Related
Translate
Previous entry: Atlanta rappers create gospel `crunk,’ prompting concern about raw hip hop in church
Next entry: Muslims refuse anti-MRSA gel
Get RNB via RSS
 |
RNB's RSS feed What is this? |
Get RNB via Email
 |
 Subscribe by Email What is this? |
Follow: Twitter
Most Popular
This Week:
- Guyana’s Jonestown suicide site gets plaque
- Scientology practices ‘putting people at risk’
- Recession: Muslim schools in UK under threat of closure
- Australian senator tells Parliament of widespread criminal conduct within the Church of Scientology
- World’s oldest ocean-going passenger ship, ministry ship Doulos, to stop sailing
- When a child dies, faith is no defense
- Israel Charges Extremist With Attempted Murder Of Messianic Family
- Scientology’s feet held to the fire in Australia: Struggle between a church and the state
- 1-year prison term for man who participated in cyber attack on Church of Scientology Web sites
- Australian police take up complaints about Scientology
Court upholds death penalty despite juror’s Bible verses
More articles on this topic: Death PenaltyThe state Supreme Court upheld the death sentence Thursday of a Bakersfield man for a 1994 rape-murder, saying jury deliberations were not tainted by biblical passages circulated by a juror, including one that called for delivery of fornicators “unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit might be saved.”
In a unanimous ruling, the court said it was improper for jurors to consider biblical verses, or any other material not presented at the trial, during deliberations. But the justices found that Bob Russell Williams Jr. would have been sentenced to death in any event.
Williams, now 30, pleaded guilty to raping and murdering Mary Breck, who was strangled during a burglary of her home in October 1994. At his penalty trial, defense lawyers presented evidence of childhood abuse by his stepmother, who denied him food and water, locked him out of the house, beat and whipped him, and sexually abused him. He spent most of his youth in a series of foster and group homes and juvenile halls.
During deliberations, the court said, the Kern County jury initially voted 10-2 for a death sentence, and one of the dissidents was described by another juror as being emotional and having a hard time making a decision.
A third juror brought in several pages from a Bible and read some passages aloud, including a line from I Corinthians condemning fornicators and a verse from Romans describing earthly government as “the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” The I Corinthians passage advocating the destruction of the flesh apparently was not read out loud but was seen and underlined by at least one juror, the court said.
The jurors remained divided 10-2 in their next ballot, but voted unanimously for death the next day. Evidence about the biblical material was disclosed in a defense motion for a new trial, but the trial judge found no harmful effects, citing juror testimony that the verses were not discussed and saying the passages did not call on jurors to substitute religious law for secular law.
The Supreme Court, in Thursday’s ruling, relied on its 2004 decision upholding the death sentence of a multiple killer whose jury had examined biblical passages demanding death for murderers. Although the evidence for a death sentence in that case was stronger than the evidence against Williams, the court said, the biblical language heard by Williams’ jurors had less potential to influence the verdict.
Williams’ lawyer, Charles Bonneau, said he was convinced that the biblical verses tipped the scales against his client. He said the ruling provides “a lot more leeway to use of the Bible” and appears to condone consideration of New Testament descriptions of the government as the agent of God. Bonneau said Williams would take his case to federal court.
Nathan Barankin, spokesman for Attorney General Bill Lockyer, said Thursday’s ruling simply “reaffirmed the established principle that while it’s improper for jurors to consider extraneous information during their deliberations, the verdict should not be set aside unless that information influenced their verdict.”
The case is People vs. Williams, S056391.
What You Can Do From Here
|
Read More Articles On These Topics
Share, Blog About, Bookmark, or Email This Article
Subscribe
Read Another Article
Previous entry: Atlanta rappers create gospel `crunk,’ prompting concern about raw hip hop in church Next entry: Muslims refuse anti-MRSA gel
RNB Homepage with latest headlinesFind Related Information
Find Related Books
|
Share This Article
To share this page simply copy and paste one of these URL's:
