Wow, just... wow.I'm a big believer in trial by jury but occasionally you get some ignorant yahoos that make some pretty ridiculous decisions. This trial is a glaring example of such a case.
Yes; I wasn't in that courtroom listening to weeks of testimony. I'm not privy to all the information the jurors had to reach their verdict.
None of that changes the central fact of this case: this couple through the process of faith healing allowed their 15-month-old daughter to die a long, painful death from pneumonia. Take religion out of the equation- at it's base this is case of neglect and manslaughter.
Still want to give the jury the benefit of the doubt? Read this account of how the jury reached their verdict and tell me if you still feel the same way.
Here's juror Ken Byers account of the process:
"Trying to come to a consensus was trying to understand each others' viewpoints," Byers said. "And trying to say what's reasonable for me might not be reasonable to somebody else, or vice versa. That was pretty much the dynamic."
Huh? I was under this odd misunderstanding that the purpose of a jury was to listen to the facts of the case as presented and then consider those facts within the context of the law. Apparently the job of a jury is instead to come up with some happy consensus, sort of like a neighborhood association voting on what Christmas decorations are and are not appropriate. Silly fucking me.
BTW- the article mentions Byers went into the trial leaning towards guilty. Nothing in the article other than his empathy for other jurors who were sympathetic to the Worthingtons explains his change of heart. Fuck him for not standing by his convictions or the facts.
Thanks to these geniuses on the jury more Oregon children are going to die for no good reason and more jackasses are going to try and use their faith as a trump card when they do something to harm, through action or inaction, those that they're responsible for protecting.
If I sound angry about this that's because I am. This jury failed.
Posts
5 comments:
No Shit. Angry, Exasperated and Sad. And you point out, this establishes precedent to allow such an event to happen again. I saw this in the local rag when I came in, but I hadn't got to the OregonLive story yet... but I couldn't even finish it. I'm headed toward a really nasty rant here, so I'll just cut it off now.
Posted like a true believer in socialized medicine where the nanny state tells you what you can and cannot do. Everyone knows that only narcissist sky fairies are equipped to deal with medical emergencies.
Let me look at this another way: let's say I live in a state where euthanasia is illegal, but my religious viewpoint says it is ok to put someone out of his/her misery, so I kill him/her based on my religious view.
Would the jury find the same?
I thought Washington State was supposed to be more liberal than the rest of the country?
I have heard of 'hung' juries. Perhaps we should hang this one.
Post a Comment