation" of church and state is something of a myth in practise, despite that it sounds good in theory.

I've also long held the belief that islam is far from the only religion that claims an "eye for an eye" or that the punishment should fit the crime.

The problems in the world today are not caused by religious writings, they are caused by people who interpret writings to suit their own ends.

This can be seen in many religions, but most tellingly, is seen most in the idealogical battle that is taking place today in the west and the mideast.

Religion can be a wonderfull thing and a great comfort and source of joy and inspiration to some people - unfortunately there will always be those who take it just that little bit too far.

With that in mind, does anyone think we should bow to this christian version of sharia law?

www.t elegraph.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 16/10/2009 by budski]


+19 more 
posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   
They might as well be consulting a coloring book, gutless, ignorant, cowards.

... in a post apocalyptic world, I hope people like this are still around, ..... to replace beef.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
completely ridiculous.

i get that there were already people on the jury that believe this, but to push it on to the other jurors, and this effected the life of someone else? im sure jesus would have a few things to say about that.

if all this religion stuff is real, most these people that pull this crap are going straight to hell the way i see it. so many misinterpreting, so many people using "holy" words for their own purposes. makes me sick.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
I'm pretty sure without a bible within 10,000 miles of those jurors a death sentence was pretty much guaranteed.


He was sentenced to death in 1999 for murdering a man whose home Oliver was burgling. The victim was shot in the face and beaten with his own rifle.


The dud broke into a home, was confronted by the owner, then proceeded to murder the owner with his own rifle. I'd rather see the death penalty done away with altogether but in this case the intruder/attacker/murderer had plenty of opportunities to flee or surrender and he instead chose to hang around for murder.

Given the circumstances and given the place, Texas, this dude was getting death with or without a bible quote.

Besides, you might be able to keep the text itself out of a jurors hands but good luck trying to keep it out of a jurors mind.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Jurors are supposed to consider only the evidince and the law.
While jurors are entitled to whatever beliefs they choose in their PERSONAL LIVES, they are NOT entitled to bring those beliefs ( WHATEVER they may be) into the jury room.
This verdict should be set aside and a mistrial declared!
And WHY are there Bibles with HIGHLIGHTED passages in the jury room anyway? Good Lord!



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


So they looked to the Bible for moral guidance.

If I have to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God, then I see no problems with jurors seeking guidance from him.

I'm sure if the guy had been found not guilty then the defense wouldn't be complaining that they read a few passages out of the Bible.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
From my own readings of the bible, I understand that Jesus opposed organised religion, taught that to turn the other cheek was preferable, and stated "let him who is without sin cast the first stone"

IMO christianity is an ideology rather than an organised religion (the clue is in the word "christ" ) but it seems that yet again, something has been usurped to satisfy narrow minded peoples version of what they want to believe and how that belief should be manifested.

How this differs from Islam, I have no idea.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


That's the whole point - a persons belief system should have no bearing on a trial and the persons guilt or innocence.

Regardless of the crime, theology has no place in courtromm deliberations.

This is the very same thing that people castigate islam for, and the hypocrisy is stunning - at least in islam/sharia there is no pretence of separation.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by jd140
If I have to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God, then I see no problems with jurors seeking guidance from him.


that needs to change
swearing on the bible
seriously, especially in cosmopolitan America

I'd swear on the bible and lie anyday

why wouldn't I lie while swearing on a sci-fi book?

just as i'd lie after swearing on a star wars or star trek book!



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


I swear by Yoda?

After all, in the UK, Jedi is one of the fastest growing "religions"

So, why not?



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   
IMO I dont think that this mans fate should lie in the hands of 12 random people. Instead, the family of the victim should decide his fate, I mean seriously, this man took the life of someone they loved for no reason. So basically he gave up his right to live/freedom. Who better to judge him, then the family of the victim?



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I wonder what answer they would have gotten if they quoted Mao Tse Tung and read a chapter of The Little Red Book?



The more ferocious the better, don't you think? The more people you kill, the more revolutionary you are.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
It's a common misconception that anyone has to swear on The Bible in court. You can, if you wish, but allmost every court simply requireds a non religious oath, and NONE require you to use a Bible.
Requiring a Bible would be Unconstitutional, therefore..illegal.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
Regardless of the crime, theology has no place in courtromm deliberations.



Whatever is the root of an individuals specific perspective you cant just decree it absent from a courtroom.

Maybe in the future trials will be decided by robots or something but now if it's not some specific brand of 'theology' it'll be another source like experience, prejudice, what they had for lunch, whether or not they feel bloated or constipated, etc...

A religion is just another variable.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Wow, with this info brought to light I am surprised... Well... No I am not, that this case has not been ruled a mistrial...

I mean, there is such a thing as separation of Church and State.... So I am inclined to think that using the bible as a guideline to decide a court case would be unconstitutional.....



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Gods law is divine, he chose his way



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Whether it needs to be changed or not isn't the issue.

The way I see it the case was open and shut. The guy broke in, shot them in the face and robbed them.

The only reason I can see them using the bible is to make sure they don't damn themselves to hell for doing the right thing, which is to execute the guy.

But I don't hate religion, so I'm probably talking to a thread of brick walls.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Ok, how ironic is it that his name is Christian?


guys don't forget one important point
WHO highlighted the passages?

the judge?
And he gave highlighted passages to the jury?

this is the question, isn't it?

Ok now I will go drink a cup of tea, and based on how the tea leaves set after I finish the tea, it will help me decide what to post next.

Stay Tuned guys!!!!


Originally posted by jd140
The way I see it the case was open and shut. The guy broke in, shot them in the face and robbed them.

I agree it is open and shut
but they need to re-open it, if only for symbolic reasons

the jury was influenced by whoever highlighted the passages
new judge, new jury, new case

then, i'm sure the same end result

it's still something that needs to be done though

[edit on 16-10-2009 by ModernAcademia]



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


And our nations continue to make demands on other nations for practising "religion-based justice"


The Judge should be struck off. Immediately. For even allowing a jury to consult a religious text in their decision making.

Regardless of guilt, evidence and so on, the Jury should never be consulting a religious ideal to base a decision on. It really is sickening.

Having said all of that, you only need to look at the injustice of the West Memphis Three case to know how corrupt the entire system is.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join