in today's Christian Science Monitor
Supreme Court Won't Hear Appeal Over Bible Reading In Jury Room
after complaining that the jury foreman at his capital murder trial read a
Bible passage aloud to the entire jury before the panel returned his death sentence.
Lawyers for Jimmie Urbano Lucero had asked the US Supreme Court to take up the case to examine whether reading Bible passages aloud during jury deliberations violates Sixth Amendment
fair-trial rights, reports the Christian Science Monitor. On Monday, the high court
declined to take up the case, offering no explanation. The action lets stand decisions
by the courts in Texas affirming Lucero's death sentence.
Lucero was convicted in 2005 of carrying out the shotgun murder of
three of his neighbors in 2003: a husband, wife, and their daughter.
During an initial penalty phase vote, 10 of the 12 juror voted for death.
At that point, the jury foreman produced his personal Bible and read a passage aloud ,
from Romans 13: 1- 6: "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities,
for there is no authority except that which God has established.... But if you do wrong,
be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant,
an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer."
The jury continued to deliberate for several hours. When a new vote was taken,
the panel decided 12 to 0 in favor of death.
Several circuit courts have ruled that the introduction of a Bible into jury deliberations
violates a defendant's rights, but two other circuit courts have ruled the presentation
of specific Bible verses during jury deliberations does not violate the Sixth Amendment.
Do you think such Bible readings are acceptable or do you see them as a violation
of the 1st Amendment in terms of separation of church and state?
What about jury members who are of different religions? Will this prove a
negative that might influence the outcome?
Posts
1 comment:
Aren't many jury instructions very explicit in what the jury is allowed to review? For example, haven't judges refused jury requests to review certain testimony, making them rely on their collective memory? Also, judges often refuse to expand on their instructions,or define terms such as "reasonable doubt" to the jury. So it seems to me that any supplemental material should be disallowed in the jury room, to include bibles, tarot cards and dictionaries.
Respectfully, Farrah Massey
Post a Comment