John Grisham's 'The Innocent Man'- the rest of the story

[Mexdeaf]

(Mods, feel free to move if you feel this is in the wrong place. However, I really would like for some of the anti-death penalty supporters to comment on this. Thanks for your consideration.)

How about reading "the rest of the story", as it is?

http://www.billpetersondistrictattorney.com/

It appears that Mr. Grisham was not unbiased in his writing, which does not surprise me. What DOES surprise me is his attitude towards Mr. Peterson when Mr. Peterson tries to point out some of his (Grisham's) errors- see the letter in which Mr. Grisham says, "I have no desire to re-hash the facts and bicker about who's right and who's wrong." I guess the facts only matter when they are on Grisham's side. And that is a POOR attitude for a professing Christian such as Mr. Grisham to have.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Hmmm, 12 views and not one response. Maybe the truth is just too hard to take.

 

[matt wade]

Hmmm, 12 views and not one response. Maybe the truth is just too hard to take.

I'm anti-death penalty, but haven't read Grisham's book and don't know anything about it.

Just wanted to post something for you anyways .

 

[SeekingTruth]

Mex, I have not read this book (I can't recall having read anything by Grisham), but if things are as presented by Mr. Peterson, Grisham should apologize. It seems to me that rather than trying to obfuscate the truth the DA went to considerable lengths to insiure that the full truth was known.

I gues you are probably right in your second post above.

 

[carpro]

(Mods, feel free to move if you feel this is in the wrong place. However, I really would like for some of the anti-death penalty supporters to comment on this. Thanks for your consideration.)

How about reading "the rest of the story", as it is?

http://www.billpetersondistrictattorney.com/

It appears that Mr. Grisham was not unbiased in his writing, which does not surprise me. What DOES surprise me is his attitude towards Mr. Peterson when Mr. Peterson tries to point out some of his (Grisham's) errors- see the letter in which Mr. Grisham says, "I have no desire to re-hash the facts and bicker about who's right and who's wrong." I guess the facts only matter when they are on Grisham's side. And that is a POOR attitude for a professing Christian such as Mr. Grisham to have.

Grisham can't admit mistakes, accidental or otherwise.

He's afraid it will be used against him in a lawsuit.

 

[just-want-peace]

One would think there would somebody screaming by now, since this book is apparently the "BIBLE" for the anti-deathers.

Quite a few have chosen to use this book as their "scripture" rather than the true Scriptures.

edited to add:

I haven't read this book & don't plan to since my views on this subject are shaped by God, not Grisham.

 

[mcdirector]

I was a Grisham fan until this book and didn't even finish it. He should have stuck with fiction. (or maybe he did and this just wasn't as riveting. ) I was looking for a good story (true or fiction) and didn't find it. I imagine he's done quite a bit of defending on this one from multiple angles.

I hope he researched better when he was practicing law.

 

[LadyEagle]

I haven't read the book, either, and like was stated above, my world view is shaped by Scripture, so I'm not interested in someone's opinion, book or otherwise, about the death penalty.

It is okay you posted in this forum, BTW, but don't look for opposing view comments unless it involves Bush.

 

[JustChristian]

One would think there would somebody screaming by now, since this book is apparently the "BIBLE" for the anti-deathers.

Quite a few have chosen to use this book as their "scripture" rather than the true Scriptures.

edited to add:

I haven't read this book & don't plan to since my views on this subject are shaped by God, not Grisham.

I'm not familiar with this book. I am against the death penalty. That belief is shaped by Jesus not Grisham. I have read several of his fictional books and thought they were excellent. Can't comment on this one though.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

The Bible supports the death penalty, so do I.

I don't care what the author says.

 

[Robert Snow]

The Bible supports the death penalty, so do I.

I don't care what the author says.

I don't believe the Bible supports putting to death someone who is innocent.

Because of our warped legal system, I feel that if the death penalty is used it should only be used in circumstances where there is absolutely no doubt as to a person's guilt.

 

[windcatcher]

I don't believe the Bible supports putting to death someone who is innocent.

Because of our warped legal system, I feel that if the death penalty is used it should only be used in circumstances where there is absolutely no doubt as to a person's guilt.

Warped or not..... Our system requires that a person charged with a capital offense, must have legal council whether he likes it or not. Furthermore all evidence available to prosecution and defense is supposed to be presented at trial. Then 12 jurors must make a unanimous decision to convicted or the jury is 'hung' and a mistrial declared or defendant is acquitted..... and a jury can alter conviction to a lessor offense than that which was prosecuted ..... IOW, any doubt regarding the guilt of a person by the end of the trial is supposed to be honored should even one juror oppose a verdict of conviction. As Peterson points out..... an appeal for a capital conviction is automatic with or without any action by the defendant...... but early times are set for the first opportunity for the death sentance to prevent lawyers from sitting on their butts and doing nothing ......iow, to force them to begin the appeal process while the evidence is still fresh and the opportunity to discover new witnesses or new evidence is most likely.

iow.... while in a system which must use man as judges and jurors..... it may be possible to convict an innocent person..... it is highly unlikely to be more than a very rare occurrance relative to the numbers which may be guilty but go free.... due to the responsibility shared by all jurors who vote and thereby have foresworn that their decision was without a doubt, for a conviction when it only takes one vote to cancel it. When God set forth capital judgement for murder.... he established this form as reasonable punishment.... and set men to be the judge of the evidence and the witnesses and the defendant.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I don't believe the Bible supports putting to death someone who is innocent.

You'll have to show me where I said it did.

Because of our warped legal system, I feel that if the death penalty is used it should only be used in circumstances where there is absolutely no doubt as to a person's guilt.

That's the way it's supposed to be, now. Because of our warped legal system, we now have murderers who walk the street. We have criminals making the laws the rest of us have to live by.

 

[Jim1999]

The Bible also supports stoning a wayward son to death! Thankfully, it also relates the story about the prodigal son.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[windcatcher]

The Bible also supports stoning a wayward son to death! Thankfully, it also relates the story about the prodigal son.

Cheers,

Jim

Yes it does mention stoning a son who refuses to accept and respect authority and continues in his rebellion, refusing all instruction........ How many examples can you find in the Bible where this was literally carried out?

It sounds insane to our ears and yet...... had the laws been followed regarding punishment and parental authority in the home........ methinks there would extremely few children given to rebellion and willful defiance of their parents..... and peer pressure would be non-existant, nor juvenile crime, nor sacrilege against God or his Word or Name or pertaining to his honor and worship. ........ (I personally agree with parental authority in the home and corporal [not capital] punishment but I don't agree that this is a license to abuse a child or discipline him in anger. The parents have a responsibility to see to it that the child has been properly instructed and has the capacity to understand instruction before holding the child responsible for disobediance or rebellion.)

The old covenant was with Israel and it involved BOTH keeping of law and its judgements:
The new covenant is that of mercy and grace ......where the penalty of breaking the law has been removed by the blood of the lamb, and all who believe in him are redeemed.

The prodigal son was grown and left out from under the authority of the father: He went into the world and joined into its wickedness, but the instruction which had been taught in his youth was remembered when he came to his senses.... having done all that he could and having lost all that he had and coming to the ends of his own willfulness, he then is truned and becomes pliable and ready to return to his father, even in his own dishonor, and repent. The father recognizes him as a son returned or restored to life in new relationship... but the inheritance which was his is now gone: It is a great picture of Israel.... and perhaps has application to the Christian walk when one's choices detour him into worldy influences and priorities.... til the worthlessness and emptiness and unfulfillment of that life is recognized and the spirit can then draw him back to the father in repentance to restore relationship.

God bless!

 

[Bro. Curtis]

The Bible also supports stoning a wayward son to death! Thankfully, it also relates the story about the prodigal son.

Cheers,

Jim

Where does the law explain the stoning of a child, and where does the law say a life for a life, in scripture. How many times are each mentioned ?

I was going to say the prodigal son wasn't a child, but W/C beat me to it.

 

[Revmitchell]

I do not think Jim was implying that the prodigal was a child and neither do I believe his point is invalidated by mentioning him (right or wrong). He just simply meant to show the contrast between the OT and the NT as far as dealing with those who are rebellious.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

That's why I posed the questions.

 

[JustChristian]

Warped or not..... Our system requires that a person charged with a capital offense, must have legal council whether he likes it or not. Furthermore all evidence available to prosecution and defense is supposed to be presented at trial. Then 12 jurors must make a unanimous decision to convicted or the jury is 'hung' and a mistrial declared or defendant is acquitted..... and a jury can alter conviction to a lessor offense than that which was prosecuted ..... IOW, any doubt regarding the guilt of a person by the end of the trial is supposed to be honored should even one juror oppose a verdict of conviction. As Peterson points out..... an appeal for a capital conviction is automatic with or without any action by the defendant...... but early times are set for the first opportunity for the death sentance to prevent lawyers from sitting on their butts and doing nothing ......iow, to force them to begin the appeal process while the evidence is still fresh and the opportunity to discover new witnesses or new evidence is most likely.

iow.... while in a system which must use man as judges and jurors..... it may be possible to convict an innocent person..... it is highly unlikely to be more than a very rare occurrance relative to the numbers which may be guilty but go free.... due to the responsibility shared by all jurors who vote and thereby have foresworn that their decision was without a doubt, for a conviction when it only takes one vote to cancel it. When God set forth capital judgement for murder.... he established this form as reasonable punishment.... and set men to be the judge of the evidence and the witnesses and the defendant.

Show me in the New Testament where God set forth capital punishment.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Show me in the New Testament where God set forth capital punishment.

Christ told his disciples to know the scriptures, and obey them. What were scriptures, in the time of Christ ?