Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight
Of course a person can rely on their own religious beliefs to make a decission, especially in the penalty phase. There is no way to stop that, nor should there be. However, the issue is they brought in outside source material. That's not allowed.
|
It doesn't appear, though, that that was the issue - from the OP quoted article:
"The Supreme Court said that "at least one juror in this case could have been influenced by these authoritative passages to vote for the death penalty when he or she may otherwise have voted for a life sentence." "
They did not say that (and it could be that it just was not in the article). They said that these "authoritative passages" could have been an undo influence on at least one juror. Would it not still have the same influence if the verses were quoted? If the jurors had taken the time to memorize them and quote them?
I am concerned that those with a religious point of view are being told that their religious point of view makes all of their opinions invalid. From the quote in the article, I would suggest that is what is being said.