April 28
COLORADO:
The Bible in the jury room: What might Pope John Paul II have said?
Pope John Paul II died days after a ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court
that related indirectly to one of the Polish pontiff's notable innovations
in Catholic teaching.
The Colorado case involved Robert Harlan, who in 1994 kidnapped and raped
Rhonda Maloney. Jacquie Creazzo, a Good Samaritan driving by, stopped to
help and Maloney jumped into her car. They sped off with Harlan in close
pursuit, shooting at them.
Harlan seriously wounded Creazzo, who survived with permanent paralysis.
He dragged Maloney from Creazzo's car and her body was found later. A jury
convicted Harlan and sentenced him to death.
But Colorado's high court has overturned Harlan's execution in favor of a
life sentence because one juror discussed biblical teaching with another
during the penalty phase of the trial. One passage cited was Leviticus
24:17-20 ("he who kills a man shall be put to death. ... eye for eye,
tooth for tooth").
The justices called this the "use of improper, extraneous, prejudicial
materials," which infuriated some religious commentators.
The fascinating case raises these questions: What does the Bible really
teach about capital punishment? What's the proper role of the Bible in
shaping culture and individual judgments?
Also, what moral resources should a juror be permitted to use? For
instance, would it have been illicit for a juror to cite Roman Catholic
teachings against the death penalty?
The 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church, issued under John Paul,
acknowledged that Catholic tradition grants the right and duty of
legitimate governments to exact "penalties commensurate with the gravity
of the crime, not excluding, in cases of extreme gravity, the death
penalty." However, "if bloodless means are sufficient to defend human
lives," these should be applied instead, in order to honor "the dignity of
the human person."
The pope's 1995 encyclical "Evangelium Vitae" ("The Gospel of Life"),
which strongly opposed abortion and mercy killing, also hardened the
church's stand against capital punishment.
Government "ought not to go to the extreme of executing the offender
except in cases of absolute necessity: In other words, when it would not
be possible otherwise to defend society. Today such cases are very rare if
not practically non-existent," John Paul wrote.
Afterward, a revision of the Catechism said traditional Catholic teaching
"does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only
possible way of defending human lives against the unjust aggressor."
That narrow wording virtually excludes execution.
Since life sentences can equally protect against aggressors, America's
Catholic bishops have for decades opposed all executions. They cite
biblical teachings about the value of human life and forbearance in the
face of evil.
Conservative Protestants who favor capital punishment rely especially on
Genesis 9:6: "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be
shed; for God made man in his own image." To them, the Catholic
catechism's emphasis on human dignity argues for the opposite, requiring a
life in return for a life.
But there's vigorous debate about whether Genesis requires execution or
merely allows it. The Rev. Derek Kidner, a British evangelical, wrote
decades ago that the teaching about life's value is eternal but "one
cannot simply transfer verse 6 to the statute books. ... Capital
punishment has to be defended on other grounds."
Others argue that while the Bible allows execution, the practice is
illegitimate unless it's applied fairly. That's the reason the Union of
Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America in 2000 surprisingly appealed for
a nationwide moratorium on executions pending "a comprehensive review of
how the death penalty is administered."
According to Orthodox Jewish writers, the Bible may specify execution to
punish various misdeeds but the later rabbis were extremely reluctant to
apply it. They found technical grounds to avoid the practice whenever
possible.
A 1979 resolution from America's Reform rabbis summarized the point:
"Jewish tradition found capital punishment repugnant, despite biblical
sanctions for it."
On the Net: John Paul's "Gospel of Life":
http://www.vatican.va/edocs/ENG0141/--INDEX.HTM
Colorado ruling:
http://www.courts.state.co.us/supct/opinions/2003/03SA173.pdf
(source: Associated Press)
IOWA:
Death penalty push derailed--Senate Democrats block the proposal, but
Republicans say they will keep trying.
An effort to bring back the death penalty in Iowa was thwarted Wednesday
when Senate Democratic leaders blocked debate of the Republican-backed
proposal.
Iowa hasn't had a capital punishment law for 40 years. The proposal would
have reinstated the death penalty in cases in which a child was abducted,
raped and killed.
Republicans failed Wednesday to attach their proposal to legislation that
would lengthen prison terms for sex crimes against children. They vowed to
keep trying as the 2005 session draws to a close in the next week or so.
Sen. Larry McKibben, a Marshalltown Republican, said the death penalty
would deter crimes such as the rape and slaying of 10-year-old Jetseta
Gage of Cedar Rapids late last month.
Senate Democratic Leader Michael Gronstal of Council Bluffs objected to
allowing debate of the proposal to continue, saying it dealt with a change
in Iowa law that went beyond the contents of the bill.
Senate Democratic Co-President Jack Kibbie of Emmetsburg, who was
presiding over the debate, agreed with Gronstal in ruling that the
amendment could not be considered.
"It expands the bill excessively from what the House-passed bill does,"
Kibbie said.
GOP leaders then called a halt to the entire debate of the sex crimes
bill, protesting that Democrats had abused the power they share with
Republicans in the Senate, divided 25-25 between the 2 parties.
"It's . . . throwing out years of history, tradition and rules in the Iowa
Senate . . . to prevent us from having a debate that the people of Iowa
want us to have," said Senate Republican Co-President Jeff Lamberti of
Ankeny.
Gronstal has argued it would be a waste of time to debate a highly
divisive proposal that was unlikely to pass the Legislature or be signed
into law by Gov. Tom Vilsack.
"I will not debate a death penalty bill," Gronstal said again Wednesday.
"I don't believe the death penalty is an effective deterrent . . . and I
think it takes a huge amount of money (in court costs) that could be used
in a better way to protect public safety."
Sixteen Republican senators sponsored the proposal for a death penalty in
limited circumstances. GOP leaders said the vote would have been close had
the Senate been allowed to debate the issue Wednesday. They said they will
look for other opportunities to revive their proposal, which would make
lethal injection the method of execution.
Iowa is one of 12 states that do not have capital punishment.
Vilsack, a Democrat, argues that the death penalty is not necessary
because those convicted of 1st-degree murder already are sentenced to life
in prison without the possibility of parole.
Despite sharp differences over the death penalty, legislators from both
parties support strengthening laws against child molesters in the wake of
Jetseta's violent death. Roger Bentley of Brandon, a convicted sex
offender, is charged with 1st-degree murder and kidnapping in the March 24
slaying of Jetseta.
The House has voted to require electronic tracking for convicted sex
offenders on parole or work release; to prohibit anyone on the state's sex
offender registry from living within 1,000 feet of a school or child-care
center; and to update the sex offender registry Web site.
The Senate is considering several additional measures. They include
doubling from five to 10 years the maximum prison term for the crime of
lascivious acts with a child and establishing a life prison term for
repeat convictions on certain sex charges.
(source: Des Moines Register)
MAINE:
Death penalty opponents air views before committee
Representatives of human rights, civil libertarian and church groups were
among those who lined up Wednesday in opposition to a bill before the
Judiciary Committee to impose the death penalty in Maine.
Sen. Jonathan Courtneys bill would impose the ultimate punishment for
those who murder family or household members.
The Springvale Republican said domestic violence cases are particularly
troubling. He cited a case in which a Pittston man allegedly killed his
mother and estranged wife in front of his children last year. Jon Dilley
faces trial for two counts of murder in those crimes.
Courtney also mentioned in his testimony a Portland case in which a man
beat his longtime girlfriend to death. Gregory Erskine was found guilty by
a jury in January of murdering Lisa Deprez just days after he was released
from jail and ordered to stay away from her.
According to Courtney, 41 percent of the murders in Maine in 2003 - nearly
double the rate of the previous year - resulted from domestic conflicts.
"Admittedly, this bill will not eliminate domestic violence," said
Courtney, but he said it is worthy of discussion if it can deter some
domestic violence cases.
Several opponents said Maine should not re-institute a death penalty,
which was repealed in 1887.
Robert Talbot of the Maine NAACP said scientific studies have failed to
find evidence that the death penalty deters crime.
The director of the Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence commended
Courtney for addressing the problem, but said that reintroducing the death
penalty will probably not accomplish what it sets out to do.
"Most abusers who murder their partners are so obsessed with killing their
victims that they are indifferent to the legal consequences," said Kim
Roberts.
The Maine Civil Liberties Union, Maine Council of Churches and Amnesty
International also opposed the measure.
(source: Associated Press)
