Juries

The Theocratic Jury Room: New Law Review Article

Amanda C. Shoffel, NEJCC Scribes Award. Comment.  The Theocratic Jury Room: Oliver v. Quarterman and the Burgeoning Circuit Split on Biblical References in Capital Sentencing. (Oliver v. Quarterman, 541 F. 3d 329, 2008; Commonwealth v. Chambers, 599 A. 2d 630, 1991), 36 New Eng. J. on Crim & Civ. Confinement 113-132 (2010).

Introduction: In 1991, Assistant District Attorney H. Stanley Rebert prosecuted twenty-eight-year-old Karl Chambers for robbing, beating, and killing seventy-year-old Anna May Morris.  In his closing argument Rebert declared, "Karl Chambers has taken a life. . . . As the Bible says, 'and the murderer shall be put to death.'"  Based on this statement, the defense appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Justice Nicholas P. Papadakos wrote for the majority, "[W]e are not convinced that the [death] penalty was not the product of passion, prejudice or an arbitrary factor."  Chambers's death sentence was vacated. 

As a result, in Commonwealth v. Chambers, Pennsylvania became the first and only state to adopt a per se reversible error rule applicable to all prosecutorial statements that rely on the Bible to support the imposition of the death penalty.  In response, Rebert stated, "I don't know of any God-fearing prosecutor that has not used some scriptural or religious reference in arguing to a jury . . . God's law is the basis for Pennsylvania law and all law."

This controversial holding poses the question: What did the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania recognize as intrinsically dangerous to a fair and impartial capital trial in allowing religion to influence the jury

 

Is the Bible Prejudicial?

That is the question before the Mississippi Supreme Court this week in the death penalty case of Kristi Fulgham who was convicted in 2006 of murdering her husband.  During the sentencing phase of Ms. Fulgham's trial, the bailiff left his Bible in the jury room.  When the bailiff returned for the Bible one of the jurors asked if they could keep it and he agreed.  Less than 15 minutes later the jury voted to sentence Ms. Fulgham to death.

Upon learning about the Bible, the judge assembled the jury and asked them collectively whether or not the presence of the Bible affected their verdict. They said no.

At the Mississippi Supreme Court hearing, the attorney representing Ms. Fulgham argued that the procedure followed by the trial judge with regards to the Bible was incorrect and that he should have individually questioned the jurors to determine whether any one juror read the Bible while conducting juror deliberations.  The attorney went on to say that “Prejudice is presumed with the Holy Bible...We don’t know the Bible was used. We don’t know that the Bible wasn’t used. We can assume it was used.”

In response, the prosecutor stated that “There’s no evidence that it improperly influenced the jury,” Davis said. “You don’t check your morals at the door; you can certainly bring them in the jury room.”

Due to the unique nature of the Bible and the fact that it is commonly known and prevalent in everyday society, courts have struggled to determine whether or not it should be deemed extrinsic evidence or presumed prejudicial when in the presence of jurors.  What makes this issue even more confusing is that the U.S. Supreme Court despite opportunities has refused to take up the issue.  The most recent chance was last year in Texas v. Lucero.

The following cases demonstrate the different approaches taken by the courts on this subject:

Fields v. Brown(9th Cir. 2007); Romine v. Head(11th Cir. 2001); and Jones v. Kemp 706 F. Supp. 1534 (N.D. Ga. 1989)