Jury consults Bible.

[justme58]

Trial by jury IMO is an archaic way of trial. Lawyers and Judges are graduates and have to study the law and be offei (sp?) with it, pass the bar etc.. Yet you have persons "pulled in off the street" who have basically very little law acumen to decide the fate of a trial? Hence the evidence presented is done is such a way by both the prosecution and defense to play to the emotions of the jury.

I know there is a weeding out process of jury selection, but IMO a 3 panel judge in capital offenses is more conducive and these folk will be aware of precedents and to look only at the evidence presented and be objective.

Granted all I know of this is what has been dramatized on TeeVee but I am sure that it is not too far from the truth? But then again, the death penalty never stopped murders from happening in the first place and .....

According to the bible, if a man kills someone and manages to get to another village, he is safe. I guess in context, using the bible, if the man fled to say CA, he should be safe from the law? Bible is a very vague reference as to what sentence should be meted out.

[MontanaGuy]

Nikk wrote:

I think it does not matter what books the Jury consults. The jury is the jury, they are the peers of the one on trial. So long as each member gets a vote, it does not matter what method they use to convince each other.

That's just not true. I've been on a few juries including an attempted murder and there are very strict guidelines about the role of the jury members and what they may or may not do and they are given specific instructions regarding the legalities that are involved. If they have a particular question or are unsure of a certain legal matter they may send a message to the Judge for clarification.
If what you were saying was true that would mean that a member of the jury could bring in their own reference material for something like psychiatric evaluations, various opinions on forensics, etc. That is absolutely forbidden. The jury is given all of the material that they need during the trial from the testimony of witnesses and and the evidence that is presented to them. That's what they base their verdict on.
When I was on the jury in the attempted murder trial they actually placed all of the physical evidence in the jury deliberating room including a blood stained shirt with a bullet hole in it. It was all wrapped in clear plastic bags but we were able to look at it as we made our deliberations.
This business with the Bible is completely inappropriate behavior and has no place in a jury deliberation room but as I said earlier because this is Texas I don't think anything will happen.

[coosjoaquin]

Why would anybody think that Nikk, a person who is all for slavery, cares about having an unbiased jury in trials as long as all the peers are fundies?

Let's just throw out objective decisions based on the evidence when doing a trial. On Mondays and Wednesday and Fridays we use the bible and draw lots. On Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays we decide things based on sharia law and Sundays we just flip a coin and choose to execute whenever it lands on tails.

[achickenchaser]

It'd be nice if some of these people went by the OT when it comes to their own lives. They're awfully good at scripture when it comes to beating other people over the head with it.

Don't get me wrong here; if the person accused of the crime did indeed do what they're being accused of, they should at least rot in prison forever.

Although the article doesn't say, I'm almost certain what part of the state this likely happened in.

In a sad and pathetic way, something like this isn't even surprising.

Earlier this year the state wanted rape victims to pay for their own rape kits.

[Asheville Native]

Originally Posted by Mercury Cougar

He won't fall under double jeopardy.

That applies only on acquittals, but not mistrials or guilty verdicts.