RE: Evidence of religious conversion at a death penalty sentencinghearing
I assume that the point is not that Christianity has special status, but that the conversion to a system of religious belief is (or so a jury might find) indicative of a likelihood of redemption (in a secular sense) and htat the person need not be executed to protect society. I would imagine that the same would be true if a convict showed devotion to some secular equivalent. Under the court's cap[ital punishment rules ,post arrest conduct in jail-even after conviction and on retrial-- is relevant as a mitigating factor. Marc Stern -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 10:45 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Evidence of religious conversion at a death penalty sentencinghearing According to USA Today -- and sorry for relying on press accounts, but I'm on the road and haven't read the lower court decisions -- "A convicted murderer should be allowed to present evidence of his jailhouse conversion to Christianity to jurors deciding whether he should be executed, the Supreme Court was told Wednesday. 'The jury could not consider evidence that plainly pointed to his lack of dangerousness, his good behavior in prison (that resulted from) his conversion to Christianity,' said Dean Gits, a federal public defender representing convicted killer William Payton." Would it even be constitutional, though, for a jury to spare a person's life because he had converted to Christianity, where it wouldn't have done so had he remained an atheist? I can see generally arguing to the jury that the person had accepted goodness and nonviolence, but would stressing the conversion to a religious tradition -- as opposed to just a change of moral views -- be permissible? Also, how does this interact with the Eighth Amendment caselaw (which I'm no expert on) that generally requires a jury to be able to consider all (or is it all?) evidence that they might consider to be mitigating? Eugene ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Re: Evidence of religious conversion at a death penalty sentencinghearing
But would the conversion to the World Church of the Creator (white supremacist religion in prison and on the web) also count? I think not, which means the courts cannot say that conversion to religion per se indicates good behavior. They need to stick to the objective facts of good behavior. The appeal to Christianity is an attempt to bring into the case mom and apple pie, but it can't be a legitimate criterion, under the rule against sect preferences in both Religion Clauses. Marci I assume that the point is not that Christianity has special status, butthat the conversion to a system of religious belief is (or so a jury mightfind) indicative of a likelihood of redemption (in a secular sense) and htatthe person need not be executed to protect society.I would imagine that the same would be true if a convict showed devotion tosome secular equivalent. Under the court's cap[ital punishment rules ,postarrest conduct in jail-even after conviction and on retrial-- is relevant asa mitigating factor. ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
RE: Evidence of religious conversion at a death penalty sentencinghearing .:.
If no lawyer would let his client mention it, why worry about it for Establishment Clause purposes as you did in your first post? Marc Stern From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 11:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Evidence of religious conversion at a death penalty sentencinghearing .:. GIven the violence of white supremacist gangs in the prisons, I cannot imagine that any lawyer would permit his client to raise his membership in the Aryan Brotherhood or the KKK. For what purpose would the denominational choice be relevant? If it is to let the jurors attach to the convict certain characteristics, isn't that an establishment of religion in the system? I guess that would count for whatever weight the jury gives it. With the right (wrong) jury, it might be evidence of redemption or whatever. Why withhold the information whatever the sect? -Original ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Re: Evidence of religious conversion at a death penalty sentencinghearing .:.
There is always the stray client that is proud of their Aryan membership and therefore would want to bring it up. If no lawyer would let his client mention it, why worry about it for Establishment Clause purposes as you did in your first post?Marc Stern ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Re: Evidence of religious conversion at a death penalty sentencinghearing
But Eugene, doesn't your solicitude for individuated, non-group focused jurisprudence in the area of rights trump everything for you here, like it has nearly always done for the S Ct in the death penalty cases? That is, every fact matters, and group-based analysis (one religious group or another) is per se not relevant? I'm not arguing for this position, just surprised to see Eugene seem to take a position so at odds with his typical individual rights positions. Steve -- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8428 2900 Van Ness Street NW mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC 20008 http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar "I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits." Martin Luther King, Jr., (1964, on accepting the Nobel Peace Prize) ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
