Have you ever served on jury duty and been assigned to an actual case? You had to listen to evidence and answer the question, “What’s your verdict?” knowing your response would profoundly affect another person life? If so, you have some idea of what the defendants in two highly publicized trials are experiencing.
One appeals trial took place in Perugia, Italy, and involved American Amanda Knox, previously convicted as accessory in the murder of her roommate, Britisher Meredith Kercher. While the world and innumerable paparazzi watched, a judicial panel of 6 lay persons and 2 professional judges listened to evidence, including new forensic tests that uncovered serious flaws in the original findings. After several hours of deliberation, the jury panel delivered their verdict, “not guilty,” overturning the prior conviction.
A relieved Amanda Knox and her family left Italy that evening, but public opinion was divided over the new verdict. As one lay judge confided regarding the conviction reversal: “There was no clear motive established, and the forensic evidence was too faulty to sustain the guilty verdict.”
The other trial is taking place in Los Angeles and the defendant is Michael Jackson’s former physician, Conrad Murray. He is accused of involuntary manslaughter, by administrating a lethal overdose of a surgical anesthetic, propofol, to Jackson at his home. The trial has just begun, and the prosecution is already depicting Murray as an incompetent professional who unethically catered to the demands of his mega-star patient.
It is anticipated that the defense will highlight Jackson’s excessive use and possible abuse of many prescription drugs. The defense is expected to contend that Jackson self-administered the lethal dose without Dr. Murray’s knowledge. At present the evidence against Murray looks very compelling, but this could change as the defense presents its case. The jury must be convinced “beyond reasonable doubt,” to render a guilty verdict.
We are all familiar with the justice system. Accused persons are allowed to state if they are guilty or innocent. This is their plea, not their verdict. Their verdict is determined by a jury of their peers, after they hear evidence which both supports and contradicts the plea. Thank goodness most of us will never go through a trial and have our future hanging on the verdict of others!
But did you know that each of us will have our day in the most Supreme Court that exists? Romans 14:10b tells us: “Remember that we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.” What’s more, Romans 3:23 states that we are all guilty of failing to live up to God’s perfection.
But here is where God’s justice system differs from ours. Although clearly guilty, we get to pronounce our own verdict! John 3:16 assures us that God loves us and sent His Son, Jesus, to serve our sentence by dying on a cross for our failures. He gives us the right to declare our own verdict by telling us: “Today I give you the choice between life and death and I call on heaven to witness the choice you make. Choose life that you may live!” (Deuteronomy 30:19)
No comments:
Post a Comment